New from the TAC Store

by Mark Thornton, Mises.org

[Watch the interview with Mark Thornton on Prop. 19.]

Proposition 19 in California would have legalized marijuana, but it fell short. Victory seemed almost a foregone conclusion for many; after all, it is California. For millions, both in California and across the country, news of Prop. 19′s failure came as a major disappointment. However, it should be considered a great victory for such a radical measure to get 46 percent of the vote in open defiance of federal law, especially considering the intense opposition. Plans are already in the works to put the initiative back on the ballot for the 2012 election, which is expected to have higher turnout from young people. But in order for the ballot initiative to succeed, we must first understand why it failed.

The Opposition

In order to understand the depth and strength of the opposition, it is necessary to understand what Prop. 19 is really about. This legislation would be in open opposition to federal law as well as to a United Nations treaty that supports the drug war. It would be a law passed by the people, not the legislature. Most importantly, it would demonstrate that in the absence of marijuana prohibition, society can survive and thrive.

This example would give other states the idea that they could also effectively repeal marijuana prohibition. It might even create a national effort to repeal marijuana prohibition. It might even give people the idea to repeal other silly and harmful federal laws. This would open a can of worms for federal authority and bring back the idea of a people’s nullification.

So as you can see this was a critical victory for federal authority. It is not just that some potheads forgot to register to vote. Lots of money was spent, lots of lies were told. This was the equivalent of a goal-line stand for federal authority.

Bruce Yandle created the “bootleggers and Baptists” model of politics to describe how special-interest groups who normally oppose each other work for a common goal. With alcohol prohibition, Baptist preachers teamed up with bootleggers and moonshiners to make and keep alcohol illegal. Today we see the shared interests of environmental groups and established oil companies, who both want drilling restricted.

Those opposing Prop. 19 included everyone from marijuana dealers to megachurch preachers. All the powerful politicians, candidates, pot smokers, and even the California Beer and Beverage Distributors Association joined the team. The ancient proverb “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” perfectly describes the relationship of these seemingly unlikely bedfellows.

Politicians

Politicians lined up solidly against Prop. 19, as you would expect. Gubernatorial candidates Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman opposed it. US Senate candidates Barbara Boxer and Carly Fiorina opposed it. California senator Dianne Feinstein opposed it. California representative and speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi opposed it. Both candidates for attorney general opposed it.

In an attempt to dishearten supporters of Prop. 19, US attorney general Eric Holder issued a statement that he would vigorously enforce federal law in California even if Prop. 19 passed. In a similar vein, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a bill making possession of small amounts of marijuana a minor violation punishable by a maximum fine of $100. This was a last-ditch effort to undermine support for Prop. 19 by giving the impression that marijuana was de facto a legal drug.

Even Mexican president Felipe Calderon and Colombia’s Juan Manuel Santos vocally opposed Prop. 19 — not surprisingly, given that Mexico and Columbia receive a great deal of money from the United States to fight the War on Drugs, and both countries generate substantial incomes from the sale of illegal drugs. Legal pot in California would have been a big blow to both marijuana and cocaine sales from south of the border.

Bootleggers

There is good evidence that those who currently grow and sell illegal marijuana opposed Prop. 19. The “Emerald Triangle,” consisting of Humboldt, Mendocino, and Trinity Counties, is the major marijuana-growing region in Northern California. According to Mother Jones, those three counties voted to defeat Prop. 19:

“There’s a large movement up here of people who realize that their self interest lies in keeping marijuana illegal,” says Hank Sims, the editor of the North Coast Journal, based in the Humboldt town of Eureka. Growers in the Emerald Triangle’s rugged hills and foggy redwood groves are shielded from the snooping eyes of the DEA, but that advantage would become a handicap if pot could be openly cultivated in California’s warm, flat, agribusiness-dominated Central Valley. North Coast ganja growers “have got government-sponsored price control in the form of busts,” Sims explains. “So I think a lot of people kind of cynically voted their pocketbook and voted to keep it illegal.”

There was even a group called “Stoners against Legalization,” but it turns out that it was headed up by a drug-law attorney who would have lost a great deal of her business had Prop. 19 passed. Likewise, medical marijuana shops have come out against Prop. 19 on the ludicrous notion that legalization would reduce patient access to marijuana.

Baptists

Segueing from bootleggers to Baptists, we find this headline from the East Bay Express: Stoners against Legalization Team Up with Ex-Crackhead Priest. Of course, the priest was joined by fundamentalist Christians as well. The East Bay Express reports,

Backed by the California Beer and Beverage Distributors, no on 19 group “Public Safety First” employed the powerful Christian fundamentalist organization Vision to America. [T]he anti-gay rights group asked its hundreds of thousands of believers nationwide to “help us get the word out about our campaign to defeat legalized recreational marijuana in schools.”

The California Beer and Beverage Distributors, who would be hurt by lower marijuana prices, teamed up with church-based Vision to America — talk about bootleggers and Baptists in action — to raise money, run advertisements, and mislead the public debate. They claimed that Prop. 19 would lead to allowing truck drivers, nurses, and students to get high before driving, nursing, and going to school. The Chamber of Commerce also aired some blatantly misleading advertisements.

The truth, of course, is that students, nurses, and truck drivers can be prevented from getting high before showing up, just as they are prevented from getting drunk. The truth is that businesses can prevent customers and employees from smoking pot on their property, and insurance companies would not go along with businesses that let their employees get high and operate heavy machinery or fly planes. In fact, marijuana is safer than alcohol and is probably only the 10th-most-problematic recreational drug.

Given the powerful forces opposing Prop. 19 — along with their lies and trickery — the forces of liberty and prosperity should not be disheartened by this initial defeat. We now have a copy of their playbook — politicians, pot growers, and medical-marijuana dealers oppose legalization, while Christian organizations, beer distributors, and drug lawyers spread lies to protect their self-interests.

Mark Thornton is a senior resident fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, and is the book review editor for the Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics. He is the author of The Economics of Prohibition, coauthor of Tariffs, Blockades, and Inflation: The Economics of the Civil War, and the editor of The Quotable Mises, The Bastiat Collection, and An Essay on Economic Theory. Send him mail. See Mark Thornton’s article archives.

The following article is based off a speech given on 09-25-10 at the 25th Annual Gun Rights Policy Conference in San Francisco, CA.
Michael will be a featured speaker at Nullify Now! in Orlando on 10-10-10 and Chattanooga on 10-23-10. Get tickets here – http://www.nullifynow.com/tickets/ – or by calling 888-71-TICKETS

I’ve often been told that when you’re giving a speech – if all you get is applause and cheers – and you never piss anyone off – you’re no better than a low-life politician, because you’re not challenging anyone’s conventional mode of thought. Hopefully, I get at least a few eyebrows raised here in my 8-9 short minutes….

So let’s start out with the easy stuff, ok? I’m a tenther. That means I believe that the federal government should exercise only those powers that we the people delegated to it in the constitution – and nothing more. For example, no Obamacare mandates, no bank bailouts, and definitely no federal gun laws – period.

Question. How many people here own a gun, or manufacture or sell guns?

And how many of you are proud felons – meaning, when the government makes rules to restrict your right to keep and bear arms, you simply ignore them because they don’t have the authority to do so?

HEMPCON

I recently went to an event called Hemp Con down in my part of the state – Los Angeles. This is a big event at the LA convention center – with loads of vendors and businesses from every angle you can think of in support of the marijuana industry. There were home security companies to help protect your weed, solar power companies to help you grow your weed, doctors giving out medical marijuana cards to virtually anyone with $80 and an hour of time. There were even delivery services – you can get your marijuana delivered to you 24 hours a day…in 30 minutes or less. The pizza companies have nothing on these guys! It was amazing if you think about it from an economic standpoint – this was capitalism, the free market – working its wonders around an industry.

What’s the point?

Virtually EVERY single one of those businesses was either directly violating federal law, or aiding someone else in doing so because marijuana is illegal, according to the feds – but not the constitution – in all situations. In 2003, Tommy Chong was arrested for merely selling pieces of glass – pipes that could be used to smoke marijuana. And today, 7 years later, we’ve got what seemed to be the WalMart of weed in Downtown Los Angeles. And guess what – no ATF or DEA thugs shut the place down. Business functioned, people did what they wanted to in freedom, and that was that.

FREEDOM TO TRAVEL

Another quick story.

In 2005, the Bush administration got the REAL ID act passed, which was – in the eyes of many – a new form of a national id card. We were warned that if this act wasn’t followed, people wouldn’t be able to travel, enter federal buildings, get on planes, and the like.

Much of my girlfriend’s family lives in Missouri, a state that’s not in compliance with the Real ID act. Her relatives do a little traveling from time to time. They get on airplanes and show their non-compliant Missouri driver’s license. No federal agents stop them and prevent them from boarding a plane.

Well, most state DL’s – including those in Missouri – don’t comply with the Real ID Act. That law is still on the books in DC – it’s never been repealed. It’s never been challenged in court either. But – due to 25 states refusing to comply with the “law” – in much of the country that Real ID act is virtually null and void.

Here in California- the state always seems to be on its knees, begging the feds for something. Well, except on marijuana. In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that state medical marijuana laws were illegal. At that time there were 10 states that had such laws. Do you know how many were repealed? Zero. And today, there’s 14 states defying Washington dc, and getting away with it.

Today, we see the Firearms Freedom Act movement growing along these lines – it’s already passed in 8 states. Following that lead, 5 states have passed laws saying no to Obamacare mandates too.

THE LESSON

What’s the lesson? This is the blueprint – when enough people say no to unconstitutional laws, regulations….and mandates….and enough states pass laws to back those people up – there’s not much the federal government can do, but slowly and consistently back off. There’s no tanks rolling into Los Angeles to shut down the dispensaries, and there’s no jack-booted thugs forcing people to get new driver’s licenses in Missouri. This is far from perfect, but it can work, and it is working right now.

So here’s the final question – and the big challenge to you today.

The next time you begrudgingly follow some federal “law” that restricts your right to keep and bear arms – or the next time you hear about a gun rights case that will be decided in 2, or 4, or 6 years – with the hope that some judge will give you permission to exercise your rights, ask yourself this question:

Do you….gun rights activists….have as much courage as the pot smokers?

For the sake of liberty – I hope you do – because I believe that we the people need to exercise our rights whether they the government wants to give us “permission” to or not!

Michael Boldin [send him email] is the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center.

While the media of late tends to focus on the new crop of states resisting DC with legislation on firearms and health care, they almost always miss, or ignore, what I consider to be some of the greatest and most effective state resistance to federal power – marijuana activism.

According to our friends at NORML, there are now 13 states who are openly resisting federal laws on medical marijuana. And now my home state of California is on the verge of taking it to the next level – full legalization.

According to a report in the SF Chronicle yesterday:

Two prominent East Bay marijuana advocates got clearance from the state today to try to put a pot-legalization initiative on the November 2010 California ballot.

This isn’t your run-of-the-mill “medical marijuana” bill – that’s already legal in CA. If approved by voters, the bill would:

allow anyone over 21 to possess or grow marijuana for personal use. It would allow each local government to decide whether to tax and regulate marijuana sales.

Any honest person reading the Constitution through the intent and understanding of the founders would recognize that the federal government has no delegated power to be involved in the marijuana issue, in any way.

Keep in mind, though, that the federal courts (and the DEA), don’t really care what the Constitution has to say about it. They’ve interpreted it in their own way, and have made it quite clear that they don’t recognize state marijuana laws as “valid.”

But, as we say here in California, thanks for your opinion, DC, we’ve got our own.

“If California wants to legalize it, let ‘em legalize it,” Paul told host Richard Greene on Air America’s “Hollywood CLOUT!” program.

He said that he believes that the U.S. Constitution gives the fifty states the right to legalize hemp production or marijuana. He said the issue was a matter of personal liberty but added that drug users should not be entitled to government-funded treatment if they abuse legalized drugs.

“If drugs are legal and people misuse them, then they do it at their own risk,” he said.

Bottom line, said Paul: “I do trust individuals to make their own decisions.”

Listen to the full interview below:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Tuesday that the time is right to debate legalizing marijuana for recreational use in California.

The governor’s comments were made as support grows nationwide for relaxing pot laws and only days after a poll found that for the first time a majority of California voters back legal marijuana. Also, a San Francisco legislator has proposed regulating and taxing marijuana to bring the state as much as $1.3 billion a year in extra revenue.

Schwarzenegger was cautious when answering a reporter’s question Tuesday about whether the state should regulate and tax the substance, saying it is not time to go that far.

But, he said: “I think it’s time for debate. I think all of those ideas of creating extra revenues – I’m always for an open debate on it.”

The governor said California should look to the experiences of other nations around the world in relaxing laws on marijuana.

Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, has introduced a bill to regulate marijuana like alcohol, with people over 21 years old allowed to grow, buy, sell and possess cannabis – all of which are barred by federal law.

California voters in 1996 legalized marijuana for medical use with permission from a physician.

Ammiano said he was pleased the governor is “open-minded” on the issue and added that he was sure the two could “hash it out.”

Under Ammiano’s proposal, the state would impose a $50-an-ounce levy on sales of marijuana, which would boost state revenues by about $1.3 billion a year, according to an analysis by the State Board of Equalization. Betty Yee of San Francisco, who chairs the Board of Equalization, supports the measure.

“This has never just been about money,” said Ammiano, who has long supported reforming marijuana laws. “It’s also about the failure of the war on drugs and implementing a more enlightened policy. I’ve always anticipated that there could be a perfect storm of political will and public support, and obviously the federal policies are leaning more toward states’ rights.”

CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is sending strong signals that President Obama – who as a candidate said states should be allowed to make their own rules on medical marijuana – will end raids on pot dispensaries in California.

Asked at a Washington news conference Wednesday about Drug Enforcement Administration raids in California since Obama took office last month, Holder said the administration has changed its policy.

“What the president said during the campaign, you’ll be surprised to know, will be consistent with what we’ll be doing here in law enforcement,” he said. “What he said during the campaign is now American policy.”

Bill Piper, national affairs director of the Drug Policy Alliance, a marijuana advocacy group, said the statement is encouraging.

“I think it definitely signals that Obama is moving in a new direction, that it means what he said on the campaign trail that marijuana should be treated as a health issue rather than a criminal justice issue,” he said.

Piper said Obama has also indicated he will drop the federal government’s long-standing opposition to health officials’ needle-exchange programs for drug users.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE

While there have been studies showing that marijuana can shrink cancerous tumors, medical marijuana is essentially a palliative drug.

If a doctor recommends marijuana to a cancer patient undergoing chemotherapy and it helps them feel better, then it’s working. In the end, medical marijuana is a quality of life issue best left to patients and their doctors.

Federal bureaucrats waging war on non-corporate drugs contend that organic marijuana is not an effective health intervention.

The federal government’s prescribed intervention for medical marijuana patients is handcuffs, jail cells and criminal records. This heavy-handed approach suggests that drug warriors are not well suited to dictate health-care decisions.

It’s long past time that Congress showed some leadership on the issue and passed legislation reaffirming the Constitution’s 10th Amendment guarantee of states rights.

States that prefer to cage sick patients for daring to feel better can continue to do so. The more enlightened states that have passed compassionate-use legislation should not be stymied by a federal government that really should have better things to do.

No doubt that these are issues that should be left to individuals and their doctors – but governments around the country would rather continue spending massive amounts of our money to throw these people in cages.

Here’s what Gregory had to say:

I distinctly remembered that Bush said something back during his first presidential campaign about leaving medical marijuana laws up to the states. After Clinton’s horrendous crackdowns in California, I recall thinking Bush’s stance on this, along with his “humble” foreign policy promises, was a reason I quietly rooted for him against Gore. I imagined on civil liberties and war, as well as economics, he’d be slightly less bad.

And, of course, here’s the original 1999 report from the Washington Post:

“Campaigning in Seattle on Saturday, Bush answered questions about medical marijuana laws by saying, ‘I believe each state can choose that decision as they so choose.’”

R. Keith Stroup, executive director for the National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws in Washington, which has backed D.C.’s drug initiative, said he was “delighted” by Bush’s support of state authority.

“Governor Bush is at least being consistent,” Stroup said. “Republicans frequently talk about devolution, returning power to the states. . . . It is encouraging to hear him indicate that he would leave this decision to them.”

Consistent – sure – as long as he wasn’t running the country as our “commander-in-chief.”  But, as Lord Acton warned us about human nature, once he got power, that power corrupted.  (Remember? Power Corrupts – absolute power corrupts absolutely.)

Then again, he might’ve just been acting like politicians act – and saying something to get a few votes.

Either way, it doesn’t really matter, because in practice Bush has only upped the ante and supported the seemingly never-ending war on your freedom/drugs.

As Ron Paul has said so clearly, this issue is one that’s supposed to be left to the states – to decide locally:

The Federal government should recognize that states have the authority to decide these issues.  This affords all states the opportunity to see which policies are most beneficial. As a Congressman and a physician, I strongly advocate that healthcare decisions should be made by doctors and patients, not politicians or federal agents, which is why I am an original co-sponsor of the recently introduced “Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act” which would bar the Federal government from intervening in such doctor/patient relationships that violate no state law.

As written previously on this site, the federal drug war is an abomination:

…the drug war is based on a repugnant assertion: that you do not have ownership over your own body; that you don’t have the right to decide what you’ll do with your body, with your property and with your life. The position of the drug warriors is that you should be in jail if you decide to do something with your body that they don’t approve of.

Federal “authorities” don’t care what your local laws are, don’t care what your personal choices are and don’t care what reason you have for your choices.

All they care about is their own power.  Period.

But, there’s nothing, whatsoever, in the US Constitution which permits the federal government to wage a “drug war.”

The Constitution was written under the principle of “positive grant,” which means that the federal government is authorized to exercise only those powers which are specifically listed in the Constitution.  The rest, as the 10th Amendment states, are to be “reserved to the States, respectively, or to the People.”

A simple reading of the Constitution would make it quite clear to anyone, that there’s nothing mentioned about drug wars, drugs, marijuana, plants, or anything of the like.

Thus, it’s not only the federal marijuana laws that are unconstitutional, but the entire federal “war on drugs.”

It’s time to bring this multi-billion dollar attack on your liberty to an end.

K.K. Forss does not claim medical marijuana solves all his problems.  His pain from a ruptured disc in his neck is debilitating.  He is unable to go to work or to the First Baptist Church  he used to attend because of the pain and muscle spasms.  Taxpayers through Medicare spend over $18,000 a year on his various medications.

Half of those drugs are strong narcotics.  The other half address the various side-effects brought on by the first half, such as nausea, heartburn, heart palpitations, difficulty sleeping, and muscle spasms.

No, marijuana would not completely address all his pain, but it made a tremendous difference in the quality of his life when he tried it for over a year.  It helped him regain 38 pounds he had lost.  It calmed his muscle spasms and helped him sleep. In short, it alleviated many side effects and greatly reduced his need for other expensive medications.  Mr. Forss estimates that being allowed to use medical marijuana would save taxpayers at least $12,000 a year in medications he would no longer need.  He would also be able to work occasionally and attend some church services.

Scientists at the University of California at Davis recently completed a study that backs up Mr. Forss’s experience, finding that cannabis demonstrates significant relief of neuropathic pain.  Many in government call for more studies while people like K.K. Forss suffer.  More studies will not change what many patients already know, and that is for some, medical marijuana helps their pain.  But over-reaching government gets in the way.

K.K. Forss lived in constant fear of federal and state officials so he eventually stopped taking medical marijuana and switched to his more rigorous and expensive pill regimen.  Presently, twelve states have passed legislation allowing marijuana, under certain conditions, to be prescribed legally by doctors for patients who could benefit from it.

K.K. Forss lives in Minnesota, where it is not yet legal.  However, even if it is legalized by the state, Mr. Forss will still have plenty to fear from the Federal government, as cannabis dispensaries and clinics that operate under these state laws are still under fire from the Drug Enforcement Administration.

In other words, the federal government sees fit to use our tax dollars to raid state sanctioned healthcare clinics, to imprison and fine patients and operators, in order to compel people like Mr. Forss to be bedridden and overmedicated at great taxpayer expense every single day.

The Federal government should recognize that states have the authority to decide these issues.  This affords all states the opportunity to see which policies are most beneficial. As a Congressman and a physician, I strongly advocate that healthcare decisions should be made by doctors and patients, not politicians or federal agents, which is why I am an original co-sponsor of the recently introduced “Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act” which would bar the Federal government from intervening in such doctor/patient relationships that violate no state law.

The bottom line is that K.K. Forss should be treated as a free American.  Mr. Forss is one of many who would like to use marijuana medicinally because it helps him.

Politicians and bureaucrats have no right to interfere.

Ron Paul is a republican member of Congress from Texas.

States rights have no bearing when thugs shut down businesses, destroy families, and throw people in jail.

From the MSNBC report:

Federal authorities contend that marijuana is an illegal drug, no matter how it used or who uses it, and they don’t honor the state laws.

It’s quite simple.  Federal “authorities” don’t care what your local laws are, don’t care what your personal choices are and don’t care what reason you have for your choices.

All they care about is their own power.  Period.

But, there’s nothing, whatsoever, in the US Constitution which permits the federal government to wage a “drug war.”

The Constitution was written under the principle of “positive grant,” which means that the federal government is authorized to exercise only those powers which are specifically listed in the Constitution.  The rest, as the 10th Amendment states, are to be “reserved to the States, respectively, or to the People.”

A simple reading of the Constitution would make it quite clear to anyone, that there’s nothing mentioned about drug wars, drugs, marijuana, plants, or anything of the like.

Thus, it’s not only the federal marijuana laws that are unconstitutional, but the entire federal “war on drugs.”

It’s time to bring this multi-billion dollar attack on your liberty to an end.