Paul Ryan Makes Sense, But Quickly Recants
Late last week I saw a headline about Paul Ryan that said he didn’t think the federal government should interfere with states on the medical marijuana issue. That’s not exactly what I’d expect to hear coming from the Romney/Ryan ticket, but I certainly wasn’t upset by it.
I think Ryan was making a point that too many people miss. When talking about the War on Drugs as a Republican in favor of ending it yesterday, it’s a hot topic, and I’m not usually in the majority. The argument I run into so often is this:
Drugs are bad. People shouldn’t use drugs. We should ban drugs.
End of argument.
And that’s without getting into the cost of law enforcement, the overcrowding of prisons for nonviolent crimes, the cost of outsourcing prison space, the dangers of prohibition, or the fact that prohibition simply doesn’t work.
The ironic part of this is that these folks who cheer for calls to return to the Constitution couldn’t legitimize the War on Drugs with any portion of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.
And that, I think, was Ryan’s point. This isn’t a federal issue. It’s a states’ issue. If marijuana is to be legalized – for medicinal or for any other use – it’s an issue for the states to decide, not the federal government.
But if you’re a Republican concerned about Paul Ryan embracing drug legalization, you don’t need to worry. Team Romney moved quickly, and Ryan’s logical approach to limiting the size and scope of the federal government is now a thing of the past.
I’m not a huge fan of Paul Ryan (mostly because he’s not the conservative he’d like you to think he is), and though I’m very much ready and willing to call out a politician for being wrong, I’m also willing to back them up when they’re right.
Paul Ryan was right on this issue. That is, until he took his talking points from Mitt Romney.