This Little Light Of Mine

Friday, March 14, 2014

HR 1523 - Respect State Marijuana Laws Act of 2013

Write your US Reps and urge the swift enactment of H.R. 1523...pronto! Better yet, let's decriminalize it completely...regulate it (like we do tobacco) and take the sales tax earned from it and relieve the property tax burden on homeowners! Pretty good concept I think!!

H.R.1523 -- Respect State Marijuana Laws Act of 2013 (Introduced in House - IH)

HR 1523 IH

113th CONGRESS
1st Session

H. R. 1523
To amend the Controlled Substances Act to provide for a new rule regarding the application of the Act to marihuana, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 12, 2013

Mr. ROHRABACHER (for himself, Mr. COHEN, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. POLIS, Mr. AMASH, and Mr. BLUMENAUER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

A BILL
To amend the Controlled Substances Act to provide for a new rule regarding the application of the Act to marihuana, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Respect State Marijuana Laws Act of 2013'.
SEC. 2. RULE REGARDING APPLICATION TO MARIHUANA.

Part G of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`SEC. 710. RULE REGARDING APPLICATION TO MARIHUANA.

`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.'.
********************************************************************************

On November 13, 2013, NAACP passes resolution on HR 1523
(Baltimore, MD)— During the October 2013 NAACP Board of Directors meeting, board members passed a resolution that supports allowing states to decrease penalties for low-level marijuana possession and supports prohibiting federal enforcement of marijuana laws in states which have lesser penalties.

The bipartisan legislation in question, H.R. 1523, prohibits the federal enforcement of marijuana laws in states which have decreased penalties, allowed medical use, or legalized recreational use; including, Washington, Colorado, California, and the District of Columbia. The state level law changes will impact communities of color the most.

Annually, more than 700,000 people are arrested in the United States for possession of marijuana. Although studies show that whites and African Americans use and sell marijuana at relatively the same rates, African Americans are almost four times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession—30 times more likely in some jurisdictions.

The following is a full text copy of the resolution:

NAACP SUPPORTS ALLOWING STATES TO DECREASE PENALTIES FOR LOW-LEVEL DRUG POSSESSION

WHEREAS, as a result of the “War on Drugs” and mandatory minimum sentences imposed largely at the federal level, the prison population has exploded in the past few decades; and

WHEREAS, one crucial result of these misguided and misplaced policies has been the disproportionate over-confinement of racial and ethnic minorities: more than 60% of the people in prison are now racial and ethnic minorities; and

WHEREAS, two-thirds of all persons in prison today for drug offenses are people of color; and

WHEREAS, more than 700,000 people annually are arrested in the United States for the possession of marijuana; and

WHEREAS, even though numerous studies demonstrate that whites and African Americans use and sell marijuana at relatively the same rates, studies also demonstrate that African Americans are, on average, almost 4 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession, and in some jurisdictions Blacks are 30 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than whites; and

WHEREAS, there are also extreme economic consequences to the present day enforcement of marijuana laws; nationally, states spent an estimated $3.61 billion enforcing marijuana possession laws in 2010 alone; money that could be spent on education, job training, and other valuable services; and

WHEREAS, several states throughout the U.S. have departed from current federal law to develop more well-tailored and effective guidelines and sentencing ranges for small, low-level marijuana use which are moderating some of the more extreme federal policies and their repercussions; and

WHEREAS, these state laws are at times at odds with federal laws; and

WHEREAS, legislation has been introduced in the 113th Congress, H.R. 1523, with strong bipartisan support, which would prohibit the federal enforcement of marijuana laws in states which have lesser penalties.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the NAACP supports H.R. 1523 and encourages its swift enactment; and

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the NAACP Washington Bureau shall contact Members of the Congress and urge the swift enactment of H.R. 1523.

Thursday, March 13, 2014

A System In Crisis

Is it any wonder why the people of Maine do not trust their representatives? When examples of wrong doing by Schneider was being brought forth, committee members bring up reasons that have nothing to do with what is being brought forth to shut them up. Saying that they are bringing these reasons before that committee for answers or fixing the problem is NOT why they were stating the reasons. They were stating the reasons to show the ineptness and criminality of the actions/in-actions of the nominee for judge while he was a legislator and AG! This proves his inability to follow his oath to the constitution and his duties in positions beforehand...thus showing a pattern of ineptness and willful derelict of duty. This is VERY pertinent to the matter at hand which is showing why he should not be nominated to sit on the bench where he'd have peoples lives, freedoms and property in his hands. If he was unwilling and or unable to address them while in a lesser position that dictates he must do so before, then what makes this committee think he'll do so in a more important role as judge? This goes to show you that these committee members are just as bad as the nominee before them and have no intention to follow their oaths of office either...and the proof of that is in the rubber stamping of nominating Schneider to the bench without so much as even taking a break to look at the information given them at the hearing BEFORE going on to vote unanimously for his nomination! UNBELIEVABLE!

)