Skip to main content

THIS is what John Carney should have been doing in Congress for the past two years

. . . and THIS is what you can depend on Libertarian Scott Gesty to help get done.

From the Mercury News (California):

A Bay Area congresswoman's new bill would bar federal prosecutors from filing civil lawsuits to seize property from landlords whose tenants comply with states' medical marijuana laws.
"The people of California have made it legal for patients to have safe access to medicinal marijuana and, as a result, thousands of small business owners have invested millions of dollars in building their companies, creating jobs, and paying their taxes," Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, said in a statement issued Friday by Americans for Safe Access.
"We should be protecting and implementing the will of voters, not undermining our democracy by prosecuting small business owners who pay taxes and comply with the laws of their states in providing medicine to patients in need," she said.
U.S. Attorneys for more than a year have been threatening landlords of medical marijuana dispensaries with civil asset forfeiture proceedings if they don't kick their tenants out -- more than 300 such letters have gone to property owners in California, Colorado and some of the 15 other states with medical marijuana laws.
Landlords whose properties are seized this way can try to retrieve them in civil court, but they're not afforded many of the constitutional rights granted to criminal defendants, such as the right to an attorney and a jury trial. And the burden of proof is on the property owner to show innocence rather than the government having to prove guilt.
[snip]
Lee's HR 6335 would prohibit the Justice Department from using civil asset forfeiture to go after properties so long as the medical marijuana tenants comply with state law; those in violation of state law would still be fair game. Among the bill's eight original cosponsors are Rep. Mike Honda, D-Campbell, and Rep. Pete Stark, D-Fremont.
John Carney could have chosen to fight for the rights of Delaware cancer patients and the doctors/providers who could insure them access to medical marijuana.

But he hasn't.  He's been silent on this issue, like so many others.

Time for a real change.

Here's what Scotty Gesty says:  "I'll vote to end the Federal 'war on cancer patients'."
The Scotty Gesty "Dog Days of August" Money Grenade is going on now.
We have an unprecedented chance to get Scott's freedom-oriented message out,
while exposing the truth about John Carney in Congress.

But we need your help.


Comments

tom said…
Our General Assembly candidates need your support too. From the 2012 Libertarian Party of Delaware's "War on Drugs" plank:

"Legislation should be passed that prohibits use of Civil Forfeiture on property belonging to any person who has not been convicted of a felony, limits the scope of any Forfeiture actions to the direct proceeds of proven criminal activity, and guarantees the owner the right to a trial by jury."

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...