Connect with us

Politics

Pot Fight Between DC Mayor, Congress Could Cost the City

Published

on

Rica Madrid poses for a photograph as she rolls a joint in her home on the first day of legal possession of marijuana for recreational purposes, Thursday, Feb. 26, 2015, in Washington. Democratic Mayor Muriel Bowser defied threats from Congress by implementing a voter-approved initiative on Thursday, making the city the only place east of the Mississippi River where people can legally grow and share marijuana in private. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Rica Madrid poses for a photograph as she rolls a joint in her home on the first day of legal possession of marijuana for recreational purposes, Thursday, Feb. 26, 2015, in Washington. Democratic Mayor Muriel Bowser defied threats from Congress by implementing a voter-approved initiative on Thursday, making the city the only place east of the Mississippi River where people can legally grow and share marijuana in private. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

BEN NUCKOLS, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The new mayor of the nation’s capital gave her constituents what they wanted — the ability to legally grow and share marijuana in private.

Democratic Mayor Muriel Bowser had little choice, given the overwhelming voter support for the legalization initiative and the unanimous opinion from her legal team that Congress couldn’t block it.

“D.C. residents have spoken,” said Rica Madrid, 34, a public-relations consultant and activist who said she feels less anxious about smoking at home now that it’s legal. “People here in this urban area, we see that the harm of the drug war is much more intense than the harm of the drug itself.”

But that doesn’t mean there won’t be consequences for the District of Columbia.

Republicans in Congress are angry that the city went ahead and legalized pot Thursday, despite their warnings that it would violate federal law. They’ve even suggested Bowser and other city officials could go to prison. While that’s highly unlikely, Republicans could get their point across by reducing or restricting some of the federal money that flows to the city every year.

“We provide half a billion dollars (annually) to the District. One would think they would be much more compliant with the wishes of Congress,” Rep. Andy Harris, a Maryland Republican and one of the most vocal pot opponents, said in an interview Thursday.

Actually, the District received more than $670 million in federal funding last year to support its $11 billion budget. The federal money is earmarked for specific programs — including the city’s court system.

Republicans will “find some areas where perhaps we have been very generous with the citizens of the District. That will all come with time,” Harris warned.

Harris didn’t mention any specific programs, but Congress could make another run at loosening the city’s tough gun-control laws. It could also reduce funding for school construction, HIV prevention or a popular program that gives District residents a break on tuition at public universities in other states.

Even top advocates of city autonomy are preparing for tough times on Capitol Hill.

“I do believe it’s likely this is a short-lived victory,” said Kimberly Perry, executive director of D.C. Vote. “Members of the House are going to come after D.C. with a vengeance on appropriations for 2016.”

The fight over pot illustrates the always-fractious relationship between the city’s elected local leaders and Congress, which has the final say over the city’s budget and laws. Bowser has pledged to strengthen the city’s relationships on Capitol Hill and work together to advance common goals. Now, that might not be possible.

Congress has already ensured that the District can’t allow marijuana to be sold legally, like in Colorado and Washington state. The new law makes it legal to possess up to 2 ounces of pot or up to three mature plants for use in the home. People can also give away up to 1 ounce.

Smoking in public and possession on federal property remain illegal. The main difference is that city police will no longer be issuing $25 civil fines for possession.

Before legalization took effect, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, a Utah Republican who chairs the House Oversight Committee, sent Bowser a letter urging her to reconsider and warning her that the city is violating a law that bans federal agencies from spending money they don’t have.

Bowser spoke with Chaffetz by phone just before announcing in a news conference Wednesday that she wasn’t backing down. She emphasized that her goal was not to defy Congress, but to honor the will of the voters, said her spokesman, Michael Czin.

“I think that we’re going to continue with our good-faith discussions with the chairman around the issues that are important to the District,” she said Wednesday. “We do disagree on a matter of law. There are reasonable ways to resolve that without us threatening him or he us.”

Bowser’s predecessor, Vincent Gray, also had high-profile skirmishes with Congress, but was able to work with the previous oversight committee chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa, to push for what District leaders call “budget autonomy” — the freedom to spend local tax revenue without authorization by Congress.

The warnings from Chaffetz and Harris suggest the District can’t expect to win any more independence.

“Mr. Issa had a more pragmatic perspective and was willing to hear us out, work with us and not be public about the battles,” said Janene Jackson, who was Gray’s liaison to Congress and is now a lobbyist with Holland & Knight. “This is a very public difference of opinion. The letter stated severe consequences. It does not bode well.”

___

Follow Ben Nuckols on Twitter at https://twitter.com/APBenNuckols.

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of July 1 – 7, 2026

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of July 1 – 7, 2026

Published

on

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Continue Reading

Activism

NPRC Joins National Grand Jury Proceedings Seeking Accountability, Constitutional Restoration

Organizers state that testimony will explore historical and political developments that they believe have contributed to the expansion of corporate influence over public institutions and governmental decision-making. Participants are expected to discuss concerns regarding constitutional governance, individual liberties, property rights, and the protection of vulnerable populations, including seniors and persons with disabilities.

Published

on

Photo by Billie Powers.
Photo by Billie Powers.

Special to The Post

The National Probate Reform Coalition (NPRC) has joined Toll and Roll and a growing coalition of advocacy organizations, victims, whistleblowers, and citizen groups in support of a nationally broadcast People’s Grand Jury proceeding scheduled for July 1 and July 7.

Organizers describe the event as a public forum designed to examine allegations of government abuse, judicial misconduct, legislative failures, and the erosion of constitutional protections affecting millions of Americans.

The proceedings will feature testimony from victims, families, advocates, and organizations from across the country who contend they have experienced harm through government actions, institutional neglect, and failures of oversight.

According to organizers, the People’s Grand Jury will focus on concerns involving probate courts, guardianships, conservatorships, child welfare systems, property rights, civil liberties, and what participants view as a growing disconnect between government institutions and the constitutional rights of the people they are sworn to serve.

NPRC is participating because many of the issues being examined mirror the concerns raised by advocates, victims, and families who have participated in its monthly town halls. For years, families have reported cases involving exploitation of elders, questionable guardianships, estate depletion, denial of due process, and a lack of meaningful oversight within probate court systems.

“This proceeding gives victims and advocates an opportunity to place their experiences on the public record,” said Tanya Dennis, lead facilitator of NPRC. “For too long, families have struggled to have their voices heard regarding elder abuse, probate exploitation, and government inaction. This forum allows those stories to be shared before a national audience.”

Organizers state that testimony will explore historical and political developments that they believe have contributed to the expansion of corporate influence over public institutions and governmental decision-making. Participants are expected to discuss concerns regarding constitutional governance, individual liberties, property rights, and the protection of vulnerable populations, including seniors and persons with disabilities.

In keeping with principles of transparency and fairness, invitations have been extended to legislators, members of the judiciary, law enforcement representatives, and other public officials who may wish to respond to concerns raised during the proceedings or defend actions taken by their respective institutions.

One of the primary outcomes sought by organizers is public consideration and support for the People’s Remedy and Restoration Act, a proposed legislative framework that advocates believe would strengthen oversight, increase accountability, provide remedies for victims of governmental abuse, and restore constitutional protections.

The proceedings are expected to be broadcast nationally, providing citizens throughout the United States an opportunity to observe testimony, review evidence presented, and participate in an ongoing conversation regarding government accountability and the protection of individual rights.

Advocates hope the hearings will encourage meaningful dialogue, legislative reform, and renewed public engagement in the democratic process.

Individuals, organizations, public officials, and members of the media interested in attending or obtaining access information may contact the organizers at tollandroll2025@gmail.com.

As Americans continue to debate the future of constitutional governance, judicial accountability, and the protection of vulnerable citizens, the July proceedings are expected to serve as a significant forum for public testimony and civic engagement. For more information, go to https://tollandroll.com

Continue Reading

Activism

Local Civil Rights Attorney, Activist Walter Riley Reveals Life Lessons from 70 Years in the Movement

Widely known in Oakland for his unifying leadership on issues of social justice and human rights, Riley is also recognized for his famous son, Raymond “Boots” Riley, a rap artist, political activist, and successful filmmaker, whose latest film, “I Love Boosters,” is now in theaters and capturing national attention.

Published

on

Walter Riley. Courtesy photo.
Walter Riley. Courtesy photo.

By Ken Epstein

Prominent civil rights attorney and activist Walter Riley recently went on radio station KPFA 94.1 to discuss his new book co-authored with local veteran organizer Jesse Strauss: “Civil Rights and Structural Attacks: Conversations with Walter Riley.”

Widely known in Oakland for his unifying leadership on issues of social justice and human rights, Riley is also recognized for his famous son, Raymond “Boots” Riley, a rap artist, political activist, and successful filmmaker, whose latest film, “I Love Boosters,” is now in theaters and capturing national attention.

Born in North Carolina, Riley has lived in San Francisco, Chicago, and Detroit, but his longtime home is Oakland, California.

Over the years, he was a leader in the South against Jim Crow, participated as a student in the historic 1968 San Francisco State University strike that created Black Studies and Ethnic Studies in the U.S. and scored victories in the fight for open college admissions.

He was also a labor organizer and was involved in early Black Panther Party formations, anti-war protests, and was a leader of the Progressive Labor Party, a pro-Mao, Marxist Leninist party.

In an interview on KPFA’s “Upfront” with host Brian Edwards-Tiekert on June 18, he discussed some of his formative experiences, born in 1944 to a family of sharecroppers who worked on a tobacco farm near Durham, North Carolina.

“I came from a farming family, the ninth child of 11 children,” Riley said. “My mom and dad got married as teenagers, and they were together for their entire lives. Growing up in this large family, we had to deal with various aspects of what it meant to live in an economically depressed area with parents who had come through what they called “Hoover times” (the Great Depression) in the South.

“They were proud of every one of their children when they took some stand, to develop and show some sense of dignity,” he said.

In his neighborhood, slavery was not a distant memory. There are many people “who knew firsthand what it was to have family members that had lived as enslaved people and lived in communities where enslaved people had lived.

“(Under tenant farming), the landowner negotiated for the entire family: the farmer, the wife, the children – everybody was involved on the farm. Kids were often engaged. We had to shovel, hoe tobacco to keep the weeds from taking over, to make sure that tobacco worms didn’t eat up the tobacco. If a child was old enough to plow, they would walk behind a horse or mule and plow a field, working from sunup to sundown,” he said.

The houses did not have indoor bathrooms, running water or electricity. “A lot of the names in the Black community were the same names as these slave owners. We could see the names of folks on the streets, street names of people who had enslaved people, and they were symbols to me of a world that did not see me as a human being, that has not treated my ancestors as humans, has treated us as chattel to be sold, to be owned, to be property,” Riley said

“When we were counted by our government, we were counted only for the purposes of allowing white people, white men, to have a vote.”

By 1950, when he was 6 years old, his family moved to another house, leaving tenant farming. His father took a job in construction.

“My parents wanted the younger kids to have education,” he continued. “The older kids had to work on the farms. By the time I came along, I was the second child born in a hospital. “My parents looked forward to younger kids to have more sense of independence from the economic and social depravities that they saw around them.”

Watching television, he became aware of the suffering under Jim Crow, including the lynching in Mississippi of Emmett Till in 1955 and Mack Parker in 1959.

When he was 13, he joined a picket line in town in front of a variety store chain that did not hire Black people and became active in the Civil Rights Movement. By time he was in high school, he had become a leader in the local chapter of the NAACP and met Malcolm X and later Medgar Evers, leaders who were both assassinated.

Married and with a child, he moved with his family in the early 1960s to San Francisco, attending San Francisco State University while working full time.

He participated in the San Francisco State University strike, the longest student strike in U.S. history, where students and their supporters prevailed in the face of mass arrests and daily violent police attacks.

While many people remember the strike for its historic victory – the creation of the first Black Studies and Ethnic Studies programs in the country. “But open admissions was the thing,” he said. “Open admissions had to do with people being able to go to school for free. People should be able to go to school just because they come here and say, ‘I want to go to school. I want an education’ (because) we live in a rich country.”

Studying Marxism, including dialectical materialism, he gradually began to understand structure of the system that needs to be changed, he said. “It requires a lot of study, and it still does.”

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.