New Bill Would Stop Federal Enforcement of Marijuana

Categories: Marijuana
Not feeling it
Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) defines the word "maverick." His stance on hemp farming and his position against the Federal Reserve earned the 2012 presidential hopeful the moniker long before the Republican establishment hijacked the label in 2008.

The hero of political independents coast-to-coast (and recent winner of the Iowa straw poll) will almost certainly start feeling the love from cannabis activists after news broke today that the Republican is supporting a bill in Congress that will effectively end the role of the Drug Enforcement Agency and any other federal agency in marijuana enforcement. Authored by Congressman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the bill will be introduced tomorrow.

Bay Area pols are on board: the bill is cosponsored by Barbara Lee of Oakland and Pete Stark of Fremont. But what of most-powerful San Franciscan Nancy Pelosi, the House Minority Leader?

It appears the former Speaker is taking a pass.

Frank, who last month introduced a separate piece of legislation that would federally reschedule marijuana, will introduce the bill and its formal language on Thursday, but reports indicate it would limit the federal government's role on enforcing pot laws. The DEA would only be allowed to police pot between the Mexican border and the United  States as well as inter-state smuggling -- meaning DEA raids of legal medical cannabis dispensaries and cultivation operations in Mendocino County would be over. It would also affirm the right of citizens in states with pro-pot laws to grow, use, sell, and transport cannabis.

Other cosponsors include Jared Polis (D-Colorado) and representatives from Michigan and Tennessee.

While the former Speaker hasn't commented on the Paul-Frank bill, Pelosi's lukewarm stance on pro-marijuana bills is documented. There's already been a bill in Congress that would make marijuana "less illegal": HR 1983, introduced last month by Frank, would "reschedule" cannabis to Schedule III or lower, meaning the plant would finally be on the same level as other legal prescription drugs. That bill, the States' Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act, is languishing in committee.

Paul's support gives the bill's proponents at least a modicum of confidence that his fellow Republicans will follow suit. But unless they get enough blue-ribbon support from both sides, the bill will likely fail.

Mobilizing that support means spending political capital -- and that's not something powerful pols like Pelosi appear ready to do. "The Leader has not previously expressed support for rescheduling," Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill tells SF Weekly. He notes that his boss is reviewing the details of the bill, but was quick to add that she rarely cosponsors legislation.

We asked Hammill specifically whether Pelosi would support the new bill, and will update when we receive a reply.

But if something as seemingly radical as telling the DEA that a nonintoxicating hemp plant is less dangerous than cocaine doesn't sit well with Pelosi, then we can only assume she won't be running to support a bill that would decriminalize marijuana nationally -- if nothing more than political reasons.

Text of the bill is not yet available, and SF Weekly hasn't gotten through to a spokesperson for Paul or Frank. But other published reports say it would repeal the federal prohibitions and allow each state to make its own laws regarding marijuana enforcement, similar to the way states make their own rules regarding alcohol, prostitution, and oil drilling to name a few.

Advocates who are eager to end this War on Drugs note that the new bill would federally decriminalize sales of marijuana as well as the use and cultivation.

If it's ever read in committee, let alone on the House floor, that is.

Follow us on Twitter at @SFWeekly and @TheSnitchSF

My Voice Nation Help
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Michael Smeltzer
Michael Smeltzer

When any government profess it maintains the right to prevent it's citizens from using herbal remedies, be they St.Johns wort, willow tree bark, digitalis, marijuana or any other naturally grown plant. One can be sure there is big money in keeping the use of these and other plants illegal.

Not because the legalization would interfere with the sale of alcohol based beverages or tobacco products as you've been told in the past. The real reasons for keeping natural occurring (growing) herbs illegal is,

1. Keeping Private, State and Federal prisons full of captive slave labor. 2. Maintaining unconstitutional controls over the general population (especially minority groups) so as to corral politically dissident individuals and groups who would challenge the current political status quo by keeping popular herbal remedy's (in use for thousands of years) illegal.3. Eliminating any serious competition in the (so called illegal) drug business, so as to allow governments to monopolize the illegal drug trade and maximize the market price at the same time.4. Finally to gather wealth without working for it. Governments realized many years ago that setting high bail bonds, confiscation of private property without paying for that property and the establishment of lawyers, judges, drug crime units and the very police themselves at every level, federal, state and local serves to fund government with out representation, i.e. and ILLEGAL TAX! on the general population at large, perpetuated by unconstitutional, illegally (so called enacted laws), which are not laws at all as defined by our very own constitution.

These are the true reasons you will never see the state or federal government ever voluntarily repeal these so called drug laws.... they are just too lucrative a zero over sight, zero audited cash cow with a big club that hangs over the head of every citizen.  

Now Trending

San Francisco Concert Tickets

From the Vault


©2014 SF Weekly, LP, All rights reserved.