When Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Modesto, was asked at a town hall meeting in March how he could represent his constituents if he were to support the legalization of marijuana, his response was simple: “I don’t know how my constituents can vote for me if I continue to enforce that law,” he said. “I’m not going to do it anymore.”
U.S. Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) is proposing a bill to ease federal laws against marijuana, a move that would allow the drug to be used in states where it is legal. The legislation, which was introduced Thursday, would treat cannabis as a drug with “low potential for abuse” and a “low potential of causing harm” under the Controlled Substances Act. (Full article here.)
In a not-so-surprising move, California Republican Rep. Tom McClintock has introduced a bill that would ease federal marijuana laws, allowing states to grow their own cannabis for medical and recreational use. McClintock’s bill, dubbed the “Respect State Marijuana Laws Act,” would allow states to “establish a system of state-regulated cannabis production, sale, and taxation.”
Rep. Tom McClintock opposes the usage of marijuana.
He believes there is “clear evidence” that its usage in youngsters may create neurological issues.
In Congress, he’s a dependable Republican and conservative vote.
Despite this, he is one of the few congressional Republicans who has continuously advocated for loosening federal limits on the drug’s usage throughout the years.
California NORML director Dale Gieringer stated, “He has the greatest record on the marijuana issue of any Republican congressman in California.”
“He’s a one-of-a-kind individual. John Hudak, a senior scholar in governance studies at the nonpartisan Brookings Institution and author of “Marijuana: A Short History,” said, “He’s a fairly conservative Republican, and conservative Republicans don’t tend to be the greatest allies of cannabis reform.”
McClintock, R-Elk Grove, teamed up with leftist Reps. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, and Earl Blumenauer, D-Oregon, to introduce a bill that would withhold funds from federal agencies enforcing federal marijuana prohibitions that a state has declared lawful. When the House reconvenes next month, it may take up the idea.
A SINGLE VOICE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY
McClintock has a lengthy history of resisting drug restrictions imposed by the federal government.
During his 2003 campaign for governor, he was questioned about the state’s 1996 Proposition 215, which legalized medicinal marijuana.
“On that issue, the people of California shouted loudly. He said that the federal government had no legal authority to interfere. Federal marijuana regulations are more stringent and restricted than state ones.
Part of McClintock’s viewpoint is libertarian in nature, believing that individuals should be free to live their lives as they see fit as long as they do not harm others.
He claims that another aspect of his philosophy is practical. Current laws, he claims, are simply ineffective.
Another factor, according to Hudak. “He is speaking on behalf of his people. He claims that Northern California is “fairly pro-cannabis.”
McClintock has been steadfast throughout the years.
“Just laws keep us safe from harm. Tyrannical rules attempt to keep us safe from ourselves,” he stated in 2018.
“Personally, I think cannabis usage in most instances is ill-advised,” he said during a House criminal subcommittee hearing the following year. Many things, however, are ill-advised and should be left to the educated judgment of free men and women rather than being made illegal.”
He claimed that current laws are not only ineffectual, but also harmful. When asked for a response this Friday, spokesperson Jennifer Cressy referred to the remarks made in 2019.
CAN WEED LAWS CAUSE PROBLEMS?
McClintock has used this example of how existing marijuana regulation causes problems for years:
According to McClintock, a deputy sheriff reportedly stated that if he handed two high school kids each a $20 cash and directed one to purchase marijuana and the other to buy booze, the youngster who bought marijuana would succeed sooner.
“They know where to obtain it, and the dealer’s whole business model is based on breaking the law,” says the dealer. Because the dealer’s whole operation relies on following the law, the youngster assigned to purchase booze would visit one liquor shop after another, be carded, and kicked out,” McClintock said.
He has suggested that reasonable state rules and enforcement are required.
“I think that treating marijuana in a controlled, legal environment is a much more effective method of keeping it out of the hands of young people and (reducing) the criminality we see right now,” he has said. “Lettuce growers aren’t an issue for us. Rice farmers aren’t an issue for us.”
McClintock has been working for years to persuade Congress to ease federal limitations, typically with Democratic support.
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-San Marcos, outlined the Republican opposition. “The Republican Party has always been pro-law and order. Support for upholding the law is the Republican mainstream as long as the government and experts inside the government continue to declare that any substance is harmful and should be illegal,” he added.
“There will be a federal reform in the near future to liberalize or legalize marijuana,” Issa said, but added, “We still have a long way to go to figure out where the limits should be.”
BATTLES IN D.C. BY MCCLINTOCK
Some of those limits have been attempted by McClintock.
During his first congressional term, in 2014, he voted in favor of a bill prohibiting federal agencies from interfering with states’ approval of medicinal marijuana usage. He also supported legislation that would make it illegal for a state to punish a bank for providing financial services to marijuana companies.
The bills were overwhelmingly supported by Democrats in the House of Representatives. One received 49 Republican votes, while the other received 45.
McClintock attempted again in 2015 to deal with federal policy affecting state marijuana legislation.
“This amendment does not support the use of marijuana. I’ve never used it, and my wife and I have taught our children not to use it either. And I think that every American should be informed of the hazards and dangers that it poses,” he told the House.
“This amendment tackles a broader question: whether the federal government has the constitutional power to impose a policy on states on things that occur solely inside their boundaries. It does not, in my opinion. Even if it does, I don’t think it should.”
45 Republicans voted in favor of his plan, while 198 voted against it.
He’s been a driving force behind the Safe Banking Act, which prohibits a federal banking regulator from punishing a financial institution for providing banking services to a legal cannabis-related company.
The measure passed the House of Representatives in 2019, but never made it to the Senate. It was re-approved by the House in April, but its destiny in the Senate remains unknown.
McClintock’s chances of success are increasing.
“On this, the train has already left the station. “We are no longer debating whether or not cannabis should be legalized,” Hudak stated.
“We are aware that it has been authorized in jurisdictions with populations of hundreds of millions of people. What can we do now to make this sector safer, more fair, and more accountable? This necessitates government intervention.”
It’s no secret that Tom McClintock believes that federal marijuana laws should be loosened up across the country. That could mean a lot of different things, but what it should mean to you is that McClintock is for people to use marijuana for personal use and for the government to focus on other drug war issues in order to focus on the real drug issues.. Read more about tom mcclintock net worth and let us know what you think.
This article broadly covered the following related topics:
- tom mcclintock district map
- tom mcclintock voting record
- tom mcclintock committees
- tom mcclintock
- tom mcclintock district