June, 21 2013, 04:24pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
510.251.1856 or Toll-free 888.929.4367 *,info@safeaccessnow.org
U.S. Mayors Demand Change to Federal Policy, End to Crackdown on Medical Marijuana in Their Cities
A resolution calling for change to federal policy is on the agenda at this weekend's annual mayors meeting
Las Vegas, NV
As mayors from across the country gather today in Las Vegas for the 81st annual U.S. Conference of Mayors, the federal government's crackdown on medical marijuana is expected to be discussed and debated over the weekend. A resolution "in support of states setting their own marijuana policies without federal interference" was introduced in advance of the conference by San Diego Mayor Bob Filner and co-sponsored by eight other mayors from across the country. Deliberation on the resolution comes days after medical marijuana advocates issued an alarming report detailing how the Obama Justice Department has spent nearly $300 million to undermine medical marijuana laws in the U.S.
"Ultimately, this is about whether local and state governments can develop, adopt, and implement public health laws without heavy-handed interference by the federal government," said Steph Sherer, Executive Director of Americans for Safe Access, which authored "What's the Cost?" an extensive report issued last week on the economic and social costs of the federal government's war on medical marijuana. "This resolution is emblematic of the frustration experienced by local and state officials, which will continue until the federal government ends its attacks on medical marijuana." More than 100 million people, or 34 percent of Americans, currently live in states with medical marijuana laws.
The resolution, which was introduced on May 22nd and co-sponsored by the mayors of Aurora (CO), Berkeley (CA), Binghamton (NY), Glendale (CO), Oakland (CA), San Leandro (CA), Seattle (WA), and Tacoma (WA), says that despite differing views on how to treat marijuana in their cities, mayors believe "states and localities should be able to set whatever marijuana policies work best to improve the public safety and health of their communities." Specifically, the resolution calls for an end to "federal interference," and a fundamental change to federal policy on marijuana. Until that happens, the U.S. Conference of Mayors "urges the President of the United States to reexamine the priorities of federal agencies to prevent the expenditure of resources on actions that undermine the duly enacted marijuana laws of states."
In 2007, at its 75th annual meeting, the U.S. Conference of Mayors declared the war on drugs a failure and called for "a health-centered" approach to drug policy. Last year, at its 80th annual meeting, mayors adopted a resolution calling for an end to the state-federal conflict on marijuana policies that "frustrates our citizens, costs cities significant time and resources to address, and prevents the establishment of a regulated and safe system to supply patients." This year's resolution cites President Obama's comments that continued interference is "not a good use of our resources" and his administration's pledge not "to circumvent state laws on this issue." Marijuana Majority is currently leading a grassroots campaign to urge mayors around the country to co-sponsor the resolution.
Mayors and other local officials have been at the forefront of resistance to the federal government's attack on medical marijuana. After the Obama Justice Department filed an asset forfeiture lawsuit last July against the landlords of Harborside Health Center, California's largest dispensary, the City of Oakland quickly filed its own lawsuit to challenge the federal government's actions. Last month, U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag similarly filed a forfeiture lawsuit against the landlord of Berkeley Patients Group (BPG), one of California's oldest dispensaries. Berkeley Mayor Tom Bates, along with four City Council members and other state and federal officials, publicly condemned the federal action and have committed to intervene in support of BPG and its patients.
Despite this resistance, the federal campaign appears unrelenting. Just last week, Michigan medical marijuana patient and organ transplant recipient Jerry Duval surrendered to federal authorities to serve out a 10-year prison sentence at a cost to taxpayers of more than $1 million. In 2012, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) spent four percent of its budget on the medical marijuana crackdown. Having conducted at least 270 paramilitary-style raids during the past four years, Obama's DEA spent approximately $8 million to carry them out. However, the amount of taxpayer dollars spent on raids was dwarfed by the amount spent on investigative efforts preceding raids, indictments, and lawsuits, which has totaled more than $200 million. In addition to sending hundreds of letters threatening to prosecute property owners, the Obama Justice Department is expected to spend more than $10 million on lawsuits aimed at forfeiting the property of those in full compliance with state law.
Further information:
U.S. Conference of Mayors draft resolution: https://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/Resolution_US_Mayors_Conference_2013.pdf
ASA report on the costs of federal enforcement against medical marijuana: https://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/WhatsTheCost.pdf
Americans for Safe Access is the nation's largest organization of patients, medical professionals, scientists and concerned citizens promoting safe and legal access to cannabis for therapeutic use and research.
LATEST NEWS
Federal Court Rules Racist Florida Voting Map Backed by DeSantis Can Remain for 2024 Election
“This is not only disappointing, but it sets a perilous precedent," said Ellen Freidin, CEO of FairDistricts NOW.
Mar 28, 2024
A federal three-judge panel unanimously ruled on Wednesday that Florida's congressional map may remain after it was challenged by former Rep. Al Lawson and the watchdog group Common Cause.
Lawson is a black Democrat whose district was dismantled when the map was created in 2022. Lawson and Common Cause alleged that the map was discriminatory against Black voters, but the federal court rejected those claims. Two of the three judges on the panel were appointed by Republican presidents.
“After clearly recognizing Florida’s history of racial discrimination, the court ignored its most recent iteration, greenlighting legislative adoption of the Governor’s racially motivated map,” says @CommonCauseFL’s Amy Keith, on the discriminatory map ruling.
— Common Cause (@CommonCause) March 28, 2024
The plaintiffs argued that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was acting with racial animus when he called for Lawson's district to be dismantled. The court ruled that even if DeSantis was acting with racial animus, the plaintiffs couldn't prove the Legislature was when it created the map.
"This is not only disappointing, but it sets a perilous precedent. The court is saying that a state legislature can erase a performing Black district for political gain as long as it can blame the governor for coming up with the racist scheme in the first place," said Ellen Freidin, CEO of FairDistricts NOW. "The ultimate result permits legislators to conspire with the governor to keep themselves and their party in power while remaining insulated from the law."
A Florida judge had ruled the map was unconstitutional in 2022 because "it diminishes African Americans' ability to elect candidates of their choice."
One of the judges on the federal court panel, U.S. Circuit Judge Adalberto Jordan, did say he believed DeSantis had racist reasoning behind his actions.
"I do not think that Governor DeSantis harbors personal racial animus toward Black voters," Jordan wrote. "But I do believe that he used race impermissibly as a means to achieve ends (including partisan advantage) that he cannot admit to."
Keep ReadingShow Less
US Leads Charge as Surge of Oil and Gas Projects Threaten Hope for Livable Planet
"The science is clear: No new oil and gas fields, or the planet gets pushed past what it can handle," said one analyst.
Mar 28, 2024
Fossil fuel-producing countries late last year pledged to "transition away from fossil fuels," but a report on new energy projects shows that with the United States leading the way in continuing to extract oil and gas, governments' true views on renewable energy is closer to a statement by a Saudi oil executive Amin Nasser earlier this month.
"We should abandon the fantasy of phasing out oil and gas," the CEO of Saudi Aramco, the world's largest oil company, said at an energy conference in Houston.
A new report published Wednesday by Global Energy Monitor (GEM) suggests the U.S. in particular has abandoned any plans to adhere to warnings from climate scientists and the International Energy Agency (IEA), which said in 2021 that new oil and gas infrastructure has no place on a pathway to limiting planetary heating to 1.5°C.
Despite the stark warning, last year at least 20 oil and gas fields worldwide reached "final investment decision," the point at which companies decide to move ahead with construction and development. Those approvals paved the way for the extraction of 8 billion barrels of oil equivalent (boe).
By the end of the decade, companies aim to sanction nearly four times that amount, producing 31.2 billion boe from 64 oil and gas fields.
The U.S. led the way in approving new oil and gas projects over the past two years, GEM's analysis found.
An analysis by Carbon Brief of GEM's findings shows that burning all the oil and gas from newly discovered fields and approved projects would emit at least 14.1 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide.
"This is equivalent to more than one-third of the CO2 emissions from global energy use in 2022, or all the emissions from burning oil that year," said Carbon Brief.
GEM noted in its analysis that oil companies and the policymakers who continue to support their planet-heating activities have come up with numerous "extraction justifications" even as the IEA has been clear that new fossil fuel projects are incompatible with avoiding catastrophic planetary heating.
The report notes that U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) "supported ConocoPhillips' Willow oil field, arguing that the Alaskan oil and gas industry has a 'better environmental track record,' and not approving the project 'impoverish[es] Alaska Natives and blame[s] them for changes in the climate that they did not cause.'"
Carbon Brief reported that oil executives have claimed they are powerless to stop extracting fossil fuels since demand for oil and gas exists for people's energy needs, with ExxonMobil CEO Darren Woods tellingFortune last month that members of the public "aren't willing to spend the money" on renewable energy sources.
A poll by Pew Research Center last year found 67% of Americans supported the development of alternative energy sources. Another recent survey by Eligo Energy showed that 65% of U.S. consumers were willing to pay more for renewable energy.
"Oil and gas producers have given all kinds of reasons for continuing to discover and develop new fields, but none of these hold water," said Scott Zimmerman, project manager for the Global Oil and Gas Extraction Tracker at GEM. "The science is clear: No new oil and gas fields, or the planet gets pushed past what it can handle."
Climate scientist and writer Bill McGuire summarized the viewpoint of oil and gas executives and pro-fossil fuel lawmakers: "Climate emergency? What climate emergency?"
The continued development of new oil and gas fields, he added, amounts to "pure insanity."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Just ‘Stop Drilling,’ Critics Say After Biden Admin Finalizes Methane Limits
The new Biden administration rule will limit methane emissions, but critics say it's time to stop drilling for fossil fuels.
Mar 28, 2024
The Biden administration on Tuesday finalized rules that will force oil and gas companies to reduce their methane emissions, but critics say the administration needs to do more to curb a key driver of the planet-warming pollution: fossil fuel drilling.
Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, and the Bureau of Land Management's new rules will require that fossil fuel companies contain methane leaks at oil and natural gas wells that are on federal land, and they will also have to limit how much methane they burn off.
Critics say the only solution that will truly address the climate crisis is to stop drilling entirely. Recently released Interior Department data shows that the Biden administration has approved close to 50% more oil and gas drilling permits on public lands than the Trump administration did during its first three years.
"The best way to eliminate methane pollution from public lands is to stop fossil fuel drilling, period. In the midst of a climate emergency, we need to take the actions necessary to stop pollution once and for all," Food & Water Watch Policy Director Jim Walsh said in a statement. "We look forward to working with climate champions in Congress like Rep. Jan Schakowsky to pass the Future Generations Protection Act to ban fracking on public lands and everywhere else."
Some praised the new rules as needed progress, including Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.).
America’s public lands should be sources of inspiration and joy, not pollution and waste. I applaud @Interior for working to stop releases of methane, a major climate pollutant, on our public lands—something I've been demanding for years with my FLARE Act. https://t.co/D1o26GEc55
— Ed Markey (@SenMarkey) March 27, 2024
Interior Secretary Deb Haaland said in a statement Tuesday that “this final rule, which updates 40-year-old regulations, furthers the Biden-Harris administration’s goals to prevent [methane] waste, protect our environment and ensure a fair return to American taxpayers.”
Methane can trap far more heat than CO2, so limiting emissions is a critical part of addressing the climate crisis. Despite pledging to cut methane emissions, oil and gas companies have not significantly reduced emissions in recent years. The U.S. is currently the largest emitter of methane from oil and gas in the world.
The International Energy Agency says major reductions in methane emissions need to be made if the world is going to avert catastrophic global warming.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular