• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

House GOP passes bill to force Obama to crack down on legal weed

Hilander

Free Spirit
Staff member
V.I.P.
Legislation approved by House Republicans would force President Barack Obama to crack down on marijuana in states that have made the drug legal for medical or recreational use.

House GOP passes bill to force Obama to crack down on legal weed in states that allow it | The Raw Story
I think if states vote to legalize marijuana the federal government should respect their decision. I'm surprised the GOP did this since that are suppose to be big on states rights.
 

Taliesin

Registered Member
Perhaps I don't know enough about American politics to fully grasp the implications of this, but could this be some kind of stunt to oust Obama if he doesn't fall in line with the GOP on this issue? Or do I have that all wrong?
 

Hilander

Free Spirit
Staff member
V.I.P.
I'm sure they will do all they can to make him, or democrats in general, look bad to the voters. I'm also sure the democrats will repay the favor.

I have to admit though he does things I don't like but I thought it was a good idea to stay out of states business unless they are trying to do something unconstitutional.
 

Van

Heavy Weapons Guy
V.I.P.
According to bullshit supreme court decisions (like wikard v filburn), the federal government can regulate all interstate and INTRAstate commerce. According to the constitution, this is a state issue as congress only was given the power to regulate interstate commerce. But the corrupt hacks on the SCOTUS just change the constitution when they don't like it so...just another example of that. Ignore the constitution and the amendment process. Just interpret it however you damn well please.

I'm surprised Gowdy was one of the writers of this one, I would love to read his explanation for the constitutionality of this abrasive overreach of the federal government.

Yet I don't believe for one second Obama cares about the constitution even though he "taught" it. He ignores laws and does whatever he want anyway refusing to enforce laws in the manner in which they were passed. Immigration? Obamacare? He always does what he sees to be politically self serving.

Agree with Hilander, the repukelicans main objective seems to be to make the dumbocraps look bad and vice versa.
 

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
Gowdy didn't write it with marijuana in mind, he wrote it with ObamaCare in mind. There have been numerous exemptions and delays to ObamaCare since it was passed. These did not go through Congress as they were supposed to instead they were done at the will of the Executive Branch.
If this bill was to pass the Senate and get passed the White House, there would be unintended consequences such as the Feds would be forced to enforce marijuana laws. But that's how a republic works. Congress could change the drug laws and the President could sign it. In today's climate, easing marijuana laws would be an easy sell. I heard Rand Paul talking about easing marijuana laws just a few days ago.
I don't trust a part-time dictator. There's a right way to get things done.
 
Last edited:

Van

Heavy Weapons Guy
V.I.P.
True MIT

I find it ironic that congress is trying to force the president to enforce a clearly unconstitutional law. Of course the president doesn't see it as unconstitutional, he is just picking and choosing which part of the law he want in place right now.

Also such is the nature of things in DC. You can rarely pass a law without a crap load of strings and other things attached. And then your political opponents flip out over one of the attachments and ignore the main point.
 

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
Unfortunately the SCOTUS disagrees and finds the law constitutional. As such it should be applied as written by Congress and the Executive Branch has no authority to alter, delay, or exempt anyone from the law. As liberal Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley stated recently, we are headed for a Constitutional crisis, which has been brewing for some time now. Every executive is guilty of power grabs, but this executive so much more so than any before him, save maybe FDR.
 

Van

Heavy Weapons Guy
V.I.P.
Yes the SCOTUS ruled it constitutional. Does that mean we must accept its constitutionality? No. We should of course keep fighting to show how unconstitutional it really is. Which I'm sure you agree with.

Every justice that voted to declare it constitutional should be impeached without question. How do they get impeached? We elect constitutionalist a who actual respect the document and the amendment process which unfortunately is a very daunting task considering the democraps ignore it 99% of the time and the repukelicans ignore it almost as much. We are the final say however not them. It's time we made this a government of the people instead of the government ruling the people which it has become.

As I posted in my blog:

1. Progressive politicians put fellow progressives onto the courts
2. Those same legislators then pass obviously unconstitutional laws
3. The laws are challenged in the courts filled with those same progressive appointees…
4. Politicians claim that since the courts upheld their law it is Constitutional?… you get the picture
5. Repeat

Thus the system of checks and balances has been rendered inert. Is this a one sided issue? Yes. It is the Progressive Democrats, and the Progressive Republicans vs. the only group of people have a hope of unseating them, the Tea Party. Democrats are driving off a cliff and the Republicans are arguing about the best way to get in driver’s seat so they can drive off the cliff with a different kind of style and flair.
 

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
I love how passionate you are about this, Van, but we can't impeach justices because of how they rule. I agree it's unconstitutional, I find the law an abomination to the Constitution and I have no doubt the framers would be calling us idiots for passing this law, but it still is what it is. What I find more disturbing is now that is has been found to be constitutional our President treats it like his toy, making whatever changes he wishes to make without any authority to do so. THAT to me is an impeachable offense because it goes beyond mere opinion, but a blatant disregard for the Constitution.
 

Van

Heavy Weapons Guy
V.I.P.
Why not? It's part of the checks and balances. Is that not why it requires a 2 thirds vote? When it boils down to it we the people have the final say and elections have consequences.

This decision was blatantly unconstitutional. For many reasons listed in the obamacare thread. I cant rehash all of them as I'm on my phone.

You have the capitation tax. A justice who voted on it helped write the law. The government does not have explicit power to have control healthcare at all except the interstate commerce clause which would allow for some. But whatever regulations they want? No. If it was a tax it started in the wrong house. Congress does not have the power to force anyone to buy anything. Etc etc.
 
Top