I’m delighted to see a showing (however slight it may be) of progress in the GOP.
A bill introduced in Congress on Friday would fix the conflict between the federal government’s marijuana prohibition and state laws that allow medical or recreational use.
California Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher said his bill, which has three Republican and three Democratic sponsors, would assure that state laws on pot are respected by the feds.
The measure would amend the Controlled Substances Act to make clear that individuals and businesses, including marijuana dispensaries, who comply with state marijuana laws are immune from federal prosecution.
“This bipartisan bill represents a common-sense approach that establishes federal government respect for all states’ marijuana laws,” Rohrabacher said in a news release. “It does so by keeping the federal government out of the business of criminalizing marijuana activities in states that don’t want it to be criminal.”
Interesting. I found the text here. What I love most about the bill is its utter simplicity! Only two pages long, it simply adds the following paragraph to the Controlled Substances Act:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the provisions of this subchapter related to marihuana shall not apply to any person acting in compliance with State laws relating to the production, possession, distribution, dispensation, administration, or delivery of marihuana.
Perhaps a similar bill could be introduced for states that refuse to cooperate with Obamacare.
The bill has gotten attention at LA Weekly (no fan of Republicans, or Rohrabacher):
We’re in the midst of strange days: An Orange County Republican wants the Democratic administration in the White House to stop cracking down on marijuana in states where it’s legal (!!!).
While I don’t think individual consumption of substances is a proper scope of inquiry for government, and I have explained why many times, at the very least, such criminal legislation was never a proper target for the federal government and should have all be left up to the states.
In Mideastern countries, religious morality police arrest people for religious moral offenses, while our chemical morality police arrest people for chemical and botanical moral offenses. Unfortunately, while our founders thought to provide a written guarantee of freedom of religious conscience, it never occurred to them that the federal government might decide to police the chemical and botanical morality of the people. Nevertheless, it eventually happened. There is no freedom of conscience in matters of chemical morality.
I’m glad to see a little progress, and I am especially glad it is coming from within the Republican Party.