Hinchey-Rohrbacher

[palmspringsbum]

Feature: Move to Block DEA Medical Marijuana Raids Heads for House Floor Vote Next Week 6/23/06

The Drug Policy Alliance


<table class=posttable align=right><tr><td><img class=postimg src=bin/mauricehinchey.jpg></td></tr><tr><td class=postcap>Rep. Maurice Hinchey addresses 2005 medical marijuana press
conference as Montel Williams awaits his turn at the podium</td></tr></table>For the fourth consecutive year, an effort is underway in Congress to stop the Justice Department and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) from arresting and prosecuting medical marijuana patients and providers in the 11 states where it is legal.

Rep. Maurice Hinchey addresses 2005 medical marijuana press
conference as Montel Williams awaits his turn at the podium
Named after its sponsors, Reps. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) and Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment would bar the Justice Department from using federal funds to pursue the medical marijuana community in those 11 states. It is scheduled for a floor vote next week.

The amendment responds to a real need: According to Americans for Safe Access (ASA), a medical marijuana defense group pushing for the amendment, at least 20 California dispensaries and collectives have been raided by the feds since the Supreme Court gave the DEA a green light with its decision in the Raich case almost a year ago. In that case, the court held that federal law making marijuana illegal superseded -- but did not invalidate -- any state medical marijuana laws.

"We are talking about at least two very important issues here," Rep. Hinchey told DRCNet Wednesday. "One is the ability to alleviate the conditions of people who are suffering from serious illnesses, such as cancer and HIV/AIDS. A study done by the Institute of Medicine under the auspices of the National Academy of Science found that marijuana used under a physician's recommendation can have very significant and salutary benefits for people suffering from those conditions. The idea that we would deprive human beings of relief recommended by a licensed physician is not humanitarian; it's inhumane. It's a really bad thing to do," Hinchey said.

"We have an administration whose Justice Department is interfering with that kind of medical practice, and we have a recent 5-4 Supreme Court decision which to some extent backs them up. That decision and the actions of the Justice Department are frankly inexplicable because what we're dealing with here is a decision by either the legislative bodies or the people themselves through referenda to provide this kind of medical relief and assistance to their citizens," Hinchey continued from his Capitol Hill office.

"Under the Constitution, these kinds of decisions are not in the hands of the federal government; they are in the hands of the states," said Hinchey, who represents a district in New York's Southern Tier. "Eleven states have decided they want to provide this kind of relief to their citizens, and now the federal government is sticking its nose in somebody else's business and trying to impede those decisions. That is just inappropriate, unconstitutional, and shouldn't be allowed. This amendment is designed put a stop to it."

Support for Hinchey-Rohrabacher is trending upward. In 2003, it got 152 votes. In 2004, an election year, support dropped to 148 votes, but rose to 161 last year. It takes 218 votes to ensure passage in the House. Supporters said they expected to make significant gains in next week's vote, although none was bold enough to predict victory this year.

Although the bill is cosponsored by California Republican Rep. Rohrabacher, voting has hardly been bipartisan. Last year, 145 Democrats voted for the amendment, while only 15 Republicans did.

With a floor vote expected next Wednesday or Thursday, the measure's sponsors and a coalition of drug reform groups, including the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA), ASA, Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP), DRCNet and others are going into high gear. "This is the final push," said MPP director of government relations Aaron Houston. "We've really been trying to connect with members of Congress. I have a good feeling about this year."

"We're trying to lean on all the swing votes right now," said Bill Piper, DPA head of national affairs. "We've been dropping off materials to members, and we'll be sending out an action alert this week," he told DRCNet. "We're definitely going to pick up votes. The real question is how many, and whether we will lose any because it's an election year, but I suspect our numbers will go up significantly."

With Democrats already generally supporting the amendment -- 70% of them voted for it last year -- reformers are also reaching out to Republicans. "We're aiming at both parties, of course, but we emphasized working on the Republicans earlier this year," Piper said. "We've hit a ceiling of sorts with Democrats. We will pick some more Democrats up, but there are so many more Republicans who could vote yes, and I think that's where we'll see out biggest gains."

"We're optimistic," said Piper. "Everyone is expecting to pick up votes and keep the momentum going. If we could get almost all the Democrats to vote for this, we would win, assuming Republican support stayed the same. And there are a lot of conservative House Republicans that are very frustrated with the White House and the drug czar. They might be willing to send a message to the DEA and the Justice Department that the money used to go after medical marijuana patients could be used to go after methamphetamine. If we get a significant vote increase, that would be a strong message that they need to think again."

"We had 27 meetings on the Hill," exclaimed ASA executive director Steph Sherer, who recently relocated to Washington. "We had a group of doctors, scientists, and patients and we went to see the toughest congressional targets," she told DRCNet. "This was the first time some of these people had ever met a patient, doctor, or scientist talking about this. I don't know whether they will support it this year, but I think we're opening a dialogue that will lead to long-term solutions for medical marijuana at the federal level."

MPP is also aiming at Republicans, said Houston. "We've got a GOP lobbying team of six people, all Republicans, all but one from groups not focused on drug policy," he told DRCNet. That team includes an Eagle Foundation education lobbyist, a Republican banking committee staffer, and a Republican Connecticut state legislator, Houston said. "These are conservative Republican organizations," he pointed out.

On the West Coast, the group has also enlisted Alex Holstein, a former executive director of the Republican Party of San Diego County, to enlist GOP support. Now head of the California Coalition for Compassionate Access, Holstein is urging Republicans to stand by conservative values in supporting the amendment.

"Local control and reduced federal authority are lynchpin Republican principles," he said. "We're asking our fellow Republicans to stand by those principles and end federal interference with the decisions made by states like California to protect medical marijuana patients from arrest and prosecution."

"States' rights is something many Republicans agree with on its face," said MPP's Houston, "and it will get some major traction if Republicans are willing to buck their party. States' rights will be the key argument for many Republicans. Protecting medical marijuana patients is entirely consistent with Republican small government states' rights principles. Republicans who vote against this amendment are showing a nanny-state liberal tendency to interfere in the lives of sick people."

Emphasizing states' rights is one way of appealing to Republicans, agreed Rep. Hinchey, who addressed a fundraising gala for MPP in New York City earlier this month. "Interfering with relief for people who are suffering in states that have approved medical marijuana unconstitutionally impedes states' rights. It's very clear," he said. "The practice of medicine is something that has been controlled by the states from the very beginning of the republic. We have picked up a few votes from principled Republicans who seem to understand this, and we hope we can find a few more."

"I have a good feeling about this year," said Houston. "The fact that the administration is in such hot water right now with congressional Republicans will probably hurt party discipline, and with the Hammer gone," a reference to recently departed House Whip Tom DeLay (R-TX), "we might see more Republicans actually willing to vote their consciences and stand up for states' rights rather than blindly following the administration's anti-science and cruel and heartless policy of arresting patients."

"You never know what's going to happen," said Hinchey, refusing to make a prediction on the outcome. "There are some people with their fingers in the air testing the wind."

[Midnight toker]

Support states' rights -- OK medical pot

Debra J. Saunders
The San Francisco Chronicle
Sunday, June 25, 2006


IF EVER a piece of legislation should pass readily through the House, it is a measure sponsored by Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-N.Y., and Dana Rohrabacher, R-Huntington Beach, that would prevent the Department of Justice from using tax dollars to prosecute medical-marijuana patients in states that have legalized medical marijuana. Because it is a good bill, expect it to fail.

Polls show that some 3 out of 4 Americans support allowing doctors to prescribe medical marijuana for patients who need it. House members must know that constituents within their districts use marijuana to control pain and nausea; their families would like to live without the fear of prosecution. As Time Magazine reported last year, research shows that the drug has salutary "analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects."

Republicans should be drawn to the states' rights angle of the bill, while Democrats should go for the personal stories of constituents who have found relief, thanks to medical marijuana.

Yet when the House last voted on the measure in 2005, it tanked on a 264-162 vote. As the House is expected to vote on the measure this week, few expect it to pass. "I wish I could tell you it's going to pass," Marijuana Policy Project spokesman Bruce Mirken conceded by phone last week. "I can't realistically expect that."

Over the last decade, two big hurdles existed: Republicans and Democrats.

Last year, a mere 15 Repubs vote for the measure -- down from 19 GOP members who supported it in 2004.

On the other side of the aisle, Democrats are moving toward the light. In 1998, the Clinton Justice Department filed suit against California medical-marijuana clubs. Last year, however, an impressive 145 Dems voted for Hinchey-Rohrabacher.

Martin Chilcutt of Kalamazoo, Mich., has written to his local GOP congressman, Rep. Fred Upton. A veteran who believes he got cancer because of his military service, Chilcutt told me that his Department of Veterans Affairs hospital doctors supported his use of medical marijuana when he had cancer.

Upton's office told me that Upton believes Marinol, the legal synthetic drug that includes the active ingredient in marijuana, should do the trick.

I had asked Chilcutt if he had tried the drug. "I don't like Marinol at all," Chilcutt replied. It takes too long to work, it is hard to calibrate the dose you need and "it made me feel weird." He prefers marijuana because it works instantly, "you can control the amount you're using and you get instant feedback."

Upton also fears sending the wrong message to kids about marijuana. But federal law has long allowed the sick access to needed pain control with drugs more powerful than marijuana. Only bad politics can account for the fact that marijuana is a Schedule 1 drug under the Controlled Substances Act, and thus deemed more harmful than cocaine and morphine -- drugs that can kill users who overdose.

Alex Holstein, a former GOP operative and conservative activist, is lobbying Republicans on behalf of the Marijuana Policy Project. He believes that regardless of their position on medical marijuana, Repubs in the California delegation should support Hinchey-Rohrabacher because state voters approved Proposition 215 -- and Republicans should stand up for states' rights and the will of California voters.

As it is, President Bush should direct the Justice Department to lay off medical-marijuana users -- because it is the right thing to do for sick people.

It's not as if the administration doesn't know how to sit on its hands and not enforce existing law. Last week, the Washington Post reported that under Bush, the number of employers prosecuted for hiring illegal aliens plummeted from 182 in 1999 to 4 in 2003.

If the Bushies can look the other way when well-heeled employers break the law, they can look the other way when sick people try to relieve unnecessary pain with medical marijuana.

E-mail: dsaunders@sfchronicle.com.

[budman]

CAGW Report Calls Drug Policies a Waste

6/26/2006 4:44:00 PM


<hr>

To: National Desk

Contact: Alexa Moutevelis, 202-467-5309 or Tom Finnigan, 202-253-3852, both for Citizens Against Government Waste

WASHINGTON, June 26 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today released a report critical of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). Wasted in the War on Drugs: Office of National Drug Control Policy's Wasted Efforts takes the ONDCP to task for functioning inefficiently and failing to achieve its core objectives.

"Billions of dollars marked for the war on drugs are being wasted on ineffective and counterproductive policies," CAGW President Tom Schatz said.

The ONDCP was established in 1988 by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act. It funds four primary programs: High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA), the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center (CTAC), the Drug Free Communities Program, and the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign. Created to reduce marijuana use, the media campaign has been the target of lawsuit concerning the integrity of the ad agency, a government report detailing the failure of the campaign, and a study showing that the ads have a reverse effect. Despite all this, Congress is planning to spend $120 million on the program in fiscal 2007.

The federal government's war on drugs includes tracking down and persecuting patients using medicinal marijuana in states where it is legal. Even though numerous studies have challenged the assertion that marijuana use is a gateway drug, the federal government's obsession with marijuana continues as the problems with methamphetamine and cocaine worsen.

As it happens, Reps. Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.) and Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) could propose an amendment tomorrow to the fiscal 2007 Science-State-Justice-Commerce Appropriations Act. The amendment would prohibit the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) from using resources to pursue medical marijuana patients in states that have deemed it to be legal.

"The federal government must re-prioritize its drug policies," Schatz concluded.

Wasted in the War on Drugs can be found at http://www.cagw.org - it is part of CAGW's series of Through the Looking Glass reports.

Citizens Against Government Waste ( http://www.cagw.org ) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to eliminating waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in government.

http://www.usnewswire.com/

<center>-0-

/© 2006 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/</center>

[budman]

Anti-Drug Border Enforcement Suffers as Congress Spends Money on TV Ads


Human Events Online
by <a class=postlink href=http://www.humaneventsonline.com/search.php?author_name=James Plummer target=blank>James Plummer</a>
Posted Jun 27, 2006


Congress will be considering this month a number of appropriations bills -- deciding how to spend the trillions of dollars hard-working Americans send them each year (lest they be incarcerated by the Internal Revenue Service). As Congress decides how to spend money on law-enforcement activities, they would do well to end waste, fraud and abuse in drug-policy spending and make sure that federal drug-policy resources focus primarily on federal responsibilities.

Congress should start by taking up the recommendations of the conservative Republican Study Committee for Katrina-relief spending offsets. Many of those proposed offsets were cuts of drug-policy spending, which is not producing sufficient results considering the billions of tax dollars spent. But that’s just the beginning of possible savings in the $60 billion State-Science-Justice-Commerce spending bill up this week.

One common-sense cut recommended by the RSC is the elimination of the Office of National Drug Control Policy's media campaign. You may recall this infamous campaign for the patronizing, cloying, multimillion-dollar ad buy during the Super Bowl, which tried to equate marijuana use with terrorism. In 1996, no less a personage than the current ONDCP "drug czar" John Walters wrote for the Heritage Foundation that, "Teaching children that drug use is wrong and harmful is primarily the responsibility of parents and local communities, youth organizations, religious institutions, schools and police. Federal funding is neither necessary nor sufficient for conveying this lesson by word and deed. ... Parents, teachers, and communities should not leave to the federal government a responsibility that really belongs to them." Ten years later, Walters’ words ring truer than ever as federal budget deficits climb ever-higher.

That’s not the only tax money being wasted. The Drug Enforcement Agency wastes much of its resources interfering with Food and Drug Administration approvals of even privately financed scientific research into marijuana, a practice condemned by small-government watchdogs such as Americans for Tax Reform. And even more tax dollars have been poured into harassing pain doctors who prescribe legal drugs in adequate measure for chronic pain patients. That outrageous abuse of power has been decried by everyone from the conservative doctors of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons to the bipartisan chief law enforcement officers of the National Association of Attorneys General.

In recent years 11 states have enacted laws allowing people to use marijuana with a doctor's recommendation. The federal government has responded by diverting resources away from investigating violent international drug cartels to conducting military-style raids on state-sanctioned medical marijuana clinics. Peaceful chemotherapy patients have found themselves under the gunpoint of the militarized federal police. While federal marijuana law contains no medical exception, federal law enforcement agencies -- and the congressmen who give them taxpayers’ money -- do have the authority to prioritize resources. Federal agencies should focus federal resources on federal responsibilities.

FDA bureaucrats, cancer patients and medical doctors are not "national security" problems requiring a militarized federal response. DEA resources should be allocated to more pressing matters, away from regulating medicine and toward fulfilling clear and present federal responsibilities. DEA agents should be on the border, interdicting international drug shipments and arresting and detaining members of violent international drug gangs such as MS-13. Based in El Salvador, MS-13’s reign of terror has expanded all the way to the leafy Washington, D.C., suburbs of Northern Virginia and, reportedly, is currently encroaching on the ruined streets of New Orleans.

Paramilitary narcoterrorist cartels are operating on the U.S.-Mexico border. The No. 1 source of methamphetamine in America is Mexico, with 65% of meth originating from across our borders. Yet Congress has remained blithely stubborn, appropriating pork for local law enforcement and insisting that that overworked DEA agents lock up Americans who are politically incorrect enough to combat their chemo-nausea under state rather than federal laws.

Using the power of the purse, Congress can now show it is serious about dismantling these criminal international drug syndicates and shutting down our borders to these narcoterrorist cartels. These problems are clear areas of federal jurisdiction.

With congressmen decrying the border situation even as border-security legislation is likely to be tied up through the end of this Congress, the House and Senate can use the appropriations process to prove their sincerity by allocating limited federal resources in a reasonable manner. The common-sense positions outlined above are well-grounded in conservative legal, medical, and public-policy communities. Both Republicans and Democrats in Congress should consider these points as the budget process moves forward.

Mr. Plummer is policy director for Liberty Coalition.

[Midnight toker]

The Marijuana Policy Project
immediate release
JUNE 28, 2006


Conservative Support Grows for Medical Marijuana Amendment

Vote Expected Today or Thursday


WASHINGTON D.C. -- A leading conservative organization, Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW), has come out in support of an amendment to stop the Drug Enforcement Administration from attacking medical marijuana patients in states where medical use of marijuana is legal. The Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment to the Science-State-Justice-Commerce appropriations bill, sponsored by Reps. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) and Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), could receive a floor vote as early as today.

CAGW's report, "Wasted in the War on Drugs," released Monday and available online at http://www.cagw.org/site/DocServer/Drug ... docID=1661, slams the federal government for "using valuable taxpayer dollars to track down and persecute medical marijuana patients that are using the drug legally in their state," and calling such efforts "useless." The report, which comes on the heels of a letter sent to members of Congress by a coalition of conservative groups condemning the government for wasting money attacking medical marijuana patients, concludes, "If passed, the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment would free up federal dollars for more important priorities and help to restore a proper division of power between the state and federal governments."

The Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment would bar the Justice Department from using its funds to interfere with the medical marijuana laws now in effect in Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. It would not impact states which do not have medical marijuana laws. A national Gallup poll released in November 2005 found that 78 percent of voters favor allowing physicians to prescribe marijuana "to reduce pain and suffering."

"We are excited by the groundswell of support for this sensible, humane measure," said Aaron Houston, director of government relations for the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) in Washington, D.C. "This week's vote will be a test of whether House members are truly listening to their constituents." MPP organized a grassroots push for the amendment, which included face-to-face meetings with over 250 congressional offices, phone calls, and connecting over 3,000 constituents with their representatives' offices via MPP's online system.

With more than 20,000 members and 100,000 e-mail subscribers nationwide, the Marijuana Policy Project is the largest marijuana policy reform organization in the United States. MPP believes that the best way to minimize the harm associated with marijuana is to regulate marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol. For more information, please visit http://MarijuanaPolicy.org.

<center>####</center>

[palmspringsbum]

Hinchey-Rohrabacher Amendment Squashed in Congress; Yet Another Victory in Drug Policy, Proclaims Drug Free America Foundation

U. S. Newswire
6/29/2006 11:11:00 AM

<hr>

To: National Desk

Contact: Lana Beck of the Drug Free America Foundation, 727-828-0211 or 727-403-7571

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla., June 29 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The Hinchey- Rohrabacher amendment would have prohibited the U.S. Department of Justice (including the DEA) from allocating funds to enforce federal drug laws in states that have legalized marijuana for so- called medical purposes. This amendment was soundly defeated in Congress by a vote of 259 to 163.

Despite the drug legalizers' dogged efforts to influence Congress, they failed. Although the pro-drug lobby touts biased polls that create an illusion that the majority of people are for marijuana as so-called medicine, the facts show that our legislators listen to their constituents and not the drug pushers. Legislators wisely considered the scientific evidence that dispels claims of marijuana being a legitimate medicine.

"This victory indicates an end to the medical marijuana scam," says Calvina Fay, Executive Director of Drug Free America Foundation, Inc. "Last year in the Raich v. Gonzales Supreme Court Case, the justices ruled in our favor against smoked marijuana as medicine. Then on April 20, 2006, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a statement concluding that they continue to support marijuana's placement as a Schedule I drug and agree that there is sound evidence that smoked marijuana is harmful. This reaffirms that medicine by popular vote is a dangerous process that bypasses the FDA, reduces consumer protections and jeopardizes sick patients."

Drug Free America Foundation is dedicated to fighting drug use, drug addiction and drug trafficking and to promoting effective, sound drug policies, education and prevention. It is equally committed to exposing and refuting the drug legalization advocates and their deceptive tactics.

If you would like to set up an interview regarding this issue with Calvina Fay or several other drug policy and prevention experts, please contact Lana Beck, Director of Communications, at 727-828-0211 or 727-403-7571.

http://www.usnewswire.com/

<center>-0-

/© 2006 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/
</center>

[palmspringsbum]

Federal Medical Marijuana Vote: Breaking Down the Numbers

The Drug Policy Alliance
Wednesday, July 12, 2006


At the end of June, Congress voted on the Hinchey/Rohrabacher amendment to prohibit the federal government from undermining state medical marijuana laws. If you have not yet thanked or spanked your representative for how he or she voted, now is the time. Find out how!

The final total on this year's vote was 163 for and 259 against. Most Democrats voted for the amendment, while most Republicans voted against it. Here's the breakdown:
<ul>
<li>144 Democrats voted for it, and 53 voted against it, a support rate of about 73%. This is one fewer Democratic vote than last year, but three Democratic supporters couldn’t make the vote. So Democratic support is actually up two over last year.</li>

<li>18 Republicans voted for it, and 206 voted against it (a support rate of about 8%). This is three more Republican votes than last year.</li>

<li>One independent voted for it, the same as last year. </li>
</ul>
Members of Congress are slowly but surely starting to recognize that their constituents demand compassion and common sense. Make sure to let them know how you feel about the issue.

[palmspringsbum]

Alzheimer's, Marijuana And Sensible Drug Policy

October 10, 2006
Dave Nalle
BlogCritics.org


It looks like scientists have hammered yet another nail into the coffin of the ridiculous War on Drugs. Researchers at Scripps Research Institute have announced that their investigation of the chemical processes in the brain which cause Alzheimer's disease, have resulted in evidence that the active ingredient in marijuana has a significant impact in reducing the progression of the disease.

Alzheimer's is caused by reductions in the levels of acetylcholine in the brain, caused by the acetylcholinesterase enzyme. Acetylcholine is a neurotransmitter which facilitates the transmission of information in the brain. Current Alzheimer's drugs like Donepezil and Tacrine work by inhibiting the action of acetylcholinesterase. The Scripps study shows that delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) has the same effect, but at a different point in the molecule chain and at lower concentrations. This means it can be used with fewer side effects and also in combination with other drugs to multiply effectiveness. The study also shows that THC prevents formation of amyloid plaques which are the mechanism through which Alzheimer's causes longterm brain damage.

The conclusion is that not only is THC a new way to treat Alzheimer's, it appears to be safer and more effective than other treatments, addressing both the immediate symptoms of the disease and inhibiting its progression.

One of the old myths about marijuana is that it causes memory loss and brain damage. Studies have not supported this theory and now suggest exactly the opposite. The suppression of short-term memory associated with use is a very temporary effect and there is no permanent impact on memory and while brain damage is theoretically possible when marijuana is smoked — as is the case with smoking anything, because of oxygen deprivation — there is no chemical damage to the brain. Now it appears that the chemical effects of marijuana on the brain are overwhelmingly positive rather than negative.

Almost everyone has an Alzheimer's victim in their family or knows someone who has lost a relative to the disease. Alzheimer's turned my late Uncle Horace from a humorous, charming man into a confused and frightened victim before it resulted in a lingering death. It is certainly one of the most horrifying and tragic diseases which anyone can face, threatening not only the loss of life but a loss of awareness which is more frightening.

In the next session of Congress the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment to decriminalize marijuana possession is almost certain to come up for a vote a number of times, as it did in 2005. With each successive vote it has come closer to passing. Perhaps this latest and most impressive addition to the already substantial medical benefits of marijuana will be enough to finally pass the amendment and counter the destructive War on Drugs with some rational policy. To help push it over the line it wouldn't hurt to start writing your congressman now. Passage only requires 51 more votes at last count.

It's time to base our drug policy on the best interests of our citizens rather than baseless fear and irrational propaganda from 70 years ago, and legalizing marijuana is a vital first step.