The Ultimate States' Rights Issue?

Michigan’s first applicant to receive legal medicinal marijuana has been documented. This is one more test of states' rights, and President Obama and his Attorney General Eric Holder have already promised that the feds would no longer harass and prosecute those who administer medicinal pot under state law. I think it’s safe to say this is a politician’s promise. Just a week after the vow was made, DEA agents popped a dispensary in California, and I expect this will continue, as Obama made the gesture to appear youthful and above the issue. And he sure doesn't want to look at it in terms of state's rights. If he were to give it that form of merit, what would that mean for gay marriage, gun laws, and abortion?
The issue is an important one in the role of states' rights. One on side of the fence, we have conservatives who feel the medicinal provision is a “nose under the tent” and they have a point, when you see who the supporters of medicinal pot are: NORML, MPP,and other stoner groups are always at the front of the push for medicinal. If state’s rights is so important, though, to many conservatives, why would this not be a classic case of letting the voter’s speak? Liberals are often remarkably silent when it comes to the issue, leaving the Libertarians to advocate next to the red-eyed.
I fall on the state’s rights side. It is folly to ignore the will of the voters and it could be leveraged in an overall debate on just where the federal reach of the law ends. I think it ends when voters of a state say it ends.
I am reminded of a fellow I met in Las Vegas in 2003 in the course of working on a story for the Washington Times not all that long ago.
In researching the story, I met a fellow named Pierre Werner, a committed pot head, entrepreneur and a true eccentric. I connected with him on the phone when I first arrived in town, and a day later, I drove to a shady North Las Vegas neighborhood and loudly rattled the cage that encased the entry to a cinderblock home. That was how I was told to knock. And out walked Pierre. We chatted for a while and I must have convinced him I was not the law, because within 15 minutes, I was walking into a grow room with enormous plants. Over the next few days, Pierre and I had lunch at a local country club at which he was a member and we went to a Las Vegas 51s baseball game. I wrote a side bar on Pierre for that story, which is now being used by a drug rehab center for some reason. One of the best things about being a journalist is that you have the chance to hang out with these interesting characters and get to know how they work. I just noted this story on his release from prison. You guessed it: His law enforcement radar failed him. Musta been that last fattie.
The application to become a medicinal pot patient in Michigan is remarkably simple. And this is where the weed jokes end...
Medical Pot Application

Publish at Scribd or explore others: How-to-Guides & Manu michigan medicinal marijuana

Stimulus Sunshine: How Much Difference Does it Make?

Today’s Freep provides an excellent chat about FOIA and the public’s right to know.
Some of these points are obvious – “Before disbursing a dime of its anticipated $7.1 billion in federal stimulus funds, Gov. Jennifer Granholm and the Legislature should create a very public and straightforward "checkbook" showing deposits from Washington and payouts in Michigan.”
Obvious but very unlikely.
You may have seen the Mackinac Center’s attempts to persuade the governor to be more open and the lack of regard the state’s chief holds for an open government. If not, we’ve posted the correspondence below.
The Center aptly summarizes the exchanges, “Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s office has twice refused Mackinac Center requests to replicate the online spending transparency found on the Secretary of State’s Web site. Claims by the governor’s office that such a project would be “cost prohibitive,” however, don’t add up.”
On the subject of stimulus money: What’s the lead us to believe that the money will be spent any differently than any other government welfare lottery? Political favors will be paid and those tight with the administration will receive most of the proceeds. This is not just the case in Michigan, but how business is done in all states. Lip service is being paid to transparency here and for Michigan, here.
So far, Michigan has handed over stimulus $$ to public health clinics that didn’t even ask for financial help, a stateside arm of the Peace Corp, and law enforcement.
President Obama’s vast expenditure is neither sound nor fair. And even if we can see where this money is going, this is a rare case in which transparency is frustrating in confirming what we know: Special interests rule.
Granholm - Mac Center Letter

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Business & Legal michigan correspondence

Mac Center Back to Granholm Letter

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Business & Legal michigan correspondence

Granholm Back to Mac Center

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Business & Legal michigan correspondence

Nixon V. Obama

In his State of the Union Address in 1971, President Richard M. Nixon asked Congress for a full employment budget, “designed to be in balance if the economy were operating at its peak potential. By spending as if we were at full employment, we will help to bring about full employment.”
Nixon also promised that his budget will stimulate the economy “and thereby open up new job opportunities for millions of Americans.”
What I don’t hear is a promise that government will “create jobs.”
Obama: “The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act — not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth.”
Google the term “create jobs” and you get 134,000,000 hits. But does government create jobs or, as Nixon put it in much better economic days, does it set a policy that opens job opportunities? Unemployment stayed at 5.9% or lower from 1971 until Carter took the presidency, about the rate that most economists would call full employment
depending on your particular economic theory. Creating jobs implies that government can do such. It can in a literal sense, but jobs that take money from free enterprise have historically added to the national debt and only worsened our economy.

Is That a Road or a Chinese Checkerboard?

The $787 stimulus plan signed by President Obama Tuesday allocates $64.1 billion for transportation and infrastructure projects, with $27.5 billion aimed at highways and bridges. The question many have is why states and municipalities have allowed roads to deteriorate at such a pace. Most municipalities have road crews and budgets for such. Leaders are supposed to know and plan for problems. The roads we drive on are part of our quality of life. Third World countries are known in part for their poor roads and infrastructure.
The incredibly depressed state of Michigan is by far the biggest offender in allowing its roads to sag. Drivers here are amazingly docile about the horrendous condition, even holding a contest to see who can find the biggest pothole.
The problem allows a lot of finger pointing but no solutions. And it has a history.
In 1991, then-Gov. John Engler promised to funnel $78 million in road funding to towns and counties. He later rescinded the funding amidst his usual political game playing. In October 1995, the Grand Rapids Press in an editorial promised that in the wake of a defeated gas tax measure, roads would suffer. Higher taxes, it reasoned, would surely make things right.
The state raised its gas tax to 19 cents in 1997 with the promise of good roads in the future: According to an AP story in July 1997, Rep. Clark Harder, D-Owosso, said the public won't see the results of the tax hike immediately. "If we can get another $20 million to $40 million into this year (for road repairs), we'll be doing well," said Harder, a chief negotiator on the road plan. "A year from now people will be saying, `Thank goodness the Legislature did something about this."'
The gasoline tax increase is expected to raise about $200 million a year for road repairs.
Other elements of the road repair package include a 30 percent increase in truck registration and weight fees for $42 million; a one-time, $69 million dip into the state's Budget Stabilization Fund; and a plan to pave the way for reforms that might include the state taking control of more primary roads from local governments.
Michigan Department of Transportation spokesman Gary Naeyaert said the $69 million the state's rainy day fund will pump into road repairs this year will still leave a lot of the work for the years ahead.
Wrong. In a recent interview on WJR, listen to MDOT flak Rob Morosi do the dance.
(BTW, Naeyaert is now head of Naeyaert Advocacy Group, a lobbying group in Lansing)
This is how political promises work, my friends. And don’t be surprised to see other elements of the stimulus plan fail as well.

Eric Holder, a man of race

Eric Holder has lived in a world of black and white. As a judge in Washington D.C., Holder saw a parade of young black teens paraded before him for any number of violent offenses, a shameful testament to lawlessness.
His comments yesterday, noting that America has been cowardly on the issue of race, is one more ridiculous statement from a man obsessed with his own race.
On one hand, it is understandable, given Holder’s front row seat to the horrific occurrence of black-on-black crime. He appears at a glance to be a sensitive man and this has surely affected if not informed his view.
On the other hand, he is speaking to a nation that has just elected its first black president. This is not the time to castigate that same nation on the issue of race.
In terms of his own performance on the issue of race, Holder is at least consistent.
* In 1995, 23-year-old Donzell McCauley, who murdered a D.C. police officer in 1993 – yes, justice moves very slow in the District – asked a federal judge to review the Justice Department’s decision to seek the death penalty. McCauley’s lawyer asked the judge to consider whether McCauley was the victim of racism in the capital-punishment case because he is black. Holder, U.S. attorney at the time, had recommended to the Justice Department against the death penalty in the case, but Attorney General Janet Reno disagreed, and, after several meetings, Mr. Holder and Miss Reno announced that they would pursue the death penalty. Holder later accepted a plea bargain with McCauley that sent the man to prison for life with no parole.
* In 1996, Holder, then the chief prosecutor for the District of Columbia, told a Washington Post reporter who asked him about race-based jury decisions: "We live in a very race-conscious society and it's going to be a part of it. People shouldn't be surprised."
* In 1997, giving an address at a ceremony marking the 40th anniversary of the Civil Rights division of the Department of Justice, Holder, said “Forty years ago, the civil rights problems our country faced were, in some ways, rather obvious. We now live in a time when many must be reminded, if not convinced, that discrimination still exists. Some would have us believe that racism and prejudice are things of the past. At the Justice Department, we know differently.”
* In 1999, a Justice Department study came out revealing that 24% of blacks were dissatisfied with police compared to 10% of whites. The survey was taken in 12 cities. We don’t know which ones, since the Justice Department press release didn’t say. But Holder announced that "There's still too great a gulf between the views of the minority community and white residents,” and said he would initiate meetings with civil rights leaders and police officials to ponder alleged police misconduct involving minorities.
"Next week's conference is aimed at exploring ways to break the barriers of misunderstanding and distrust that are still far too common among many of our nation's police agencies and the residents," Holder said.
Apparently, that conference failed miserably, given his statements of yesterday.