The Department of Justice to institute marijuana banking regulations
Let me say upfront, and this is sure to anger some of my fellow conservatives, that I support the legalizing of marijuana for while I do not smoke it I feel the Federal government does not have the right to tell people they cannot. But beyond that, as a states rights advocate I feel this is a state issue and therefor it should be decided by the individual states not the Federal government. I support Colorado and all the other states who are attempting to take power away from the Federal government which it should not have in the first place.
Having said that: Eric Holder has announced the Department of Injustice will be instituting new banking laws on marijuana.
U.S. Treasury and law enforcement agencies will soon issue regulations opening banking services to state-sanctioned marijuana businesses even though cannabis remains classified an illegal narcotic under federal law, Attorney General Eric Holder said Thursday.
Holder said the new rules would address problems faced by newly licensed recreational pot retailers in Colorado, and medical marijuana dispensaries in other states, in operating on a cash-only basis, without access to banking services or credit.
Proprietors of state-licensed marijuana distributors inColorado and elsewhere have complained of having to purchase inventory, pay employees and conduct sales entirely in cash, requiring elaborate and expensive security measures and putting them at a high risk of robbery.
It also makes accounting for state sales tax-collection purposes difficult.
“You don’t want just huge amounts of cash in these places,” Holder told the audience at the University of Virginia. “They want to be able to use the banking system. And so we will be issuing some regulations I think very soon to deal with that issue.”
The reason there is a problem here in the first place is simple; these new state laws run contrary to Federal laws. There is an easy fix to this problem available to the Federal government and that would be for the Federal government to enforce its own laws and shut down the shops which are not in compliance with Federal law and prosecute those who are in violation of the law, or decriminalize marijuana at the Federal level. But apparently the Federal government is not interested in enforcing these laws and we have seen this before.
The Federal government is picking and choosing which laws it chooses to enforce and which ones it chooses not to. We saw this with DOMA, and most recently with immigration laws.
In the case of the latter the Federal government has chosen not to enforce Federal laws which has led some states to pass their own immigration laws. The Department of Injustice quickly turned around and sued these states for instituting laws which are contrary to the same Federal laws the government refuses to enforce because Federal law trumps state law.
Does not the same hold true in this case? And yet the Federal government is going out of its way to help these states break Federal law. And they wonder why people are calling this a lawless regime? Either the United States is a nation of laws or it is not. Which is it?
America's Watchtower 
Reblogged this on Brittius.com.
LikeLike
Thank you.
LikeLike
You’re welcome.
LikeLike
So if we followed the Libertarian model, all the greedy, unethical snake-oil salesmen would still be peddling their drug concoctions, we’d have a nation of opium smokers who lay around becoming do-nothing addicts …. there’d be no regulations on efficacy and safety of medication, plus the designer drugs would be killing our children en mass – sounds like a good plan, — if one is a communist attempting to bring about the fall of America!
LikeLike
You made quite a leap there, bub, to say that decriminalizing marijuana will lead to this:
“…all the greedy, unethical snake-oil salesmen would still be peddling their drug concoctions, we’d have a nation of opium smokers who lay around becoming do-nothing addicts …. there’d be no regulations on efficacy and safety of medication, plus the designer drugs would be killing our children en mass…”
LikeLike
Yes this is a libertarian position to take but in no way did I say I supported the legalization of anything stronger, nor for no regulations at all. But this is, in my opinion, more that just a libertarian stance, it is also a Constitutional stance for the Founders believed in personal responsibility with as little government intrusion as possible. When the tide turned in favor of banning alcohol the Federal government did not proclaim it illegal, an amendment was passed and voted on by the people, and that is the way it should be. However a line must be drawn due to public safety and I draw that line above marijuana. Here is the New Federalist Party’s position on this issue:
In the United States of America, marijuana has now been used by a large number of its citizens for half of a century. It is the New Federalist Party’s position that marijuana use is not going to end in the U.S., no matter what the Federal Government does about it. Prohibitions against marijuana have resulted in our jails being filled with inmates whose only convictions have been for the possession of a marijuana related substance. Such incarcerations are being carried out at the taxpayers’ expense. Criminals who have been convicted of more serious, violent crimes are being released from jail early, in order to make room so that newly-convicted marijuana users can be incarcerated to serve their sentences. The New Federalist Party is opposed to the short-sighted
35 The New Federalist Party: Official Platform: 7/4/2013
early release of violent criminals from prison in order to make room for any non-violent offenders.
B.) The prohibition against marijuana manufacture, possession, sale and use has resulted in billions of dollars leaving the U.S. every year. These riches end up in the hands of foreign drug cartels. These cartels are creating local and national criminal networks in the U.S. via their recruitment of violent street gang members to sell their products. This is analogous to what happened when the U.S. prohibited the sale of alcohol in this country. The enrichment, strengthening, and organization of Cosa Nostra into the power it is today was the direct result of the untenable prohibition of alcohol in the U.S. This scenario is being repeated with marijuana prohibition, only this time, it is the street gangs and the cartels who are being empowered. It is the Party’s position that the current Federal policies aimed at the question of marijuana manufacture, possession, sale and use in the U.S. are misguided, myopic, ineffective, and futile.
C.) The New Federalist Party posits that the billions of U.S. dollars spent in the futile effort to eradicate the growth of marijuana in foreign and domestic fields, and in attempting to prevent the importation of marijuana into this country, would have been better spent fighting violent crime and the trafficking of the “harder” drugs. The decriminalization of marijuana would free up personnel, equipment, and funding that could then be utilized to combat violent crime.
D.) The New Federalist Party recognizes the highly detrimental individual and societal impacts of heavy alcohol, drug, and tobacco use. Our society has seen first-hand what happens when drugs other than marijuana are being used heavily by individuals. The relationship of marijuana use to violent crime is not very direct, once you factor the criminal control of the marijuana trade out of the equation. Due to the fact that their overuse is unsafe, it is the Party’s position that all currently controlled and/or illegal substances with the exception of marijuana are to remain controlled and/or illegal, and are not to be decriminalized.
E.) The Party recognizes that the control of any decriminalized drug’s manufacture, distribution, possession, and use, like the control of alcohol and tobacco, is ultimately a States’ and Unincorporated Territories’ Rights issue. The Federal Government is to follow the strictures of the commerce clause concerning the taxation and regulation of marijuana’s manufacture, distribution, possession, and use that in any way involves the interstate trade of marijuana products. The regulation and taxation of the importation of any marijuana into the U.S. from any and all foreign growers and/or suppliers is still to be under the purview of the Federal Government.
F.) It is the Party’s position that only marijuana products are to be decriminalized. No other controlled and/or illegal substances when used are safe enough to decriminalize. The individual States and unincorporated territories are encouraged to:
1.) Ensure that only marijuana produced within the U.S. is sold within their borders.
2.) License all growers and distributors.
3.) Tax all marijuana sales as is necessary to effectively regulate its control within their borders. It can also be taxed to fund any social services deemed necessary by the decriminalization of Marijuana related products.
4.) Establish reasonable age and quantity limits on the possession of marijuana products.
5.) Establish maximum percentage of active compound limits for marijuana products.
36 The New Federalist Party: Official Platform: 7/4/2013
6.) Require proper labeling of marijuana products as to active compound percentages per unit weight, and packaging stamps to show that the product was legally purchased and sold. These two requirements will help law enforcement to determine whether the products in the possession of an individual are indeed legally manufactured and possessed.
7.) Regulate the home manufacturing of marijuana products, plus their distribution and use.
8.) Prohibit the use of marijuana products in any public place or venue.
9.) Prohibit anyone from engaging in any activities that are a threat to public safety while using and/or being under the influence of Marijuana, such as driving any sort of vehicle or heavy equipment, or hunting.
10.) Provide law enforcement with the tools and Regulations necessary to determine if anyone is engaging in an activity that would be illegal while being using and/or under the influence of marijuana. As an example, under circumstances of probable cause during a traffic stop, use of the tongue swab test would be authorized. If this field test results in a positive result for the presence of THC very near, at, or beyond that State or Unincorporated Territory’s regulated legal limits, a hospital blood test would be legally authorized.
LikeLike
To support legalization is an insult to those who have died protecting our children, tot hose who understand that they put their lives on the line and do it with full understanding!
To be aware of what pot is now, compared to what it was in the 60’s is NOT irrelevant! Before going public with statements endorsing legalization, it’s worth while to educate oneself on the ramifications of 1) the % of THC in today’s pot, 2) visits to the ER due to pot, and more importantly, the myth of pot’s supposed connection to violent crime …. etc.
LikeLike
@ josiahe
“To support legalization is an insult to those who have died protecting our children, tot hose who understand that they put their lives on the line and do it with full understanding!”
To whom does this refer and how is decriminalizing pot an insult to them?
LikeLike
Like you Steve, I too support legalization. I do not smoke pot at this time, but have in the past. I believe this is a state issue, but then state lines are not guarded so that will become a mote point as more states join what I view as a libertarian effort and not necessarily a progressive one. All the pot smokers I know, and I rub elbows with a few are conservative. Enforce of federal law does fall on the Executive Branch and I’m old enough to remember many times in the past where the President decided inforce laws he didn’t agree with. Not that, thats right, but just the way things are. Personally I think the President should be required to enforce all federal laws, but that would be something thats near impossible, because he could always say he didn’t have the manpower. I could hear Obama now, calling for more money and higher taxes to pay for such measures. Measures that would accomplish little, but increase spending and raise the debt.
LikeLike
I also know several pot smokers and most of them are conservatives while all of them are functioning members of society who work 40+ hours a week and only smoke while on private time. They smoke pot in the same manner I drink beer and I do not see why one should be legal while the other should not.
It is the president’s job to enforce all the laws, not just the ones he agrees with.
LikeLike
We have a rogue President and a rogue Attorney General. They bend and break whatever laws they want. Constitutionally, if they don’t like a law, they should petition Congress to change it. They could care less about the Constitution. I agree with you, Steve, that drugs laws an issue for the states and not the Federal government. However, the laws are on the books and it is thei responsibility to enforce them.
LikeLike
Exactly, the president cannot pick and chose which laws to enforce, if he disagrees with a law he should seek to have it changed, not just deem it changed and that is where the problem lies with this president.
LikeLike
Personally I am ambivalent regarding the use if maryjane but I feel it is reasonable to suspect Obamalama sees the potential for marihuana as the next cash cow for the federales and may well do what is necessary to tax it to fund his blob like dependency programs; states rights be damned. Cigarette smokers pay $10.00 for a pack of smokes, no problemo; weed on an EBT card, no problemo .
LikeLike
There is no doubt Obama sees this as a chance to get more money into the coffers by taxing it. People are already buying weed and drugs on EBT, they simply go to the ATM and get cash out.
LikeLike
The unintended consequences of decriminalizing marijuana is what no one is thinking about. In this case the Fed is attempting to exert more control over banks and states then the constitution allows. Marijuana shops should be allowed to use state charted banks or credit unions to do their banking, but as we know the Feds want control.
I think its great decriminalize marijuana and take away guns. Now you have a disarmed stoned population the police state can control. There is no longer a reason to be a slave and work to support this corrupt system.
LikeLike
Holder did such a good job w/ FnF this should be no problem. He was out of the spotlight for some time. They must’ve figure everyone’s ‘okay’ with him now – the past forgotten. Instead of guns now he’s in charge of this, representing the puppeteer’s interest, of course.
LikeLike
The rate we are going, it will require a joint or two, to get us through! Seriously, I am with Jim. We should have learned with prohibition. That’s how the cartels got their start.. The crime families with prohibition, now even more sinister types who could care less who they kill.
LikeLike
LOL, I hear you there!
LikeLike