I repeat, it does not legalize marijuana. It is a very straightforward amendment. It removes the Federal interference from local law, from local affairs where States have adopted through their legislative process or initiative process, a limited use of marijuana for medical purposes only. And in most cases, in all the cases I know, it has to be dispensed by a doctor. And the reason this amendment passed in California is because the elderly community, oftentimes suffering from pain, felt this was a remedy for pain. And the voters of California said, you should not deny this as long as it is being used in the medical arena. That is all this amendment does. It says, Federal Government, get off the back of those States that have used their legal process to have a limited use of marijuana for medical purposes. And those States are Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and the District of Columbia. The States of Hawaii and Maryland have also passed the laws through their legislatures. This is not about legalization of marijuana. This is just saying, Federal Government, where those States have adopted those laws, just stay off their backs.
Sam Farr: “I repeat, it does not legalize marijuana. It is a very straightforward amendment. It removes the Federal interference…”
On the recordJuly 22, 2003
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing an amendment related to medical marijuana use during a House floor debate.
Share
More from Sam Farr
Mar 15, 2017
At a time when American leadership is needed more than ever, we must continue to invest in the international affairs budget.
Mar 15, 2017
History has shown us what we can get by retreating into a defensive, isolationist crouch.
Jul 14, 2016
I am embarrassed that Congress is going home today for 2 months after having done nothing about this outrageous use of guns in America. We are going home because it is an election year. We have 2 months to be with our constituents. I hope…
Feb 29, 2016
Yes, I presume that the decision to move sort of out of the Washington area was a strategic one, plus probably cost-effective for real estate purposes.





