Note that this amendment is not really a radical step towards drug legalization. It's very moderate. It would not prevent the DEA from arresting people using, growing, or selling marijuana for recreational use or even from arresting patients for medical marijuana in states that have not approved it. It just stops the federal government from arresting patients who use marijuana in those states which have legalized marijuana for medical use.
Dave
Page 1 — Page 2
Article comments
1 - RJ
Great post.
Congressman Dave Weldon in my district is a solid right-wing Republican. While I agree with him a lot of the time, I also disagree with him on issues like this.
He's a medical doctor, but also a conservative Christian. So, I doubt he will change his mind on this issue.
Still. It is worth the effort to confront our elected Representatives with our opinions on various issues. It can sometimes make the difference.
And anyway, it's our right, as well as our duty...
2 - Dave Nalle
It would be really cool to see postings here of what kind of response people who called their congresscritters got. My rep is a quasi-moderate Republican, Mike McCaul, and I might have enough pull to actually talk to him since I was a state GOP convention delegate. I already emailed, but I'm going to follow up with a call on Monday. I'll report here if anything interesting comes of it.
Dave
3 - Jose Melendez
Re:
"It would be really cool to see postings here of what kind of response people who called their congresscritters got."
Ask and ye shall receive:
Tuesday morning, I sat down for a meeting on the record with Dick Harkey Congressional aide to John Mica.
Predictably, he kept putting words in my mouth, repeatedly showed he was not getting the message, and pointed out several times that Mr. Mica was not going to be responsive to what he thought I was saying.
The obfuscation gave me an inspiration. I politely suggested he pretend for the moment that I was Congressman Mica, and relay what Jose had to say.
Of course, he again got it wrong, so I asked him to please read aloud from the document I brought as an affidavit.*
For a couple of paragraphs, he was on autopilot, barely showing any comprehension. But then as he got to the meat of the document, I detected a wince of recognition and visible change in facial color.
Perhaps it was because it was he who was speaking that he actually heard what was being said.
I highly recommend any citizen write a polite and brief note to your representative's office requesting a meeting to discuss the issues. Fax it instead of emailing, they seem to respect that more.
Dress for church or a funeral, be polite and firmly professional.
Make sure to ask if they will agree to the conversation being on the record, and then press those record buttons, or at least take simple notes with a pad and pen.
Stick to the list of talking points you brought (hint, hint), and avoid talking about anything else, or you risk being taken off track and diluting your message. Oh, and only state things you know or honestly believe to be true - don't guess if you are unsure!
Remember, these are busy people that do indeed work for you, so treat them with respect. If your employees consider you unreasonable, you'll get far less productive work from them.
Ahem! Read those last lines again aloud before a mirror, if necessary..
Many today have very short attention spans, so once you've gotten them to repeat or at least acknowledge that they understand what you are saying, that's a perfect opportunity to motion to adjourn, as they say.
To put this another way, once you have the sale, just collect, or you risk losing to buyer's remorse.
Certainly, if they have the last word, it is helpful that those words be yours.
Thank them for their time and be sure to smile and be friendly to everyone on your way out . . .
Later, transcribe your notes and briefly answer their objections or reiterate your concerns in written, polite and firm ways that encourage them to concede or dispute your points, instead of dismissing them out of hand!
That's my opinionated if small contribution to the cause.
Jose Melendez
*http://www.CCCCP.org
888 247-8183
To recap:
1. Tell them what you will tell them,
2. Tell them what you are telling them,
3. Tell them what you've told them,
4. Ask them what you've told them,
5. (optional) Try again to get them to Tell you what you've told them
6. Thank them, shake hands and thank them and their staff kindly.
Wage peace,
Air Jose
4 - Georgio
Dave..thanks for this post..I have a question and I know you have the answer..What site can we go to that shows daily what bills are being voted on and how they voted..Thanks
5 - Dave Nalle
The site is at house.gov and this bill is H.R. 2087.
Dave
6 - Silas Kain
Now that H.R. 2087 has been referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce people living within the districts of Representatives on that committee would do well to contact them in the next week or two.
Members of the committee are as follows:
REPUBLICANS: Joe Barton, Texas, Chairman; Ralph M. Hall, Texas; Michael Bilirakis, Florida, Vice Chairman; Fred Upton, Michigan; Cliff Stearns, Florida; Paul E. Gillmor, Ohio; Nathan Deal, Georgia; Ed Whitfield, Kentucky; Charlie Norwood, Georgia; Barbara Cubin, Wyoming; John Shimkus, Illinois; Heather Wilson, New Mexico; John B. Shadegg, Arizona; Charles "Chip" Pickering, Mississippi, Vice Chairman; Vito Fossella, New York; Roy Blunt, Missouri; Steve Buyer, Indiana; George Radanovich, California; Charles F. Bass, New Hampshire; Joseph R. Pitts, Pennsylvania; Mary Bono, California; Greg Walden, Oregon; Lee Terry, Nebraska; Mike Ferguson, New Jersey; Mike Rogers, Michigan; C.L. "Butch" Otter, Idaho; Sue Myrick, North Carolina; John Sullivan, Oklahoma; Tim Murphy, Pennsylvania; Michael Burgess, Texas; Marsha Blackburn, Tennessee
DEMOCRATS: John D. Dingell, Michigan, Ranking Member; Henry A. Waxman, California; Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts; Rick Boucher, Virginia; Edolphus Towns, New York; Frank Pallone Jr., New Jersey; Sherrod Brown, Ohio; Bart Gordon, Tennessee; Bobby L. Rush, Illinois; Anna G. Eshoo, California; Bart Stupak, Michigan; Eliot L. Engel, New York; Albert R. Wynn, Maryland; Gene Green, Texas; Ted Strickland, Ohio; Diana DeGette, Colorado; Lois Capps, California; Mike Doyle, Pennsylvania; Tom Allen, Maine; Jim Davis, Florida; Jan Schakowsky, Illinois; Hilda L. Solis, California; Charles A. Gonzalez, Texas; Jay Inslee, Washington; Tammy Baldwin, Wisconsin; Mike Ross, Arkansas
Thanks, Dave, for the heads up. You're a walking public service announcement and I salute you.
7 - Tng
Yo im down wit weed and it helps people so they should go thrwe with da ligalisation....they are just tryna find a way to marke it and make money come'on it sthe goverment...its all they want
8 - Dave Nalle
The latest on this is that the bill is likely to hit the floor for a vote tomorrow. I haven't heard anything about what might have happened to it in committee.
BTW, there's a bit of a confusion in my original article, or at least I now think there is. According to something I read in the Houston Chronicle today the Hinchey-Rohrbacher Amendment and HR 2087 are separate pieces of legislation which say essentially the same thing, one as a stand-alone bill and one as an Amendment. Hinchey-Rohrbacher is apparently farther along in the process and is the one which is likely to be voted on tomorrow.
Dave
9 - mars
um, your information is incorrect. hinchey-rohrbacher is being voted on today, which would prevent DEA from spending money on prosecuting MMJ patients and caregivers. it is an amendment to the Science-State-Justice-Commerce Appropriations bill.
HR2087, or the States Rights to Medical Marijuana Act, is still in committee, seeking more sponsors. this bill would federall reschedule marijuana to schedule II which lists drugs with "recognized medical value"
10 - sakibomb
what's a good resource to find out what happened today? google news brought me here.