Ron Paul Won't Legalize Marijuana, Because He Can't

[420 Warrior]

As if the promise to dismantle most of the Washington-based government wasn't enough, Texas Congressman Ron Paul has also made waves in his bid for the Republican presidential nomination with his maverick stance on drug policy.

During his 30 years in the House of Representatives, Paul has authored and co-authored multiple marijuana-friendly bills. He's proposed laws to decriminalize marijuana, permit industrial hemp farming, and constitutionally delegate to states how to enforce extant medical marijuana.

None of these bills have ever been heard in committee. Nonetheless, Paul's drug war bona fides are earning him admirers among liberals who note that Paul is the only candidate to remotely approach the two points necessary to end the Drug War: Repealing, or at least amending, the Controlled Substances Act, and a rescheduling of marijuana within the DEA's pantheon of forbidden fruits.

A growing number of marijuana activists are embracing Paul as a pot-friendly alternative to President Barack Obama, whose Justice Department has done more to dismantle state-legal medical marijuana than George W. Bush's crew ever did.

These supporters ignore a key point: If Paul were president, he wouldn't be any better for legalizing marijuana than President Obama -- or worse than Romney or Santorum. And as recently as Monday's debate in South Carolina, Paul had this to say about ending the Drug War: "I don't think we can do a whole lot about it."

Marijuana was criminalized by the feds in 1970, when the Controlled Substances Act was passed by Congress (under pressure from Richard M. Nixon's administration). Only Congress can repeal an act of Congress, just as only Congress can amend the Constitution, raise taxes, and wage war (legally).

The federally subsidized war on marijuana can end if the CSA remains, as long as marijuana is dropped from Schedule I, the list of the most dangerous drugs, to Schedule II (which includes cocaine) or lower. Through the CSA, the general public can directly petition the Attorney General to do this. Theoretically, the president could issue an executive order unilaterally urging the Attorney General to do this, but to do so would be "an extension of executive power," according to Robert Smith, a professor of political science at San Francisco State University.

Earlier this month, Stephen DeAngelo, the founder and CEO of Oakland's Harborside Health Center -- the nation's largest cannabis dispensary and the subject of the Discovery Channel documentary series Weed Wars -- made noise of his own when he suggested to the Huffington Post that pot activists should vote Republican. "We are single-issue voters," said DeAngelo, whose comments were followed by the Justice Department's extension into Colorado of the crackdown on state-legal medical cannabis that's been ongoing in California since September. Surely a Republican cannot be worse?

DeAngelo isn't supporting Paul or any other Republican, or at least not yet, he told us during a recent interview with SF Weekly. "Millions of us are looking for the right place to put our vote," DeAngelo said. While other marijuana activists like South Lake Tahoe-based Steve Kubby, author of one of the marijuana legalization voter initiatives vying for a spot on Californians' November 2012 ballots, have thrown their weight behind Paul, DeAngelo says he'd prefer to back Obama as he did in 2008. "I'm waiting and hoping that he does the right thing and comes to our defense," he said. "I'm not going to vote for someone who thinks I'm a criminal and should be in prison."

During Monday night's GOP debate, "drugs" was mentioned once, when liberal Fox News analyst Juan Williams noted that black people in South Carolina are jailed at four times the rate of white people for nonviolent drug offenses. He then asked Paul what he'd do to stop this. Perhaps amazingly, Paul used his precious response time to agree with the premise of Williams' question before punting the answer.

Here's the entire exchange.

WILLIAMS: Congressman Paul. An analysis by the Prison Policy Initiative finds that blacks who are jailed at four times the rate of whites in South Carolina are most often convicted on drug offenses. Do you see racial disparities in drug-related arrests and convictions as a problem? And if so, how would you fix it?

PAUL: Yes. Definitely. There is a disparity. It's not that it is my opinion, it is very clear. Blacks and minorities who are involved with drugs, are arrested disproportionately. They are tried and imprisoned disproportionately. They suffer the consequence of the death penalty disproportionately. Rich white people don't get the death penalty very often.
And most of these are victimless crimes. Sometimes, people can use drugs and [are] arrested three times and never committed a violent act, and they can go to prison for life. And yet we see times just recently we heard where actually murders get out of prison in shorter periods of time. So I think it's way -- way disproportionate.
I don't think we can do a whole lot about it. I think there's discrimination in the system, but you have to address the drug war. You know, the drug war is -- is very violent on our borders. We have the immigration problem, and I'm all for having, you know, tight immigration policies, but we can't ignore the border without looking at the drug war.
In the last five years, 47,500 people died in the drug war down there. This is a major thing going on. And it unfairly hits the minorities.
This is one thing I am quite sure that Martin Luther King would be in agreement with me on this. As a matter of fact, Martin Luther King he would be in agreement with me on the wars, as well, because he was a strong opponent to the Vietnam War.

So I -- I -- I would say, yes, the judicial system is probably one of the worst places where -- where prejudice and -- and discrimination still exists in this country.

What, then, is a marijuana-minded voter to do? The safe money appears to be on a Romney-Obama showdown in November, and Romney has vowed to fight medical marijuana "tooth and nail." It appears a cannabis supporter can vote Libertarian, or support the man who's presided over the biggest crackdown in medical pot's brief history, hunker down and hope for the best.

News Hawk - 420 Warrior 420 MAGAZINE
Source: SF Weekly
Author: Chris Roberts
Copyright: ©2012 SF Weekly, LP.

 

[Bonehead]

These supporters ignore a key point: If Paul were president, he wouldn't be any better for legalizing marijuana than President Obama -- or worse than Romney or Santorum. And as recently as Monday's debate in South Carolina, Paul had this to say about ending the Drug War: "I don't think we can do a whole lot about it."

I don't think you can put Ron Paul in the same category as Romney. I think there's a spectrum of degrees of difficulty. Ron Paul would push for it the hardest but I understand what the writer is trying to say.

Good comments above too!

 

[budbro]

The federally subsidized war on marijuana can end if the CSA remains, as long as marijuana is dropped from Schedule I, the list of the most dangerous drugs, to Schedule II (which includes cocaine) or lower. Through the CSA, the general public can directly petition the Attorney General to do this. Theoretically, the president could issue an executive order unilaterally urging the Attorney General to do this, but to do so would be "an extension of executive power," according to Robert Smith, a professor of political science at San Francisco State

Would have to completely disagree with the author's view here. All the President has to do is appoint a USAG with one single ounce of intelligence who could read and comprehend any of the thousands of pending petitions already submitted by scientific, medical and most recently, political petitioners that have requested it be removed from, or reclassified on the schedule. In the CSA, the USAG is granted authority to reclassify or remove any drug from the schedule, he doesn't need the permission from congress or the prez or anybody else,to do so. But, if you have ever heard the current USAG Holder, speak, you already know this is one stupid, lying, crooked individual. Kinda reminds me of his boss.

I agree with Ron Paul, that creating a new law that repeals all existing marijuana laws is the "cleanest" and less likely to be challenged or changed in the future, but any POTUS has the capability to do so without congress or extending his power, simply through appointing intelligent people to the post who share the same views. That is why the CSA was written the way it was, so congress and/or the prez didn't have to get involved everytime something needed to be added, removed or reclassified from the schedule.

"I don't think we can do a whole lot about it"? Completely out of context and IMO, a complete violation of the journalistic code of ethics. He was referring to how rich white people tend to get off, while poor minorities end up in jail for the same crimes. This has to do with local law enforcement and local judges who clearly discriminate on a daily basis. He was never asked if he would hold the power to make marijuana legal if elected as seems to be the premise of this whole article. Dumbass, unethical journalist if you ask me.

 

[Bonehead]

Ron Pauls Campaign is not just about the failed war on drugs. His campaign is based on Liberty. He feels adults shouldn't have to be told by the government what they can and cannot do if it does not harm anyone else. That is all. Ron Paul might not end the war on drugs right away because he would have to get congress to agree with him. However, in these tough economic times. The non drug using public is starting to think this war on drugs is a big waste of money. And they are right. They could put pressure on Congress and give momentum for this to become a reality. Imagine how much money could go to reduce our debt.

Good points except I would say that RP thinks that the Federal Gov't shouldn't tell people what they can or cannot do but state gov't could make laws for their own state which includes keep cannabis illegal. If that state feels the right to keep cannabis extremely illegal, they would be able to under RP.

 

[budbro]

If that state feels the right to keep cannabis extremely illegal, they would be able to under RP.

States would have the right to keep it illegal no matter who was president. Just as abortion remains illegal in a 1/3 of the states and alcohol is still completely illegal to purchase in many counties and cities within many states. That's the beauty of the Constitution of the United States and the way our founding fathers intended. Different states, counties, and cities can all do as they wish based on the secular make-up and the free will of the people.