Jim Finnel
Fallen Cannabis Warrior & Ex News Moderator
As election time begins to sneak up on us once again, South Dakota will be voting to legalize medical marijuana, and California voters will decide if marijuana should be legalized completely.
After watching the political games played with medical marijuana, it made me ask why people don't petition to vote on the matter themselves? After all, recent polls have shown an 81% acceptance of marijuana as medicine (Langer 2010). In digging around I found some disappointing information.
If you live in Hawaii, Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, Iowa, Indiana, Wisconsin, Minesota, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Viginia, West Virgina, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Deleware, Connecticut, Vermont, Rhode Island, or New Hampshire you basically don't have the same rights as people in every other state not listed. Not only do you not have the same rights, but you have limited power to change these things, because these states don't allow for citizen petitions to change laws, or present grievances.
Here's what the first amendment of the United States Constitution says:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble,
and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Notice the last part, "and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances?" While I must entertain the arguement that a petition can be presented in a court of law, it stands to say that requiring every citizen to litigate their grievances goes against any common sense.
Why are citizens in these states not allowed to petition to change the law, and allow other citizens to vote on issues?
Apparently, it's not so simple. The issue of citizen-run government is one that must be litigated in the states listed above. That's right, if a citizen wants to petition for a law change, they must sue the state (First Amendment Center 2010).
Even other states that allow petitions have specific limitations. For instance, Mississippi and Florida will only allow petitions for constitutional amendments, while Alaska, the District of Columbia, Idaho, Maine, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming will only accept petitions for statitory initiatives. Kentucky, Maryland, and New Mexico only allow for Popular Referenda (Ballot Initiative Strategy Center 2010), which is nothing close to a citizen petition.
In total, 24 states allow for Ballot Initiatives. This means that the majority of states cannot collectively have citizen-driven change. It also means if you live in one of the states without citizen petition acceptance that your government officials don't value your freedoms in the same ways as those in others states; and they have a potentially over-inflated sense of moral enforcement and totalitarianism. Surely the only people with the ability to critically analyze issues aren't just the ones who can afford to run for office. More importantly, what does it say when we, as citizens, are required to abide by federal and state law, yet in the majority of states, our constitutional rights aren't honored by either institution without fighting for it in a court of law?
References
Ballot Initiative Strategy Center 2010. Initiative strategy. Ballot Initiative Strategy Center (accessed March 27, 2010).
First Amendment Center 2010. Petition right to sue. firstamendmentcenter.org: Petition Topic (accessed March 27, 2010).
Langer, Gary. 2010. High support for medical marijuana. ABC News. Medical Marijuana, ABC News Poll Analysis - ABC News (accessed March 27, 2010).
News Hawk: User: 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: Examiner.com
Author: Angela Macdonald
Copyright: 2009 Clarity Digital Group LLC d/b/a Examiner.com
Contact: Contact Us
Website: Petition paranoia: Limiting citizen rights to change antiquated drug laws
After watching the political games played with medical marijuana, it made me ask why people don't petition to vote on the matter themselves? After all, recent polls have shown an 81% acceptance of marijuana as medicine (Langer 2010). In digging around I found some disappointing information.
If you live in Hawaii, Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, Iowa, Indiana, Wisconsin, Minesota, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Viginia, West Virgina, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Deleware, Connecticut, Vermont, Rhode Island, or New Hampshire you basically don't have the same rights as people in every other state not listed. Not only do you not have the same rights, but you have limited power to change these things, because these states don't allow for citizen petitions to change laws, or present grievances.
Here's what the first amendment of the United States Constitution says:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble,
and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Notice the last part, "and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances?" While I must entertain the arguement that a petition can be presented in a court of law, it stands to say that requiring every citizen to litigate their grievances goes against any common sense.
Why are citizens in these states not allowed to petition to change the law, and allow other citizens to vote on issues?
Apparently, it's not so simple. The issue of citizen-run government is one that must be litigated in the states listed above. That's right, if a citizen wants to petition for a law change, they must sue the state (First Amendment Center 2010).
Even other states that allow petitions have specific limitations. For instance, Mississippi and Florida will only allow petitions for constitutional amendments, while Alaska, the District of Columbia, Idaho, Maine, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming will only accept petitions for statitory initiatives. Kentucky, Maryland, and New Mexico only allow for Popular Referenda (Ballot Initiative Strategy Center 2010), which is nothing close to a citizen petition.
In total, 24 states allow for Ballot Initiatives. This means that the majority of states cannot collectively have citizen-driven change. It also means if you live in one of the states without citizen petition acceptance that your government officials don't value your freedoms in the same ways as those in others states; and they have a potentially over-inflated sense of moral enforcement and totalitarianism. Surely the only people with the ability to critically analyze issues aren't just the ones who can afford to run for office. More importantly, what does it say when we, as citizens, are required to abide by federal and state law, yet in the majority of states, our constitutional rights aren't honored by either institution without fighting for it in a court of law?
References
Ballot Initiative Strategy Center 2010. Initiative strategy. Ballot Initiative Strategy Center (accessed March 27, 2010).
First Amendment Center 2010. Petition right to sue. firstamendmentcenter.org: Petition Topic (accessed March 27, 2010).
Langer, Gary. 2010. High support for medical marijuana. ABC News. Medical Marijuana, ABC News Poll Analysis - ABC News (accessed March 27, 2010).
News Hawk: User: 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: Examiner.com
Author: Angela Macdonald
Copyright: 2009 Clarity Digital Group LLC d/b/a Examiner.com
Contact: Contact Us
Website: Petition paranoia: Limiting citizen rights to change antiquated drug laws
