Transcript of CCRCC Cannabis Resolution

Tonight when I got home from work I found an e-mail from the secretary of the Clark County GOP in my inbox. She had transcribed the part of the March CCRCC that included the cannabis resolution we've been working with for almost a year. I want to thank Michelle Ketrow for going above and beyond in sending me this:

Partial Transcript of the Minutes of the CCRCC Meeting on March 20^th, 2010

Russ Mickelson: We had two Resolutions that were submitted at a previous Central Committee Meeting and they were voted on to “lay them on the table”, and, so now we have to bring them back up for discussion and decision. This one Resolution reads this way:

As read:

WHEREAS, the prohibition of Cannabis fills our prisons with non-violent offenders; and

WHEREAS, ending Cannabis prohibition would free up law enforcement time and money that could be focused on violent crime (added: “And for your information Cannabis has to refer to the plant that grows Marijuana); and

WHEREAS, Cannabis could be regulated and taxed in a manner similar to, and as easily as, alcohol; and

WHEREAS, Cannabis is non-toxic and non-lethal; and

WHEREAS, the voters of several states, including Nevada, have recognized the medicinal use of Cannabis; and

WHEREAS, Nevada takes pride in its libertarian ideals such as personal responsibility and individual freedom; and

WHEREAS, current federal laws encroach upon the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it (added: “Referring to the Constitution”) to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people;” therefore be it

RESOLVED that we the members of the Clark County Republican Central Committee urge Nevada legislators to enact legislation requiring the legalization of Cannabis in the state of Nevada.

Russ Mickelson: And this was presented and discussed at some length and there was a companion Resolution that again related to the legalization of Marijuana or otherwise known as Cannabis, and they were voted and laid on the table, now I guess, Mr. Chairman, it’s open for discussion?

Chair: The reason we brought this up at this meeting is it was actually put on the table, it was read, I believe, prior to the July Meeting, and it has not been addressed and my feeling is that we can only let these things sit for so long, I apologize for letting it sit as long as we have, and it probably should have been addressed in 2009, we just want to get these things cleared off prior to the County Convention.

The floor recognizes Diana Orrock, I believe that you have an amendment to this Motion?

(Read by Diana Orrock):

Mr. Chairman, I move to amend this Resolution by deletion and substitution, deleting the entirety of the submitted Resolution and replacing with the following:

WHEREAS the Republican Party is a strong supporter of the 10^th Amendment;

BE IT RESOLVED that the CCRP believes that the State of Nevada, not the Federal government is best suited to govern, regulate and control such substances as Cannabis.

Voice: Second

Chair: Okay, Do we have a second on that Motion? (Voice) We have a second.

Voice: I second that.

Chair: And what was your name? I’m sorry, Sir.

Voice: Chuck McDonald

Chair: Chuck McDonald, we have a second.

Chair: We’ll open the floor to debate on this or comment.

Chair: Paul? Mr. Folger?

Paul Folger: Well, if you are going to go that far, why stop at Cannabis? The 10^th Amendment is pretty clear that things such as that or taxes or education should be allowed to the 10^th Amendment so why are we stopping at this one issue with that newly stated Resolution ?That’s my comment

Chair: The Floor recognizes Mr. Ross.

Jordan Ross: I would like to respond to Paul’s comment just on a generic level, I would say that the reason is, first of all, historically the 10^th Amendment has been applied in a “piece meal” fashion, and it’s going to continue to be the case, and so I think that what the original intent of the person who wrote this Resolution, who’s not here tonight, was to address, not really a, to be honest, a 10^th Amendment issue, but a specific public policy issue. So, I would, just…more of a Constitutional curiosity item, but to be honest, I just think that the original author of this Resolution was simply addressing a public policy issue.

Chair: And at this point we are just specifically addressing the Amendment, not anything that possibly occurred before that, so please keep the comments relative to the current Amendment.

Chair: the Floor recognizes? I’m sorry; my wife should be up here giving the names.

Speaker: Hi my name is Mike Vannozi, I don’t know if it’s a propos at this time, but I would like to state my opposition to the legalization of Marijuana. I believe it creates a delirious effect on our County and our citizenry, and I believe It would be like a plague, and I am totally against legalizing Marijuana.

Speaker: Chuck McDonald: I honestly believe that everybody has a right to live their life as they see fit. Now, I think it’s irrational for people to get themselves out of their minds on Marijuana or Cocaine or Heroin or anything else, but they have a right to live their life as they see fit , so let them go and do it. Why would the government want to waste their time chasing down these people and putting them in jail and spending all of this money? To me it really, really is a waste of time. I’m not an advocate of it, but as a legal issue, the government is spending so much money incarcerating all of these people now, I think we could better spend our money on defending our borders.

Chair: I want to take this time to remind everybody that the Amendment, the Motion that was made, does not speak anything about Marijuana, it’s rather the power of the State government to decide using the 10^th Amendment rather than the national government, so this Amendment is specific not to the legalization of Marijuana but specific to the State Sovereignty issue of the 10^th Amendment. So let’s keep our comments relative to the Amendment or I will have to cut off those comments as we go forward.

Dan Hickey: Mr. Chairman, I move or make a motion, whichever is proper terminology, that we Call the Vote on the Motion to Amend by Substitution.

Voice: Second.

Chair: We have a Motion and a Second.

Chair: Okay, it takes a two-thirds vote to close debate. Ken Minster, can you get your ushers, one on each side. All of those in favor of the Motion as made by Mr. Hickey to close debate and seconded, please raise your hands.

I think we have more than two-thirds. It’s a clear majority, it’s way over two-thirds, so we’ll close debate on it, at that point the Motion carries.

Now we need to have a vote on the Motion as stated. All of those in favor of that Motion, please raise your hands.

Voice: Re-read the Motion.

Chair: We can do that. Diana do you have a copy of that Motion for me please? And I will re-read it. We are voting on the Amendment so there is no debate. After we vote to accept the Amendment to the Motion then we can come back to debate of that Amendment.

(Re-reads Diana Orrock’s earlier reading).

That is the entirety of the Motion, the Motion to Amend, so all those in favor of this Motion to Amend, please raise your hands. That Motion carries as well.

Now it’s the main Motion so we can open this to debate.

Voice: (unclear).

Chair: Woody, we can do that. All of those in favor of a count for the vote, please just say “aye”. Everybody raise your hands who was in favor of the vote. Ken would you please go through with your ushers and count?

Chair: 85 in favor? Okay, all of those opposed please raise your hand. 21. The Motion carries 85 to 21. At this point now we can open up that Motion, the main Motion that was read to discussion.

To be continued…..

So there you go. I'll take that as a victory. Thank you to the folks who helped me write the original resolution. I still don't know who wrote the amendment and I guess I never will. Just for the record, I was at this meeting. I don't know why Jordan Ross kept saying I wasn't. I guess he missed me.

Now we just have to get the hemp resolution read and voted on.

The May 2010 CCRCC meeting

That was a boring meeting. Here’s the breakdown: By-laws were changed regarding membership in the state central committee and who should be able to be a proxy.

Fossils gave awards to fossils.

Somewhere in this two hour and twenty minute cavalcade of fun we became a “Committee of the Whole.” You can look that up in Robert’s Rules of Order.

So, with all of the awards, elections and all of the other random droll, we ran long. The standing chair had to put us at a recess until the July 2010 meeting.

The bad news is, there are still no answers on the resolutions. The good news is that “Old Business” should be up first on the agenda when we come out of recess in July. I think.

I sat through that whole boring shit, with my stomach in knots, so I could ask for some info on the cannabis resolution. As per usual we hold a business meeting and forget to do business. It’s frustrating to say the least. By the end of the meeting most of the members had left. I jumped up to the microphone after recess was called and asked them to clarify that we couldn’t do “Old Business.” We were in recess and that was the end of the meeting. I drove home and went directly to my Robert’s Rules and read up on what just happened.

So the bottom line is the hemp and cannabis resolutions will be celebrating their first birthday in July. Hopefully I can bother the party brass enough to get them to follow through before then.

-Chris Dyer

Tea Party of Nevada

Some folks have started a new political party here in Nevada. According to what I've read it's a sham to help Harry Reid win his Senate race. Or, it could be some late joiners to the tea party movement. Just for the record, Ron Paul supporters in Las Vegas held a "tea party" protest on December 16th, 2007 at the IRS building...so technically, the tea partiers kinda stole our "thang" that we, of course, stole from the original Boston tea party. It's all good though.

I don't know where these other "Others" came from, but I can't wait to see how it plays out.