The Frank Paul Axis?


Hat tip to Freedom Democrats.

Barney Frank is one of the Democrats I admire most. He has a reputation for being good where the Democrats are supposed to be good...by my standards...even when many of his fellow Dems get weak-kneed, indifferent or cowardly on such issues.

But Frank is backing up words with action. And has found a faithful ally...albeit of convenience...in Ron Paul. And the two have been busy getting some bills co-sponsored and perhaps on the floor for a vote.

[Frank] has formed a legislative alliance of sorts with Ron Paul in doing so. Paul has co-sponsored 3 of Frank's recent pieces of legislation.

1) Overturning UIGEA
2) HR5843, which would essentially remove and federal penalties for marijuana possession of 100 grams or less
3) HR5842, which force the DEA and other federal authorities to respect states’ current laws on medicinal cannabis

HR5842 essentially would make the Controlled Substance Act null and void in certain states because of their medical marijuana laws.

We can tentatively call this a "Frank-Paul" axis. This axis would undoubtedly come into play again with Frank's intention to introduce legislation to defund the Iraq war under a Democratic President. Also, I predict this axis will likely introduce a Federal Reserve Accountability or Transparency Act in the future.

Under Bush-Clinton-McCain regimes, this axis would wilt under the weight of the implied Veto Pen. But what about under an Obama Presidency? These bills are finding other co-sponsors and supporters in the congress. If the threat of the veto pen was removed, or even, i dare, say, there was actual support from the Executive branch for these bills, then this Frank-Paul axis could actually bear legislative fruit. Obama was rewarded last night for not pandering to the lowest common denominator. If his likely presidency truly represents "change we can believe in," a good starting point would be to support this Frank-Paul axis.

These may seem like small potatoes but it's a start to get some dents and chinks kicked into the armor of our "War on Drugs". And of course, the partnership could be a force in the Iraq mess.

The alliance could yield some further reforms down the road...if the person holding the veto pen is friendly to such measures.

--

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Just wanted to note that Gordon is going backwards in the UK (#93154)
by catchy

UK upgrades MJ from Class C to Class B:

The home secretary, Jacqui Smith, announced a new system of escalating penalties for adults caught in possession of small amounts of the drug from early next year.

Tougher sanctions will replace the current system of police warnings, and officers will be able to arrest first-time offenders.

...

Gordon Brown warned of the "more lethal quality" of much of the cannabis now available, described it as a gateway drug, and said that the reclassification was needed to "send a message to young people that it was unacceptable".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/may/07/drugspolicy.drugsandalcoh...

Here's the Thomas.gov for H.R.5843 (#93045)
by BlaiseP
I'd be surprised to see anything come of this (#93037)
by hobbesist

... but I can't help but applaud the prospect of a little ideological miscegenation.

--

Brevis esse laboro, obscurus fio.

None of this stuff will make it out of committee (#93025)
by BlaiseP

What with the electoral hunting season coming up, nobody will be willing to have a Get Soft on Crime bullseye label adhered their political backsides.

This sort of legislation makes far too much sense, guys. But as with Prohibition, the won't be a mandate for change while the Moralistic Harrumphers have anything to say about it. There's money to be made in any war, including the War on Drugs.

Perhaps they're waiting to see (#93039)
by John

who becomes president. A sympathetic signing pen in the first 100 days could embolden them.

Maybe so, hadn't thought about it from that angle (#93041)
by BlaiseP

There isn't enough libertarian sentiment in the country to get such a thing passed. If I was attacking this problem, I'd try the angle of un-federalizing these crimes and returning them to the several states. IANAL, but it seems the Feds have overstepped their boundaries. There has to be something on the books, SCOTUS might be sympathetic to some stare decisis limited govenrment reading of the law here, overturning all these ridiculous federal laws.

Great idea but (#93062)
by eeyn524

the Supremes already ruled on this in Gonzalez v. Raich and decided that this is federal under the "all of life is interstate commerce" theory.

For the feds: Stevens, Souter, Ginsberg, Breyer, Scalia, Kennedy. The four "liberals" were probably sympathetic to medical marijuana but loved federal power even more. Scalia supposedly believes in federalism, but this case proved he was didn't really mean it. Kennedy is just anti-freedom in general, so no surprise.

For medical marijuana: O'Connor, Rehnquist, Thomas, all on federalism grounds.

Yeah, there's all that baloney in Morrison, too. (#93069)
by BlaiseP

But I wonder how the Roberts court would view the matter?

Though most people think he's a doofus, I have a grudging admiration for Clarence Thomas. Here's his hilarious and common-sense dissent

If the majority is to be taken seriously, the Federal Government may now regulate quilting bees, clothes drives, and potluck suppers throughout the 50 States. This makes a mockery of Madison’s assurance to the people of New York that the “powers delegated” to the Federal Government are “few and defined,” while those of the States are “numerous and indefinite.” The Federalist No. 45, at 313 (J. Madison).

Moreover, even a Court interested more in the modern than the original understanding of the Constitution ought to resolve cases based on the meaning of words that are actually in the document. Congress is authorized to regulate “Commerce,” and respondents’ conduct does not qualify under any definition of that term.8 The majority’s opinion only illustrates the steady drift away from the text of the Commerce Clause. There is an inexorable expansion from “ ‘commerce,’ ” ante, at 1, to “commercial” and “economic” activity, ante, at 20, and finally to all “production, distribution, and consumption” of goods or services for which there is an “established … interstate market,” ante, at 23. Federal power expands, but never contracts, with each new locution. The majority is not interpreting the Commerce Clause, but rewriting it.

And that's another way as well (#93042)
by John

....

I'm torn. (#93017)
by Bernard Guerrero

I'd be happy to see the "War on Drugs" go down the tubes, but I really have no problems with blowing up foreigners for strategic reasons and I tend to think that Iraq falls under that rubric. So I don't know whether to root for them or hope Barney and Ron get their butts handed to them.

--

The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.
- H.L. Mencken

"Blowing up foreigners for strategic reasons" (#93032)
by Jordan

Did you mispell "bad strategic reasons"?

--

Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH

I'm not. (#93020)
by John

:)

I tell ya, you conservatives (and liberals) are so schizophrenic when it comes to government power.

No schizophrenia here. (#93021)
by Bernard Guerrero

I'm a libertarian when it comes to me. The rest of you need watching. Or worse. :^)

--

The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.
- H.L. Mencken

LOL. (#93022)
by John

how....schizophrenic?

;)

Links

Conservative
Liberal
Moderate/Mixed/Non-Partisan
Non-Political/Reference

Related Sites -

Polisci Applied (Aaron)
Intrepid Liberal Journal (Intrepid Liberal)
Obsidian Wings (Bird Dog)
Open Hand/Open Eye (locutas)
Red State (Bird Dog)
Swords Crossed (brendanm98)
Wagster Speaks (Wagster)
WatchingAmerica (BlaiseP)
The Social Pathologist (TSP)

Foreign Affairs -

Abu Aardvark
'Aqoul
American Footprints
Council on Foreign Relations
CSIS
Democracy Arsenal
Intel Dump
The Fourth Rail
The Head Heeb
War and Piece

Politics -

Ace of Spades HQ
Andrew Sullivan
Balloon Juice
Belgravia Dispatch
Captain's Quarters
Crooked Timber
Curmudgeonly & Skeptical
Daily Kos
Democracy Arsenal
Eschaton
Firedoglake
Glenn Greenwald
Global Guerrillas
Hugh Hewitt
Instapundit
Jawa Report
Lawyers, Guns and Money
Liberals Against Terror
Matt Yglesias
Michael J. Totten
Michelle Malkin
Moon of Alabama
New America
OxBlog
Patterico
Political Animal
Political Wire
Publius Pundit
QandO
Reality Based Community
Talking Points Memo
The Agitator
The Belmont Club
The Corner
Truman Project
Winds of Change.net

War -

Counterterrorism Blog
Iraq the Model
Jihad Watch
Small Wars Journal Blog

Economics and Business -

Angry Bear
Brad DeLong
Daniel Drezner
Mahalanobis
Marginal Revolution
Roubini Global Economics
The Big Picture

Science and Tech -

Bad Astronomy
New Scientist
Real Climate
Science Blogs
Scientific American
The Panda's Thumb

Legal -

Balkinization
Conglomerate
Ideoblog
Jurisdynamics
Law and Letters
Overlawyered
ProfessorBainbridge
ScotusBlog
Talk Left
The Becker-Posner Blog
Volokh Conspiracy

Sports -

Baseball Crank
Baseball Musings
Baseball Reference.com
ESPN.com
NFL.com
Only Baseball Matters
The Sports Economist

Books, Film and Music -

Amazon.com
Internet Movie Database
All Music Guide

News and Aggregators -

Asia Times
Boingboing
CNN
Digg
English Russia
Fark
Los Angeles Times
Memeorandum
MSNBC
Politico
Poynteronline
Slashdot
The New York Times
The Washington Post

References -

Wikipedia
Your Dictionary