Pubdate: Fri, 14 Dec 2012
Source: Orange County Register, The (CA)
Copyright: 2012 The Orange County Register
Contact:  http://www.ocregister.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/321
Author: Rob Kampia
Note: Rob Kampia is co-founder and executive director of the 
Marijuana Policy Project.
Page: Local 17

MARIJUANA NONE OF FED'S BUSINESS

In the weeks since 55 percent of Colorado and Washington voters 
passed a pair of ballot initiatives legalizing marijuana, the 
question on many people's minds is, "How will the federal government 
respond?" Before Election Day, the U.S. Justice Department was 
completely silent, despite the fact that all nine former heads of the 
Drug Enforcement Administration sent a letter to Attorney General 
Eric Holder in September, asking him to publicly oppose both initiatives.

And since the election, three areas within the Obama 
administration  the White House, the Office of National Drug Control 
Policy and the DOJ  continue to be silent. The only public comments 
so far were made by a DOJ spokesperson, who said DOJ is "reviewing" 
both state laws, and ONDCP director Gil Kerlikowske, who repeated 
that DOJ was reviewing the matter. This is good news. Article Tab: 
state-marijuana-monday-ca Gerald Thompson holds up a bag of marijuana 
on the steps of the State Capitol in Denver on Monday, Dec. 10, 2012. 
Marijuana for recreational use became legal in Colorado Monday, when 
the governor took a purposely low-key procedural step of declaring 
the voter-approved change part of the state constitution.

Members of the U.S. House of Representatives have been more active. 
This, too, is good news. Specifically, on Nov. 16, 18 members of the 
House, including the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, Rep. 
John Conyers (D-Mich.), sent a letter to Holder and DEA administrator 
Michele Leonhart, urging the DOJ to respect the voters of Colorado 
and Washington.

And, on Nov. 27, Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) and nine other House 
members, including Republican Reps. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Michael 
Coffman (R-Colo.), introduced legislation to clarify that federal law 
does not prevent states from legalizing marijuana.

More significantly, it's worth remembering that a more muscular bill 
to de-federalize virtually all marijuana laws had attracted 21 
sponsors even before Election Day. This bill is the ideal, ultimate 
bill, because it would mostly take the federal government out of the 
business of prohibiting marijuana. This bill was introduced by Rep. 
Barney Frank (D-Mass.), who is retiring, so there will be a new lead 
sponsor early next year.

There's now also movement to introduce a new bill to treat marijuana 
like alcohol and tobacco on the federal level, which means allowing 
states to determine their own marijuana policies without federal 
interference, and imposing a federal marijuana tax that's similar to 
the federal taxes on alcohol and tobacco.

This new proposal, if it's introduced, could have legs. Currently, 
alcohol, tobacco and gasoline sales generate more than $6 billion, 
$17 billion, and $20 billion for the federal government annually. 
Given projected models of what a taxed and regulated marijuana market 
might look like, it's safe to assume that marijuana sales would 
generate perhaps $2 billion to $3 billion for the federal government annually.

And this doesn't even include federal income tax revenues from newly 
employed marijuana workers, nor does it include tax revenues for 
local and state governments, nor does it include criminal justice 
savings on every level of government.

Predictably, the U.S. Senate has been much quieter. In the history of 
the Senate, only one medical marijuana bill has been introduced, and 
that was by Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) in 2004.

But Democrats increased their majority in the Senate on Election Day, 
and Democrats are overwhelmingly more supportive of marijuana policy 
reform than are Republicans, so we hope to work with friendly Senate 
Democrats, along with limited government Republicans like Sen. Rand 
Paul (R-KY) and Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), to put marijuana policy on 
the Senate's agenda next year.

Going back to medical marijuana, it's worth noting that 163 members 
of the House voted in May of this year to prohibit DOJ (which 
includes the DEA) from spending any taxpayer money to interfere with 
state-level medical marijuana laws, including in California.

In a 435-member House, this amendment needs only 218 votes to pass, 
so 163 "yes" votes is pretty impressive, given that the amendment was 
called with less than two days' notice, and especially given that 
precisely 20 percent of the House was composed of freshmen 
Republicans (supposedly ultra-conservative "Tea Party" people).

Clearly, the federal government has been the biggest obstacle to sane 
marijuana laws since President Richard Nixon declared a domestic war 
on some drug users in 1971. But the feds aren't all bad, as evidenced 
by the fact that they have allowed legitimate medical marijuana 
businesses to help people for years in states like Colorado, Maine, 
and New Mexico.

Looking toward the next few months, the U.S. Senate should hold 
hearings and possibly even pass a marijuana de-federalization bill 
through the Senate Judiciary Committee. And the Obama administration 
should simply do nothing.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom