Hillary Clinton Proposes Loosening Restrictions On Marijuana

[Jacob Redmond]

Hillary Clinton proposed loosening restrictions on marijuana in South Carolina on Saturday, telling a largely African-American audience that she would like to reschedule the drug in order to spur research.

"What I do want is for us to support research into medical marijuana because a lot more states have passed medical marijuana than have legalized marijuana, so we have got two different experiences or even experiments going on right now," Clinton said. "The problem with medical marijuana is there is a lot of anecdotal evidence about how well it works for certain conditions. But we haven't done any research. Why? Because it is considered that is called a schedule one drug and you can't even do research in it."

She added, "I would like to move it from what is called Schedule 1 to Schedule 2 so that researchers at universities, national institutes of health can start researching what is the best way to use it, how much of a dose does somebody need, how does it interact with other medications."

This is a new position for Clinton, who in the past has said she wanted to spur research but has never endorsed reclassifying the drug.

Marijuana is currently categorized by the Drug Enforcement Administration as a Schedule 1 drug, the highest categorization for drugs "with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse."

Rescheduling the drug would open up the possibility of more research into marijuana and the way it interacts with other substance.

Clinton did not endorse legalizing marijuana on Saturday, instead saying she wanted to "see how it works" in states like Colorado and Washington that have legalized the drug "before we do a national plan from the federal government. Because I think there is a lot for us to learn."

Clinton has long been more conservative than many Democrats on marijuana. Asked during the CNN debate in October whether she would legalize the drug, Clinton simply said "no" and repeated the line that she wanted to learn from the states.

Bernie Sanders, Clinton's stoutest Democratic challenger, has sought to seize on marijuana as a wedge issue with Clinton, filing a bill in the Senate earlier this month that would allow states to decide whether to legalize recreational use of marijuana and decriminalize the drug at the federal level.

"It's a state and a federal issue. The federal issue is that we should remove marijuana from the Controlled Substance Act. That's a federal decision," Sanders told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday. "The state decision is that we live in a federal system of government where issues like tobacco and alcohol are significantly regulated by the states. And I think that is a province of the states."

And Martin O'Malley, the former Maryland governor who is a distant third in the Democratic race, proposed rescheduling marijuana earlier this year as part of his criminal justice reform plan.

Clinton's subtle announcement was not heralded by all marijuana activists.

"The rescheduling of marijuana is a step in the right direction, but only going down to Schedule 2 is mostly a symbolic move," said Tom Angell, chairman of Marijuana Majority. "It may make research slightly easier, but on its own wouldn't do anything to protect seriously ill people who are using marijuana in accordance with state laws from being harassed by the DEA. Only changing the federal criminal statutes can effectively do that."

Angell, who has been supportive of Clinton's moves on marijuana in the past, added that he was hopeful it was "only a matter of time before (Clinton) officially adds her voice in support of legislation that would" change federal criminal statutes.

News Moderator: Jacob Redmond 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Hillary Clinton Proposes Loosening Restrictions On Marijuana
Author: Web Staff
Contact: Contact Page
Photo Credit: Nation Of Change
Website: WHOTV News

 

[RaysDad]

Hillary is a TWO FACED LIAR!!!!!! All she wants is the almighty vote.

RD

 

[Happy Hemper]

No don't move cannabis from Schedule 1 to Schedule 2 but rather move cannabis from Schedule 1 to Schedule None, in its natural state cannabis should not be on the schedule at all...no plant should.

 

[davidsan]

Hillary Clinton proposed loosening restrictions on marijuana in South Carolina on Saturday, telling a largely African-American audience that she would like to reschedule the drug in order to spur research.

“What I do want is for us to support research into medical marijuana because a lot more states have passed medical marijuana than have legalized marijuana, so we have got two different experiences or even experiments going on right now,” Clinton said. “The problem with medical marijuana is there is a lot of anecdotal evidence about how well it works for certain conditions. But we haven’t done any research. Why? Because it is considered that is called a schedule one drug and you can’t even do research in it.”

She added, “I would like to move it from what is called Schedule 1 to Schedule 2 so that researchers at universities, national institutes of health can start researching what is the best way to use it, how much of a dose does somebody need, how does it interact with other medications.”

This is a new position for Clinton, who in the past has said she wanted to spur research but has never endorsed reclassifying the drug.

Marijuana is currently categorized by the Drug Enforcement Administration as a Schedule 1 drug, the highest categorization for drugs “with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.”

Rescheduling the drug would open up the possibility of more research into marijuana and the way it interacts with other substance.

Clinton did not endorse legalizing marijuana on Saturday, instead saying she wanted to “see how it works” in states like Colorado and Washington that have legalized the drug “before we do a national plan from the federal government. Because I think there is a lot for us to learn.”

Clinton has long been more conservative than many Democrats on marijuana. Asked during the CNN debate in October whether she would legalize the drug, Clinton simply said “no” and repeated the line that she wanted to learn from the states.

Bernie Sanders, Clinton’s stoutest Democratic challenger, has sought to seize on marijuana as a wedge issue with Clinton, filing a bill in the Senate earlier this month that would allow states to decide whether to legalize recreational use of marijuana and decriminalize the drug at the federal level.

“It’s a state and a federal issue. The federal issue is that we should remove marijuana from the Controlled Substance Act. That’s a federal decision,” Sanders told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday. “The state decision is that we live in a federal system of government where issues like tobacco and alcohol are significantly regulated by the states. And I think that is a province of the states.”

And Martin O’Malley, the former Maryland governor who is a distant third in the Democratic race, proposed rescheduling marijuana earlier this year as part of his criminal justice reform plan.

Clinton’s subtle announcement was not heralded by all marijuana activists.

“The rescheduling of marijuana is a step in the right direction, but only going down to Schedule 2 is mostly a symbolic move,” said Tom Angell, chairman of Marijuana Majority. “It may make research slightly easier, but on its own wouldn’t do anything to protect seriously ill people who are using marijuana in accordance with state laws from being harassed by the DEA. Only changing the federal criminal statutes can effectively do that.”

Angell, who has been supportive of Clinton’s moves on marijuana in the past, added that he was hopeful it was “only a matter of time before (Clinton) officially adds her voice in support of legislation that would” change federal criminal statutes.

News Moderator: Jacob Redmond 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Hillary Clinton Proposes Loosening Restrictions On Marijuana
Author: Web Staff
Contact: Contact Page
Photo Credit: Nation Of Change
Website: WHOTV News

From whatt I understand reclssifying it as a schedule 2 drug will mean less reserch since it requires more money for approval by government and time .. MUCH more money .. I Think her ideas are based on the assumption young folks won't vote period .. Thats a big mistake since she is relying on the same demographics that repubs are using with success scared middle age and older folks and of course tea bag nut jobs and religious fanatics who won't vote for her anyway .. She is running her husband's campaign in a totally different era .. She is an idiot but liar is a bit too much .. Unfortunately Sanders is likely unelectable so the public will be left with choosing between republican nut jobs and democratic old school candidates .. at this point it doesn't look good for us pot supporters unless Clinton picks a very progressive running mate. Then the equation might change or if she realizes or admits we hacve been studying pot for decades and there is no reason for her Bs position on it other than misplaced political moves.

 

[Radogast]

From whatt I understand reclssifying it as a schedule 2 drug will mean less reserch since it requires more money for approval by government and time .. MUCH more money .. I Think her ideas are based on the assumption young folks won't vote period .. Thats a big mistake since she is relying on the same demographics that repubs are using with success scared middle age and older folks and of course tea bag nut jobs and religious fanatics who won't vote for her anyway .. She is running her husband's campaign in a totally different era .. She is an idiot but liar is a bit too much .. Unfortunately Sanders is likely unelectable so the public will be left with choosing between republican nut jobs and democratic old school candidates .. at this point it doesn't look good for us pot supporters unless Clinton picks a very progressive running mate. Then the equation might change or if she realizes or admits we hacve been studying pot for decades and there is no reason for her Bs position on it other than misplaced political moves.

I believe Bernie Sanders is electable. Currently, he is at the head of the largest grass roots movement for a politician that the USA has ever seen.

 

[Radogast]

An update on Bernie Sanders being electable

In a new McClatchy-Marist poll, (reported 11-11) Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) leads Republican candidate Donald Trump by a landslide margin of 12 percentage points, 53 to 41. In the McClatchy poll, Sanders also leads former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) by a landslide margin of 10 points, 51 to 41.

In new shock poll, Sanders has landslides over both Trump and Bush | TheHill

 

[davidsan]

From whatt I understand reclssifying it as a schedule 2 drug will mean less reserch since it requires more money for approval by government and time .. MUCH more money .. I Think her ideas are based on the assumption young folks won't vote period .. Thats a big mistake since she is relying on the same demographics that repubs are using with success scared middle age and older folks and of course tea bag nut jobs and religious fanatics who won't vote for her anyway .. She is running her husband's campaign in a totally different era .. She is an idiot but liar is a bit too much .. Unfortunately Sanders is likely unelectable so the public will be left with choosing between republican nut jobs and democratic old school candidates .. at this point it doesn't look good for us pot supporters unless Clinton picks a very progressive running mate. Then the equation might change or if she realizes or admits we hacve been studying pot for decades and there is no reason for her Bs position on it other than misplaced political moves.

I have been trying to respond to radograst via my android phone and twice it said I needed one more word and wiped out my comments so I will try on my home cpu .

I agree with your heart but not mind .. The folks who vote are older and the title of democratic socialist will scare them as they think "commie" . If he is nominated the individual , party and big money folks with clear minds will be dwarfed by the right wing nut jobs religious fanatics and other wackos They will pour hundreds of millions treating him like the Mccarthy era... Many young folks will vote ( which is why I think Clinton is wrong) in running such a main stream campaign designed by John Podesta who is another didn't inhale guy .. I went to college with him... and he runs her campaign. I know him well and was his nemesis in 1969-1970. I think you are deluding yourself thinking Bernie can win by his support today as compared to general election .. Portland is not like the rest of country I love the area and when my health is good I make biz trips out there for my nursery.I agree with your heart as said but think you are living in a bubble.. I want to be wrong but I think I am not .. I deal with folks all over the usa and i know how most think most get all there news on fox and are much more conservative than you realize Sorry for the delay in this is the third time I have written and been bumped off on android.. Davidan

 

[Radogast]

I have been trying to respond to radograst via my android phone and twice it said I needed one more word and wiped out my comments so I will try on my home cpu .

I agree with your heart but not mind .. The folks who vote are older and the title of democratic socialist will scare them as they think "commie" . If he is nominated the individual , party and big money folks with clear minds will be dwarfed by the right wing nut jobs religious fanatics and other wackos They will pour hundreds of millions treating him like the Mccarthy era... Many young folks will vote ( which is why I think Clinton is wrong) in running such a main stream campaign designed by John Podesta who is another didn't inhale guy .. I went to college with him... and he runs her campaign. I know him well and was his nemesis in 1969-1970. I think you are deluding yourself thinking Bernie can win by his support today as compared to general election .. Portland is not like the rest of country I love the area and when my health is good I make biz trips out there for my nursery.I agree with your heart as said but think you are living in a bubble.. I want to be wrong but I think I am not .. I deal with folks all over the usa and i know how most think most get all there news on fox and are much more conservative than you realize Sorry for the delay in this is the third time I have written and been bumped off on android.. Davidan

I am very sorry you had posting troubles, Davidan.

I don't have any expertise in calling a political horse race.

I know the democratic party was exremely stupid in the way they ran Al Gore's campaign. I know John Kerry was unelectable.


My mind and my heart say that the forces that smashed McGovern have mostly died off and moved on BUT I sympathise with your concerns especially about the crowd brainwashed by Fox. I respect your ideas and assessment. My also wife did schooling in Galesburg, Illinois so she helps me with understanding the mind of middle america and the timing of trains.

I'm sure you were more eloquent the first two posts - but we play the hand we are dealt.

 

[bobrown14]

My personal belief is that WHOMEVER runs on a "LEGALIZE IT" platform is going to be the winner. Be it Bernie or Trump or whomever.

Hopefully the "democratic socialist" tag won't hurt him too much. A lot of voters understand we currently have Democratic Socialist government right now - I.E. Health care (Market place/Medicaid/medicare), oh and lets not forget Social Security. All those are socialist programs that have been in place for a long time benefiting most EVERYONE. All Bernie is doing is calling it what it is.

In elections for president there's lots of older folks whom are for the majority baby boomers and OK with cannabis and can remember summer of love and Nixon making it a schedule 1 drug & to his paranoia of getting re-elected.

Look what happened in Canada - an "also ran" nobody wasn't even on the horizon when they were polling voters and when he went on a "legalize it" campaign, won in a landslide. Good job Canada.

We may see a change of stance from many of the candidates on this issue - moving slowly and surely toward decriminalization. I think Hillary knows that the schedule 1 for cannabis needs to change on the federal level FIRST before moving to decriminalization. She's a lawyer and knows how the process needs to work to get a change to happen.

All we need is a few of those republican ultra conservatives to bow down and give canna a green light, because they will be afraid if they don't they will loose.

My vote will be for the candidate that runs on a legalize it campaign. Work out the details after.

I think we should have 2 distinct and separate paths for cannabis


1 - medical marijuana - overseen just like the rest of our prescription drugs
2 - recreation marijuana - purchase at a dispensary (similar to purchasing wine or liquor in many states)

 

[Nicholas Flamel]

99% of the democrat and republican party are lying pieces of crap. They all work for the same people, themselves. They do not care about this country or the people who live in it. All they (politicians) want is to get elected and keep this game going as long as possible. Our children are going to inherit this mess that our so called leadership has got us into by spending way too much money. The democrats need to stop dividing people by race, money, gender, and the republicans need to stop trying to control the way people live their own lives. Rand Paul and the Libertarian party have the best plan for the future. Small government, fiscally conservative, socially liberal. And leave the middle east alone. If the russians want it, let them have it. They will have the same issues we have had.
I think if you dont believe in gay marriage, then teach your children that a man should be with a woman. But dont try to tell others that they are wrong for believing somethin other than what you believe. I dont give a fudge what people do, as long as it doesnt harm me or my family. This rule goes for everything, that is real freedom

 

[Radogast]

99% of the democrat and republican party are lying pieces of crap. They all work for the same people, themselves. They do not care about this country or the people who live in it. All they (politicians) want is to get elected and keep this game going as long as possible. Our children are going to inherit this mess that our so called leadership has got us into by spending way too much money. The democrats need to stop dividing people by race, money, gender, and the republicans need to stop trying to control the way people live their own lives. Rand Paul and the Libertarian party have the best plan for the future. Small government, fiscally conservative, socially liberal. And leave the middle east alone. If the russians want it, let them have it. They will have the same issues we have had.
I think if you dont believe in gay marriage, then teach your children that a man should be with a woman. But dont try to tell others that they are wrong for believing somethin other than what you believe. I dont give a fudge what people do, as long as it doesnt harm me or my family. This rule goes for everything, that is real freedom

I'm with SOME of what you say, but do you really think it is the Democratic party "dividing people by race, money, gender" ???

The divide by race and gender is done by those not including the same housing and job opportunities to certain races and genders. The divide by money is done by those with money not allowing those with little money to have enough money to live comfortably. There is a huge difference between pointing at a problem and saying 'We should to fix that' and causing that problem.

The best elements in socially liberal politics point to the problems that can be fixed (banking regulations, racial unfairness, sexual exclusion.) They aren't dividing people, they are pointing out the class and race divisions that already exist - and can be made better.

 

[Nicholas Flamel]

I also agree with some of what you say Radogast. But the facts are that the Democrats have been in control for seven years and imo they have divided this country more than it has been divided in a long time. I see much more racism now then i saw even ten years ago. If we didnt have a huge national debt and their policies actually worked, then i would be all for it. This country has the highest standard of living in the world. The poor people here would be considered rich in many other countries. It has now become better to stay home and collect welfare then it is to get a job. I am all for helping those in need but where does it end? This cannot last forever. One day China will want that loan paid back and our children will be the ones who will suffer.

 

[Radogast]

I also agree with some of what you say Radogast. But the facts are that the Democrats have been in control for seven years and imo they have divided this country more than it has been divided in a long time. I see much more racism now then i saw even ten years ago. If we didnt have a huge national debt and their policies actually worked, then i would be all for it. This country has the highest standard of living in the world. The poor people here would be considered rich in many other countries. It has now become better to stay home and collect welfare then it is to get a job. I am all for helping those in need but where does it end? This cannot last forever. One day China will want that loan paid back and our children will be the ones who will suffer.

I could pick at your statements, but that would be a purely political argument.

I will address the one issue of divided and divise government.

The Republican party has been in control for of the House of Representatives 16 of the last 20 years, and all of the last 7 years. The Democrats have had the White house for the last 7 years.

Consider the 7 year situation where a Democratic president is 'working with' a Republican House that does almost nothing except symbolic votes to undo legislation they formerly approved. Yep. That is a divided government.

Consider the frequent cheap mud slinging and over-the-top rhetoric by politicians in the House. Contrast to the polite, well considered statements of President Obama. The opinons are divided. The rhetoric is divisive.

 

[Nicholas Flamel]

I think my problem is with both of the parties almost equally. I think the republicans tell their people what they want to hear. I think the democrats tell their people what they want to hear. Then each party will blame the other party on everything thats wrong. After they are all done with this little song and dance, both parties will then go into a room, shut the door, count their money, and have a drink together in celebration of another successful day of accomplishing nothing! I want to thank you for having this discussion With me. My views on the world and life are constantly evolving, and i always want to hear the viewpoints of others.

p.s.you are a great wizard, tell Gandalf hey, lol.

 

[OlderGrower]

Back on topic
I hate to say it, but Hilary has made my choice one step easier for my vote, and it will not be for her. Here is my main concern on the whole issue. Why the hell do we have to wait for them to get elected for any one of the candidates to push a bill through the house of Congress? Hell Citizen United pushes bills through the house all the time, why can one of these candidates? Why I ask, could it be that it is just a campaign promise that they never intend to keep? Actions speak louder then words, and campaign promises do not mean CHIT. According to our supreme court, corporations are people too, apparently the will of the people does not mean chit to them.

 

[Nicholas Flamel]

Back on topic
Why I ask, could it be that it is just a campaign promise that they never intend to keep? Actions speak louder then words, and campaign promises do not mean CHIT.

You nailed it! Every election its the same issues over and over. It would be nice if when we go to vote for president, that we can also vote on major social issues. Or just vote on these issues when the census takes place every ten years.

 

[OlderGrower]

I watch both parties debates only because I believe the only way to make an informed decision is to hear both sides. I think if you only listen to one side you are selling yourself short. That being said I have seen candidates from both sides of the isle say they think MJ should legalized, but as far as I am aware only one candidate has offered up a bill to make it so. Until someone else does the same, I have no other option then to support that person with my vote.