Funk 1

Vera Funk Mr. Bennion AP Government and Politics 9 December 2013 Marijuana: Matter of the State or National Government Imagine border patrol officials populating the lines between states. What if conflicts between states in which marijuana is illegal and states in which marijuana is legal arose due to the underground, interstate commerce of marijuana? This will be the reality of the United States if the legalization of recreational and medical use of marijuana is in the power of the states. I believe the legalization of marijuana should be the responsibility of the national government. To start off, the ratification of marijuana should be the responsibility of the national government because if individual states legalize marijuana, citizens of other states will posses the ability to obtain it. According to the Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug

Trafficking Area, marijuana that originated in Colorado has travelled to 23 other states, where marijuana is illegal. If marijuana is legalized in one state, in time citizens in other states will find a way to gain access to it. In essence, if one state allows marijuana, the mobility of the marijuana is inevitable. One way to stop the mobility would be to establish border patrol, yet setting border patrol up at all state borders would cost too much money. Protecting the border of the United States is estimated to cost $12 billion (Twelve Billion). Establishing border patrol at all state borders would raise that price. Therefore, I believe marijuana should be a federal decision so that the United States save money and avoid complications in interstate commerce. In addition, the establishment of marijuana should be a federal decision to avoid the unnecessary jail time of innocent citizens. In a story by Rebecca Richmann Cohen,

Funk 2
federal agents arrested Chris Williams, a medical marijuana caregiver, in the state of Montana, where medical marijuana is legal, for possession of marijuana. Williams, now, faces the possibility of life in federal jail, although he acted within the law of his state. To avoid this conflict, the national government should make the decision on legalizing or prohibiting the use of marijuana for the whole country. To avoid citizens who are acting within their state laws being sent to federal jail, I think the national government should control the establishment of marijuana. In contrast one may say that the general welfare of the citizens of a state lies in the hands of the state government. Constitutionally, the states do carry this power, yet doesnt the federal government have a role in protecting the welfare of the citizens? Take president Franklin D. Roosevelt, for example. If Roosevelt had not cared about the citizens of America, the Great Depression would have dragged on longer. With the enforcement of the New Deal, Roosevelt implicated programs to help citizens get employed (The New Deal). Roosevelt proved that it is necessary for the national government to care for the general welfare of the citizens in order to help the country. In essence, the national government should have a say of whether marijuana is legal or not, after all it is their job to care for the citizens of America as well. In conclusion, the national government should decide weather marijuana is legal or not. To save money, to control interstate commerce, to avoid the unnecessary jail time of innocent citizens, and to protect the general welfare of the citizens of America, I firmly maintain the belief that the federal government should posses the power of establishing or banning the medical and recreational use of marijuana.

Funk 3

Works Cited "The New Deal." The New Deal. United States History, n.d. Web. 05 Dec. 2013. Twelve Billion. N.d. Photograph. N.p