By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
The United States House of Representatives passed a bill preventing federal prosecutions against patients who use prescribed marijuana and cultivation where it is legal in the various states. If passed by the Senate and signed by the President it would mark a profound reversal in federal marijuana policy.
The House voted 219-189 in favor to an amendment of an appropriations bill. The amendment strips the Department of Justice of all funds for enforcing marijuana laws in states where medical marijuana is legal. This would not only include the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) but all other agencies as well as DOJ prosecutions, theoretically if signed into law prosecutions already in process must halt as well. With the recent signature by Minnesota’s governor, twenty two states and the District of Columbia have medical marijuana statutes.
During debate on the House floor, California Representative Dana Rohrabacher called for compassion, saying: “Some people are suffering, and if a doctor feels that he needs to prescribe something to alleviate that suffering, it is immoral for this government to get in the way.”
In addition, the House also passed two amendments that would strip funds in federal intervention of state hemp cultivation and research.
Aaron Houston, a marijuana lobbyist and advocate, called the vote a “tipping point” on marijuana. He noted that this amendment has been offered six times before over the course of 11 years and never before gained traction.
Marijuana Majority Chairman Tom Angell stated “It’s clear that more politicians are beginning to realize that the American people want the federal government to stop standing in the way. If any political observers weren’t aware that the end of the war on marijuana is nearing, they just found out.”
It seems inertia is now favoring the end of Refer Madness.
By Darren Smith
Sources:
Think Progress
Washington Times
Amendment to HR 4660 Offered by Mr. Rohrabacher of California
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
Paul S
How about sharing your theater credits in the creative hotbed of Phoenix AZ?
I have close family who earn their livings in the professional theater and have won awards for their work in the theater and one has been in several productions directed by a MacArthur winner in New York. I have corresponded with them. They all spell it ‘theater’.
Your insistence on “theatre” is pure pretentious phoney oppositional BS.
“And that is the spelling used in Theatre Departments across the country.”
This is what you resort to when you can’t argue any of the other points, like the UN special rapporteur on torture not being an expert on torture. He is.
Theater departments are nice places where people learn to work in the theater. In the real world, and on legal contracts, it is often spelled either way, depending on the theater. Most of the contracts I worked under spelled it the American way.
None of which matters one whit in a discussion in which the main point is that our continued scheduling of marijuana as a schedule one drug is insane, the drug is good for pain relief, and our backwards laws about it should be changed.
But I guess some people love being backwards if it means they get to punch hippies.
NYC is not a creative hotbed. Most of the really interesting plays are being done in regional theatres. Broadway has been turned over to remounting old shows. And the theatre does draw some dim bulbs. As does the theater.
And why are you so locked on liberals punching hippies?
Schulte:
“so the party responsible for Jim Crow laws and segregation in the South, is not racist?”
50 years ago. Things change. Dixiecrats became Republicans. This is a basic fact of American politics so obvious that very few people even try to deny it.
” You think the members of the NAACP who clapped when they heard Sherrod say that she had denied the white farmer his due, are not racist and not Democrats?”
Read this (I know you won’t, but you should):
http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/05/the-case-for-reparations/361631/
“Have you ever listened to Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton? ”
You aware of the Republican who killed some Jews recently?
Or maybe some of the GOP people who’ve actually come out and called Obama a nigger?
youtube.com/watch?v=YHPQYqazXfM
He ran for President!
This guy is my favorite:
freakoutnation.com/2011/12/18/tea-party-politician-on-obama-assassinate-the-fucken-nigger-and-his-monkey-children/
I can’t repeat what he said, but it included a call to assassinate the US President.
This guy won’t even apologize:
sfgate.com/news/us/article/Town-s-white-police-official-calls-Obama-N-word-5480252.php
I could go on all day. But I have better things to do than listen to Republicans deny what Republicans have been doing for the last 50 years.
Here’s a little hint, guys: If you have to keep going back to 1964 for something Republicans did right on race, you might want to think your policies, because the demographics are going to eat you alive.
That’s why I say keep talking.
supak – HO HUM
Noah Webster decided to change the spelling of certain words in his first dictionary so the United States would have a unique language. Some of the spelling caught on, some didn’t.
Schulte:
“theatre is the correct spelling if you are talking about the theatre of Shakespare, Mamet, Wong. It is theater if you are talking about Michael Bay.”
I would think someone as far right as you would frown on the British spelling of anything.
David:
“You should consider the Democrat’s Southern Strategy to paint all Republicans as racist homophobes.”
Why? We don’t paint them all as anything. We just expose the ones that already are racist homophobes. Some of them aren’t. Good for them.
But your continued denial of the use of the southern strategy to get racists in the south to vote GOP is hilarious.
Keep talking.
Schulte:
“Have you ever listened to Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton? Major Democrats, major racists. Even Harry Reid and Joe Biden, made racist remarks about Obama.”
Go put your collection of racist remarks from Democrats together. You can even use the registered Democrats in West Virginia if you want.
Then I’ll put together the racist things Republicans have said just in the last 6 years.
Wanna bet on who’s list is 10 times longer than the other?
I am so far to the right that I am for the re-institution of the monarchy in the USA. And that is the spelling used in Theatre Departments across the country.
Scott Supak wrote: “But your continued denial of the use of the southern strategy to get racists in the south to vote GOP is hilarious.”
I never denied that there was a Southern Strategy more than 40 years ago. I just think you and Democrats overplay that hand. Look in the mirror. Republican and Democratic political strategists both engage in these kinds of strategies of how to talk to garner votes for your party. There is no doubt that the political strategy of focusing on State’s rights and limited federal government worked toward causing a lot of Democrats to leave the Democratic party. Today the Democratic strategy is to paint Republicans as racist, as homophobes, as uncaring and unloving toward the poor, as evil wealthy men trying to cut taxes on the rich so they can get richer. They employ language carefully to foster hatred toward the Tea Party and toward Republicans. I subscribe to emails from both Democrats and Republicans. The Democratic emails are always filled with hatred and vitriol toward those evil Republicans and how they need money to stop them. The Republican emails rarely take such a tone. They focus on success stories of Republican governors or ideas that will make our world a better place.
Help the very angry God of the Vortex of Doom has eaten my post.
“We know how racist Democrats could be back then.”
Gee, David, if I had the time, I could dig up some more modern quotes by racists about the use of the evil weed, and I’ll give you odds on which party more than 80% of them belong to.
Things did change in 1964. It’s called the Southern Strategy.
As Schulte says, live with it.
Scott Supak wrote: “Things did change in 1964. It’s called the Southern Strategy.”
It is amazing what Democrats will do with a quote taken out of context from a Republican with a brain tumor. You should consider the Democrat’s Southern Strategy to paint all Republicans as racist homophobes. You seem to be part of that campaign of reprogramming.
angryman – so the party responsible for Jim Crow laws and segregation in the South, is not racist? You think the members of the NAACP who clapped when they heard Sherrod say that she had denied the white farmer his due, are not racist and not Democrats? Have you ever listened to Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton? Major Democrats, major racists. Even Harry Reid and Joe Biden, made racist remarks about Obama.
Please. I hardly think that the reaction of a few members of the NAACP to a much maligned and even more misunderstood (due to the admitted careful editing of the original publisher) video negates the Clearly Stated Agenda of the entire Republican organization.
Jim Crow? WTF I find any argument based on the positions of either party at the time of the last century (or two) irrelevant to their current policies and agendas.
Of course they have never said “We republican; We Racists” .
We know by the obviously disadvantageous things they support and the disenfranchising things they support. Nobody who cared for or didn’t hate Minorities and the Poor could; in good conscience support such policies.
To say to me that Republicans are not Racist truly insults my intelligence and if you are a Republican and you don’t believe your party is racist; I fear you are living in a far worse place than a river called “Denial”. I’d say you are living with your head in the sand. probably praying for spankings from the Frat Brothers or something. LOL
Angrymanspeaks, I retrieved your comment above at 2:20
supak – fallacy of composition at 11:04
angrymanspeaks wrote: “We know by the obviously disadvantageous things they support and the disenfranchising things they support. Nobody who cared for or didn’t hate Minorities and the Poor could; in good conscience support such policies.”
What disenfranchising things are you talking about? Why do you speak in vague terms? Say what you mean plainly.
The Republican policy concerning helping the poor is that government for the most part should not be doing it. This does not mean that we hate the poor. It means that we believe working people should care for and help their neighbors directly, or they can give to private charities in their local communities who they perceive are doing a good job. This is much more efficient than government who basically steals what they need to give to the poor. The government, not being very human, basically then supports drug addicts, crime, and all manner of social ills. Just look at the history of public housing projects in any city and you will find a cesspool of humanity at its worse. These Democratic policies are what I call disenfranchising to the poor.
angrymanspeaks: “It is the policies of the Republican party clearly and publicly stated that make Republicans Racists and Homophobes; not the accusations of the Democrats.”
What a ridiculous comment. You are wrong. We Republicans have no policies that are racist or homophobic. If we did, I would resign my membership immediately. Our party was started to combat racism. We ended slavery.
Here is an excerpt from our party platform:
“In the spirit of the Constitution, we consider discrimination based on sex, race, age, religion, creed, disability, or national origin unacceptable and immoral. We
will strongly enforce antidiscrimination statutes and ask all to join us in rejecting the forces of hatred and bigotry and in denouncing all who practice or promote racism, anti-Semitism, ethnic prejudice, or religious intolerance. We support efforts to help low-income individuals get a fair chance based on their potential and individual merit; but we reject preferences, quotas, and set-asides as the best or sole methods through which fairness can be achieved, whether in government, education, or corporate boardrooms. In a free society, the primary role of government is to protect the God-given, inalienable, inherent rights of its citizens, including the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Merit, ability, aptitude, and results should be the factors that determine advancement in our society.”
http://www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_home/
Oh; I hardly think I can accept such obvious miss-statements.
The Republican Party espouses nothing but policies aimed towards that end.
Of course they don’t say so but when you look at the effect of the laws and policies they support; it becomes clear.
They oppose Gay marriage. They oppose a woman’s right to choose. They oppose raising the minimum wage. They support elitist educational authority that assures that wealthy white kids receive a top notch education while poor white and black kids receive second best; at best. They oppose Common Core which would assure equal educational standards for all schools and children. I could go on for some time but I think you will get my point. All of these things mark them as both Racist and Elitist.
You can’t tell me that the Republican Party isn’t Racist.
Looks like you better hurry down and resign your membership; Huh David?
Insistence on spelling it “theatre” is pure pretension.
theatre is the correct spelling if you are talking about the theatre of Shakespare, Mamet, Wong. It is theater if you are talking about Michael Bay.
Schulte:
“I also take issue with whomever it was that said that the 1937 law was racist. I cannot find any evidence for that.”
Me, quoting Harry Anslinger, godfather of the war on weed:
“Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”
Schulte:
“Truck shows are not legit theatre.”
Schulte, what the heck do you know about legit theater? The call for the in, the run (933 shows) and the out was given to me by the call steward as “legit” and I was paid under the legit theater contract.
But I worked on the opera many times. That legit enough for ya?
Still a truck show.
“I also take issue with whomever it was that said that the 1937 law was racist. I cannot find any evidence for that.”
I wonder where you checked. I don’t know if the law is racist or not. But if ever there was a question that I would expect to provide evidence for anyone on any side of the question this is it.
I am not even sure what would count a compelling evidence.
Was there a difference in use between different ethnic groups?
Is disparate impact enough to declare the law racist?
Don’t we have to go back to examine the legislative history?
Is is enough that we find public racists giving testimony and supporting the law? Remember, at that time in our history, it is pretty likely to find public officials who had expressed racist sentiments. I will bet anything we can find elected racists who voted for the legislation. I could be wrong. But that seems like a safe bet to me.
Is it necessary to identify supporters who explicitly link their support to their racist views?
And if we find racists who supported the legislation do we have to demonstrated that it was a majority of racists that voted for it or is it enough that racists contributed to the discussion?
It seems to me that for anyone interested enough to go through old news clippings, speeches, and the congressional record could find plenty of evidence to support what ever position they might want to take.
But I will bet there is plenty that has already been written on this.
Schulte:
“Anyone who spells theatre theater didn’t work in the legitimate theatre.”
Is this a joke? You calling me a liar? You want I should get the Rush Limbaugh fan I argued with all the time on Lion King, who called me one of the best stagehands he ever worked with?
“I also take issue with whomever it was that said that the 1937 law was racist. I cannot find any evidence for that.”
Not only do you not remember that I said it, but you didn’t follow my citation. One of those known unknowns…
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/dope/etc/cron.html
> After the Mexican Revolution of 1910, Mexican immigrants flooded into the U.S., introducing to American culture the recreational use of marijuana. The drug became associated with the immigrants, and the fear and prejudice about the Spanish-speaking newcomers became associated with marijuana. Anti-drug campaigners warned against the encroaching “Marijuana Menace,” and terrible crimes were attributed to marijuana and the Mexicans who used it.
> During the Great Depression, massive unemployment increased public resentment and fear of Mexican immigrants, escalating public and governmental concern about the problem of marijuana. This instigated a flurry of research which linked the use of marijuana with violence, crime and other socially deviant behaviors, primarily committed by “racially inferior” or underclass communities. By 1931, 29 states had outlawed marijuana.
But wait, there’s more!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/14/marijuana-prohibition-racist_n_4590190.html
> In a column for The Fix, Maia Szalavitz reminds us that Harry Anslinger, the father of the war on weed, fully embraced racism as a tool to demonize marijuana. As the first commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, a predecessor to the Drug Enforcement Administration, Anslinger institutionalized his belief that pot’s “effect on the degenerate races” made its prohibition a top priority. Here are just a few of his most famous (and most racist) quotes:
> “There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others.”
> “Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”
—
“Only Jazz musicians smoking marijuana, yeah!”–Jimmy Buffett
—
“unless some of the 25 states said it was legal to sell the drug and there is nothing in the Constitution to have a right to possess or ingest in any form, cannabis.”
The 1906 law approved legal sale of cannabis, if labeled as such.
The ninth amendment gave us the right. Racists took it away.
The woman in Nebraska was tortured.
Your ignorance of the facts does not make them go away.
“Their Satanic music, jazz and swing result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others.””
BTW, were there any notes where they play that Satin music and those white women hang out?
I mean just for completeness and accuracy of the historical record.
bfm – you have to watch Reefer Madness to get the real picture.
Truck shows are not legit theatre. That is a temporary gig.
Yeah, and if it passes the Senate with the help of a few Republicans, even though the Senate is in “democratic control” we will here how the Republicans made the difference in the Senate.
Can’t wait to do the percentages on who votes which way. I’d bet a higher percent of Senate Republicans vote no than in the House.
Also, can’t wait to see the Vote View blog charts.
There are 435 representatives in the House. 49 Republicans voted yes. 170 Democrats voted yes.
Apologies to Scott but I thought people here could use some reinforcement….
It was Democrats who passed this liberalization of the medical marijuana laws.
I feel sure one year from now some brain-dead American will say the House was controlled by Republicans in 2014, therefore Republicans were in favor of liberalizing medical marijuana laws.
I anxiously await the vote in the Senate.
Spinelli:
“He usually retires ~8pm CDT”
This is doubly funny when one considers that Spinelli could easily have been referring to Bob, Esq, who gave Schulte the exact same response pointing out how wrong he was on when pot was made illegal.
I give the same basic answer as someone else, but only I deserve the snark.
This from a guy who agrees with me on most major topics of civil liberties.
Odd, that.
^ “Pot was made illegal ”
Should read “Pot was not made illegal…”
Spinelli:
“He usually retires ~8pm CDT.”
This is a direct attack on my, with no bearing on the points in question.
I stay up late, Spinelli. A habit from my days in theater. I just don’t want to spend more time with you than necessary to debunk the Gish Galloping.
“Only the naïve think the govt. is competent or legit. ”
Tell that to the Navy Seals. Or the Secret Service. Or the good folks growing weed for reasearch down in the Delta. Without their excellent work, we wouldn’t know anything about using pot as medicine, since the free market seems uninterested.
“Other countries have been doing good research and we’ll have to rely upon those sources”
Actually, most of the really good research lately has been in the US.
“Our govt. is in bed w/ Big Pharma.”
That’s for sure. Overly extended patent protection alone costs us billions every year.
We could just fund the NIH better and make all the research open source, so any drugs developed would be in the public domain and generically produced at proper market prices.
Anyone who spells theatre theater didn’t work in the legitimate theatre.
BFM, You are absolutely correct not trusting the govt. to do real research. Only the naïve think the govt. is competent or legit. Other countries have been doing good research and we’ll have to rely upon those sources. Our govt. is in bed w/ Big Pharma.
He usually retires ~8pm CDT.