Posted on 06/23/2011 3:33:06 PM PDT by Crush
Dr. Ron Paul (R-Texas) clarified details on the marijuana bill he will introduce with Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and others. Paul talked to Larry Kudlow on CNBC’s The Kudlow Report on Wednesday. The bill is not a blanket legalization bill as numerous media have suggested.
Paul's position relates to the Tenth Amendment.
Paul said the bill would return marijuana to the status that existed in 1937. The legislation, he said, would remove it “from the jurisdiction of the federal government.” The states that chose to legalize it for personal use or for medical purposes would regulate marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol.
Kudlow noted the approach is a Tenth Amendment issue. The debate over marijuana has led some states where the herb is permitted for medical use to prohibit the use because of conflict with federal law.
The Wall Street Journal pointed out at the Washington Wire blog that New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) has refused to implement his state’s medical marijuana law “without assurances from federal prosecutors.”
Another example is California where medical use is legal but dispensaries have been raided by federal law enforcement.
Paul, who is a medical doctor, said marijuana is helpful for people who have cancer and who are getting chemotherapy. There is also potential for people who suffer chronic pain but want to avoid a narcotic pain reliever that can lead to physical addiction.
Paul told Kudlow the federal government’s War on Drugs begun by President Richard Nixon (R) is a “catastrophe” that has cost US taxpayers more than $1 trillion.
Paul’s central point, however, is that the states should have jurisdiction over the issue.
CNBC said that 15 US states and the District of Columbia already permit the use of marijuana for medical purposes. Federal laws, however, technically place those states...
(Excerpt) Read more at theusreport.com ...
“Will every state also have to have import restrictions of its own on this, if they decide to keep it illegal? Are bags going to need separate state-level inspection and scanning for agricultural products when traveling interstate, like there is in Hawaii? These are also my concerns.”
That’s exactly how it works now in those states with high tobacco taxes.
I can see the similarities you’re drawing, but where in America is it illegal to possess tobacco, not just illegally dodge taxes on it?
I see what you mean.
“I can see the similarities you’re drawing, but where in America is it illegal to possess tobacco, not just illegally dodge taxes on it?”
I actually had New York in mind when I wrote this. Doesn’t the state go to outlandish lengths to collect tobacco taxes online and in other states? California may have its border fruit checks, but New York has what are close to being tobacco customs.
I have to confess ignorance to the extent of that, because I don’t smoke or dip or anything. I have heard of what you’re talking about, how anti-tobacco this state and especially this city is. There are a couple of Indian reservations not too far from the city - the Poospatuck one is I think the closest, but is small: only a few blocks long and a few blocks wide, on Long Island. The other one is bigger: the Shinnecock reservation, close to the Hamptons. There was an uproar about avoiding taxes on cigarettes from those places that made the news, but I haven’t heard much since.
I haven’t seen it in Washington, but was basing what I wrote on what I’d seen visiting Los Angeles recently and what I’d read about it elsewhere.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.