|
Jamie Raskin on Drugs
|
|
Reduce mandatory sentencing for drug offenses
HB 121 Amends Mandatory Sentences for Certain Drug Offenses
passed Senate (40-7-0); Sen. Raskin voted YEA.- Repeals the mandatory sentence of at least 10 years imprisonment for first and second time convictions for distributing
or dispensing a dangerous controlled substance;
- Requires an individual convicted of drug offenses to be sentenced to at least 2 years imprisonment, and a maximum imprisonment of 20 years or a maximum fine of $100,000, for first or second offenses
Source: VoteSmart synopsis of 2015-2016 Maryland legislative records
, Apr 5, 2015
Voted YES on reducing penalties for possession of marijuana
SB 364 Reduces Penalties for Possession of Marijuana
Bill Passed House (78-55-8); passed Senate (34-8-5); Sen. Raskin voted YEA.Highlights:- Reduces the penalty for a first offense of possession of less than 10 grams of marijuana to a fine of
$100 from a maximum prison sentence of 90 days, a fine up to $500, or both.
- Classifies the possession of less than 10 grams of marijuana as a civil offense punishable by a maximum fine of $250 for a second offense; and a maximum fine of
$500 and for a third or subsequent offense.
- Requires an individual less than 21 years of age who violates a provision of this bill or an individual older than 21 who commits a third or subsequent offense to perform the following actions:
-
Attend a drug education program;
- Perform an assessment for substance abuse disorder; and
- Enter substance abuse treatment.
Source: VoteSmart synopsis of 2013-2014 Maryland legislative records
, Mar 29, 2014
Exempt industrial hemp from marijuana laws.
Raskin co-sponsored Industrial Hemp Farming Act
Congressional Summary:Amends the Controlled Substances Act to exclude industrial hemp from the definition of "marihuana." Defines "industrial hemp" to mean the plant Cannabis sativa and any part of such plant, whether growing or not, with a THC concentration of not more than 0.3%.
Argument in favor (Sen. Ron Wyden):
Members of Congress hear a lot about how dumb regulations are hurting economic growth and job creation. The current ban on growing industrial hemp is hurting job creation in rural America and increasing our trade deficit. This bill will end this ridiculous regulation. Right now, the US is importing over $10 million in hemp products--a crop that US farmers could be profitably growing right here at home, if not for government rules prohibiting it. Now, even though hemp and marijuana come from the same species of plant, there are major differences between them. The Chihuahua and St. Bernard come from the same species, too, but no one is going
to confuse them.
Argument in opposition (Drug Enforcement Agency):
The DEA regulatory opposition to industrial hemp production is based upon:- The difficulty in distinguishing legitimate hemp with low narcotic concentration from illicit cannabis, and
- the perception that industrial hemp advocates have a hidden agenda of favoring legalization of marijuana.
Argument in opposition (DrugWatch.org 10/30/2013):
- The DEA ban on THC in hemp food products, though characterized as a drug war issue, is, in fact, a food safety issue. No state or country has scientifically established the safety of food products made from hemp.
- Smoking hemp/marijuana with a low THC level of 0.25 percent could result in psychological effects on inexperienced users (children, for example).
- Supporting industrial hemp/marijuana sends an ambivalent and harmful message to youth and others regarding marijuana.
Source: S.359/H.R.525 14_H0525 on Feb 14, 2013
Immunity for banks offering services to marijuana businesses.
Raskin co-sponsored immunity for banks offering services to marijuana businesses
Congressional Summary:This bill provides a safe harbor for depository institutions providing financial services to a marijuana-related legitimate business insofar as it prohibits a federal banking regulator from:
- terminating or limiting the deposit or share insurance of a depository institution solely because it provides financial services to a marijuana-related legitimate business; or
- prohibiting, penalizing, or otherwise discouraging a depository institution from offering such services.
Immunity from federal criminal prosecution or investigation is granted, subject to certain conditions, to a depository institution that provides financial services to a marijuana-related legitimate business in a state or one of its political subdivisions that allows the cultivation, production, manufacture, sale, transportation, display, dispensing, distribution, or purchase of marijuana. Argument in Favor:
[Cato Institute, March 31, 2016]: Marijuana is now legal under the laws of [several] states, but not under federal law. And this creates huge headaches for marijuana businesses:
- Two years after Colorado fully legalized the sale of marijuana, most banks here still don't offer services to the businesses involved.
- Financial institutions are caught between state law that has legalized marijuana and federal law that bans it. Banks' federal regulators don't fully recognize such businesses and impose onerous reporting requirements on banks that deal with them.
- Without bank accounts, the burgeoning pot sector can't accept credit or debit cards from customers.
Source: H.R.2076 & S.1726 16-HR2076 on Apr 28, 2015
Opposes jail sentences for non-violent drug offenders.
Raskin opposes the PVS survey question on drug sentencing
The Project Vote Smart Voter Guide inferred how candidates would respond to the question, 'Crime: Do you support mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenders?'
Project Vote Smart notes, "in response to the increasing unwillingness of candidates to answer issue questions, Project Vote Smart has researched Congressional candidates' public records to determine candidates' likely responses on certain key issues. These issue positions, from the year 2016, are provided [for candidates who] refused to provide voters with positions on key issues covered by the 2016 Political Courage Test, despite repeated requests. Historically, candidates have failed to complete our test due to the advice they receive from their parties and advisors and out of fear of negative attack ads."
Source: Political Courage Test 16PVS_Q9 on Nov 8, 2016
Voted NO on additional Drug War funding for synthetic drugs.
Raskin voted NAY Stop the Importation and Trafficking of Synthetic Analogues Act
GovTrack.us Summary: (SITSA): There are more than 400 known types of synthetic--or "artificial"--drugs, which mimic the effects of substances including cocaine and ecstasy. They've largely begun to flood the market in recent years. The bill outlaws 13 different synthetic drugs of the most pernicious varieties. There are more than 400 known types of synthetic--or "artificial"--drugs, which mimic the effects of substances including cocaine and ecstasy. They've largely begun to flood the market in recent years.
GovTrack Pro/Con: Supporters argue the legislation will tackle a growing scourge in a far more timely and immediate manner than what the lagging DEA is usually able to accomplish. Opponents argue the bill would too greatly expand Attorney General Jeff Sessions' ability to criminalize drugs and impose unnecessarily punitive mandatory sentences, according to a letter signed by dozens of organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Human Rights Watch, and NAACP.Opponent's argument to vote NO Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY): The bill would explicitly impose mandatory minimum terms of supervised release which undermines the discretion of judges who are in the best position to make such determinations based on the facts and circumstances of each case.
Legislative outcome: House Bill Passed 239-142-46, Roll Number 268 on June 15, 2018
Source: Congressional vote 18-HR2851 on Jun 8, 2017
Page last updated: May 27, 2022; copyright 1999-2022 Jesse Gordon and OnTheIssues.org