STATE SHOULD LET ITS FARMERS GROW HEMP

Marijuana Laws Based On Fear, Not Facts

In his June 22 article ("Shea-Porter's gravitational pull") for the
Monitor, GOP boss Fergus Cullen blasted Democrats for advancing the
Nanny State and going too far, too fast on a number of issues. I agree
with much of what he had to say.

For example, like most New Hampshire citizens, I prefer to wear my
seatbelt voluntarily rather than because I'll be pulled over, fined
and harassed for noncompliance. And who really thinks there should be
a fine for releasing helium balloons? (Wouldn't a public service
announcement suffice and be less insulting to the average citizen?)

However, Cullen is spreading pure disinformation (and defending one of
the worst excesses of the Nanny State) with his dishonest assertion
that Democrats nearly legalized marijuana.

There was a bill submitted, HB 92, which really would have legalized
marijuana outright, but it received little support from
legislators.

The bill Cullen is blasting Democrats over is actually HB 774, a
medical marijuana bill which nearly passed the House despite
opposition from leaders in both parties.

Republicans voters I talk to understand perfectly well that HB 774
would not have "legalized marijuana." In fact, the marijuana
prohibition as we know it would have continued in New Hampshire for
everybody except for the estimated 100-200 seriously ill patients who
would have been permitted to use marijuana with a doctor's
recommendation. Extending this exemption to seriously ill patients is
a matter of simple compassion.

Fortunately, many rank-and-file Republicans understand this better
than their party bosses, and they also know better about industrial
hemp (another area where Cullen says Democrats are trying to go too
far, too fast).

It is illegal to grow hemp anywhere in the United States, but we
import far more hemp than any nation in the world, and hemp markets
are rapidly expanding.

Farmers and scientists say hemp is more environmentally friendly than
cotton or corn, and they also say it has shown great potential as a
healthy source of food, a clean source of energy (ethanol and
bio-diesel), a forest-friendly source of paper, and a natural source
of quality cloth and rope.

In fact, any reasonable person who studies the issue can see that the
federal ban on industrial hemp is senseless, hysterical and sustained
only by propaganda. Experts agree that regulated hemp farming would
have no effect whatsoever on the marijuana trade, and considering
hemp's promise as an eco-friendly crop that would help the U.S. become
more economically self-sufficient, the ban is simply contrary to the
public interest.

It's also worth mentioning that the hemp bill (HB 424, which passed
the House and died in the Senate) would not even have given New
Hampshire farmers the liberty to grow hemp, at least not until the
federal Drug Enforcement Administration lifts its own ban. By
contrast, legislation passed this year in North Dakota directly
challenges the DEA's authority, and North Dakota farmers have filed
suit against the DEA with the full support of their own state's
commissioner of agriculture. Meanwhile, consumers get to buy hemp
moisturizer at the local Wal-Mart and hemp waffles at the local
Shaw's, but the profits have to be sent to Canada, Europe, and even
China.

At the very least, New Hampshire Republicans should understand that
these decisions should be made in Concord by citizen legislators, not
by politicians in Washington, D.C., many of whom we know are beholden
to the pharmaceutical industry and the rapidly growing
prison-industrial lobby. We've become far too comfortable with federal
intimidation (and federal gravy) from the so-called war on drugs.

(Matt Simon of Pembroke is executive director of the New Hampshire
Coalition for Common sense marijuana Policy.)