Thursday, June 28, 2012

Candidate Survey: My Take on AZ Right-wing Issues

I recently completed the lengthy Arizona Republic candidate questionnaire and when it was done I wanted to share my answers. The first parts of the survey are routine. The major portion though scans the views of a candidate through a decidedly right-wing lens. You'll see what I mean.

Breaking the Ice

1.       Best Advice in the campaign: Scottsdale Mayor “Jim” Lane encouraged me to expect my opponents to not “clearly” see my side of the issue and be prepared for further explanations when trying to make a point.

2.       My favorite book is Ken Kesey’s Sometimes a Great Notion

3.       I love Mr Smith Goes to Washington and rewatched it just last night for somewhere in the range of the 40th time. I use it in my 8th grade social studies class to enrich the study of Congress and how a bill becomes law. Personally I love Jefferson Smith's dedication to being a good person and his down-to-earth humility. The writing is clever, the direction is Frank Capra at the top of his game and the good guy wins.

4.       My favorite place in AZ is the string of parks and resorts on the Colorado between Lake Havasu and Parker. I moved to Arizona seeking a mix of mountains and water and nowhere in the state and possibly any state, is the mix of elements more exotic.

5.       Right now, I am most impressed with Quartzite mayor Ed Foster and Citizens for a Better Arizona’s Randy Parraz. In both cases these leaders are leading with their hearts and putting themselves on the line for the public.

Issues

1.       Has the federal government grown too large? No, I do NOT believe that the federal government is too large, and find the whole suggestion it might be, to be anti-American; because the folks who are advancing this hateful anti-American propaganda are encouraging the public to hate their government at the same time they expect to be elected. Our government is supposed to have a huge role in creating a good society and needs to be robust. The government is not some separate faceless monolith; it is millions of American citizens, mostly doing their best to serve the public. While I don’t like waste any more than the next guy and agree that in some cases money should be spent elsewhere, I am not in favor of throwing out the baby with the bath water just because selfish greedy Republican ideologues want to poison public opinion of their country. How despicable to treat American workers attempting to improve our society (government employees, that is) as if they are the enemy.



2.       What is the best way for the federal government to stimulate growth? The best way for the federal government to stimulate the economy is for it to actually do its part to ensure domestic tranquility, provide for a common defense, and promote the general welfare: build roads, deliver mail, educate the young, heal the sick, help the poor, improve our infrastructure, protect and repair the damages we’ve done to the environment. Massive federal jobs programs can change the direction of the country as it did in the 30s, improve the country we live in, and provide cash flow into the economy in the most efficient way to stimulate the economy: by spreading it out to numerous governmental employees to enhance their consumer spending at the same time they improve the quality of our lives.



3.       How do you propose to balance the federal budget? I propose to treat capital gains as income, raise the top level of taxation to 50%, and remove the cap on income when it comes paying into Social Security. I also want a transaction tax on Wall Street investments, closing existing corporate tax loopholes, legalizing and taxing cannabis, and increasing fines for financial frauds as ways of increasing revenue. As for spending, I would eliminate government no-bid contracts, block private contractors from war zones, reduce our number of foreign military bases, set a table of spending caps on items the government purchases to prevent the rampant overcharging the government so often faces, block all vendors that have records of fraud or abuse from doing business with the government, speaking of which I would press to require that all companies doing business with the government have their headquarters in the US and pay US taxes and set a separate higher tax rate for companies with offshore tax havens, cut government subsidies for energy and the agriculture industry (as opposed to small family farmers), establishing a universal health care system to reduce the government expenses of caring for our poor, elderly and veterans, and reverse the trend of privatizing government services which has led to a decline in service at an increase in costs.



4.       Should wealthy American pay more in taxes? The social contract concept, originated formulated by John Locke, but at the heart of our government contends that citizens trade a portion of their independence and wealth for the services governments provide. It seems to me that those who get better services can afford to pay higher prices for them. America is shaped and created by rich for their own benefit. Our laws and culture are written to cater to the desires of the wealthy and protect their business interests, all too often at the expense of the general public. It is simple to see that a corporate CEO is getting a better set of services as an inner-city ghetto dweller.  These people can afford to pay more for the government they shape to their own benefit. Historically there is a clear correlation between the health of the economy and the rates of taxation on the wealthy, higher taxation = healthier economy, periods of lowered taxation on the wealthy have led to more financial crisis.



5.       If you could, how would you reform the tax system? As I have mentioned in previous questions, I would raise the taxes on the wealthy. But I will also work on adjusting to the tax rates to reduce the complexity of taxes on the middle classes and the poor.



6.       Do you support entitlement reform and, if so, what kind? I reject the term “entitlement reform” as yet another version of the conservative (read “miserly”) re-labeling quality government programs as boondoggles so they can cut their taxes and reduce the quality of government services for segments of the public they disrespect.



7.       Would you vote to increase the U.S. debt limit if asked? Without hesitation I would raise the debt ceiling whenever necessary in the same way as I wouldn’t pause to borrow money personally if that’s what it took to feed my children. Our government is ours, as if it were our child, we have a responsibility to take care of it, despite what the anti-Americans would try to teach us, hating your government is hating our country. When your child does something you don’t like, you correct the misbehavior, not starve the child to death. The second obligation or duty of the Congress is to borrow money when necessary to meet the demands of fulfilling its role to live up to the promises of the Preamble to the Constitution (Article I, section 8, paragraph 2). While the choices of Republican administrations have, by choice, leveraged our country’s spending towards waste and graft, those wasteful examples do not preclude the obligations of our government to provide the services to improve the lives of the public. That said, only under currently unimaginable circumstances would I work against our government borrowing money, when necessary, to take of our people. Those who are too squeamish to borrow, should rethink their stances on taxes.



8.       In retrospect, were the federal bailouts of the financial sector and the automobile industry good or bad decisions? The financial sector? No, for a variety of reasons including the lack of accountability in the arrangements of that bailout, their flagrant abuse of the funds and the systemic injustices of the general operations of Wall Street and the banking industry. But I do not equate GM with Wall Street. Furthermore the terms of the auto industry bailouts were much better enumerated, they have met their obligations, and the industry has a much better record of not shafting the public (though by no means a spotless record as history shows).



9.       If elected, would you work to steer federal funding back to projects in Arizona? Or would you oppose such pork-spending even for your own state? I think that the term “pork barrel spending” is again an intentional negative characterization of what is not necessarily a negative thing. We send our congressmen to Washington to look out for our state’s interests, which is why we elect them. To suggest that any actions they take towards that obligation is guaranteed to wasteful and/or corrupt is a false image, another part of the messaging to turn the public against their government. While I would not promote the idea of unnecessary spending, I will look out for Arizona’s interests and, when practical, I will direct government spending to Arizona.



10.   Can, and should, the federal government do more to help Arizona homeowners who are continuing to struggle from the effects of the housing crisis/mortgage meltdown? Yes, the federal government should be prosecuting the perpetrators of this massive fraud and getting people back into the houses that were stolen from them. Admittedly not all the houses lost in the past few years were the fault of the banks; but when consumers go to banks and mortgage companies, they are in a dependent relationship on the banks to be the honest experts of good intent. Banks and mortgage companies conspiring to defraud people of not only their wealth, but their very shelter, are not only committing a crime of theft, but an abuse of trust.  The rights of the millions of homeowners are far more important than the wealth of handful of bankers who exploited them.



11.   If you support more robust border security, please describe how the United States should go about it. Do you support a border fence along the U.S. –Mexico border? I do NOT support turning our southern border into a war zone. Mexico is our number one trading partner, it is disgraceful to turn our relationship with them into an adversarial one to pander to the latent racism of some members of our society. I believe in adjusting our antiquated, prejudice-based immigration laws to reflect the realities of contemporary immigration. If we are prepared to naturalize the majority of those attempting to immigrate, instead of attempting to bar them, we would not need to militarize our border.



12.   Would you support some sort of a guest-worker program for immigrant labor? If so explain how it would work. I do not support the idea of a guest worker program, of intentionally creating a group of second class people. Historically the US had such a program, the “Bracero Program,” which led to rampant exploitation and abuse of the workers and to numerous undocumented immigrants taking up residence around the country. This program, like the earlier use of Chinese laborers to build the western railroads created a legacy of a secret under class, ripe for exploitation and that legacy had indeed become the basis for an entire industry of employers of all sizes abusing the labor of the undocumented immigrants to the tune of millions of workers and billions of dollars. Why create another group of people built for exploiting when we could create immigrant worker programs to help these people become citizens, instead of slaves.



13.   Would you support some sort of a pathway to legal status for illegal immigrants who are already in the country and in many cases have been here for years? I heartily support the creation of a plan to have currently undocumented immigrants become full-fledged, fully participating citizens. I suggest that the term “amnesty,” another right-wing code word, is misleading and hope to note the success of a previous program to help undocumented immigrants gain their citizenship and that that program was under Reagan. Insisting that our workers pay taxes, our students’ parents assist in their education and that our consumers and workers have their rights protected sounds like a good thing to me, not something to be insulted.



14.   Do you support the Dream Act? Why or why not? The DREAM Act is a fine intermediate step and I cannot understand an objection to it, other than it does not go far enough.



15.   Was Arizona’s SB-1070 a good or a bad approach to dealing with illegal immigration? SB-1070 is a disgrace, a shame upon our state and nation. The only good thing it brought was a dramatic increase in citizen activism opposing it.  Of note, I agree with the Supreme Court's ruling both in striking down the majority of the bill and in upholding the provision that law enforcement can investigate immigration status after stopping a suspect for criminal behavior.



16.   Do you support President Obama’s health-care reforms? Why or why not? I support the ACA as far as it goes, but as a Christian, I find it an outrage that this country does not have a universal health care program in place and, while the Affordable Care Act is a step in the right direction, by far, it does not go far enough.



17.   If you oppose Obamacare, what should replace it? I actually oppose the rightwing propagandists who turned this good idea in lies about death panels and support the political ouster of the Republicans that opposed it to replace them instead.



18.   The U.S. War on Terror is now more than 10 years old. Are you satisfied with its course or would you like to see a new direction? Please explain your position. I have spent the majority of my life working on causes related to peace and justice. I am outraged by the so called War on Terror, embarrassed to have the land I love sullied so by its many injustices, and call for investigations into the war crimes the U.S. committed under the direction of Presidents Bush and Obama. As Franklin famously said to trade away essential liberty for temporary security makes one worthy of neither. Our war on terror has made us more terrified and less safe in many regards. It’s resulted in one entirely fraudulent war--in Iraq, creating immense misery and trillions of dollars in debt, another—in Afghanistan--of questionable intent, numerous human rights abuses, worsened relations for other countries, and a destruction of the rights of US citizens here at home. It has essentially been a war on the American public and our rights to free speech and dissent. If our country pursued its foreign relations in an honest and humanitarian fashion, we wouldn’t be needing a war on the myriad enemies we create.



19.   What should be the U.S. policy towards Iraq and Afghanistan moving forward? Investigating the fraudulent circumstances that the Bush administration operated under in starting these wars would be progress. Acknowledging that these wars, especially the Iraq War, were started under false pretenses and we deserve to be held accountable is another.  Beyond that I cannot tell what the next steps would be. I would hope for rebuilding of the countries with local contractors and returning all U.S. forces. For better or worse, I would leave those countries alone after that. We have already done enough damage.



20.   What steps can or should the United States take to ensure that nations such as Iran don’t get nuclear weapons? The US is not in a position to decide which other sovereign countries can and cannot possess nuclear weapons. Whether or not Iran is actually attempting to be a belligerent enemy of the US is difficult to ascertain since the GOP/war-hawk propaganda has prevented the public from learning the truth in this case. The media and the right have been pounding the drums for war with Iran since before the new was even worn off of the Iraq mess. It is small wonder given the history between the two countries and the bellicose language our side uses, that the Iranian response would be equally hostile, add that to the differences of the cultures and the Iranian leaders are easily demonized. But when will we stop destroying whole nations because we oppose the oligarchy that runs it? When the US is prepared to surrender our own nuclear weapons, we can judge the intentions of others who wish to possess them.



21.   Would you support a cap-and-trade-style measure to address climate change? While I am a Democrat, and “cap-and-trade” measures are associated with Democrats, I do not support them. I see them as a boondoggle, a misdirection, and sad waste of time when we need real measure to address CO2 emissions and climate change. Instead of solving a problem it just moves money around. If the Dems don’t want to be saddled with negative stereotypes, they should try harder to not live up to them.



22.   What should the federal government’s role in education be? I feel that according to Article I, section 8, paragraph 1, the first and foremost duty of Congress is collect taxes as necessary to provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare for the people of the United States. It is important that in a document so spare and succinct that the phrase “provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare” is repeated in the Preamble and in this opening clause in the section of the Constitution that enumerates Congressional powers. To my mind creating a quality public education for the vast majority of Americans education is the essence of those two noble goals. Education is one of the essential infrastructure frameworks of our country, our path to the future, as essential as post offices and roads. Providing quality education for the public, to make a better country and improve our citizens’ lives should be a primary obligation of the national government. As such, the national government’s first duty is to provide adequate funding for the education of the American public and then to establish rules that prevent the abuses of those funds and the rights of the students. I hold that the federal government’s performance in the realm of education has thus far been woefully inadequate, both in terms of funding and in forcing misdirected and unfunded mandates on the states. Towards that end, I would say that the role of federal government in education would be to set the standards of curriculum (I feel this is not a fit role for the states, being as given as they are to vagaries of opinion from region to region as to what constitutes facts in science and relevance in social studies) and funding for the education of the nation, especially in the realm of federally mandated special services. Education is an essential service and should be treated as such and not as wasteful luxury. Until our country honestly works to educate our public, we do not live up to the noble ideals we so casually lay claim to.



23.   Do you support school choice initiatives? If so, explain. I do not support school choice initiatives. I understand that some people want to have their children educated away from the general public. I do not agree with that impulse and find it elitist in a society that claims to pride itself on egalitarianism. If that is so then while we can tolerate the selfish elitism of others, we should not be asked to subsidize it. A quality public education is the goal, not a weakening, of our social fabric. The majority of the country does not have access to quality alternatives to their local public schools, so school choice, or school voucher, programs do not advance the general welfare, but instead reduce the pools of funding for the many for the benefit of the few. Spending public funds for the privileged to afford elitist educations is decidedly against real American values.



24.   Do you support or oppose gay marriage? And should the federal government maintain or repeal the Defense of Marriage Act? Of course I support the rights of US citizens and properly documented foreign nationals to enjoy their full rights including marriage and in the case of the LGBT community, adoption rights as well. DOMA was a theocratic lie foisted upon us by the religious right and needs to be removed.



25.   Where do you stand on abortion and women’s access to reproductive services? I uphold the original determination that until a fetus is viable in its third trimester, it is essentially a growth within the woman’s body, not a separate person, and thus a matter of her personal choice to extend, or abort, her pregnancy. The move to shift personhood to the point of conception is ENTIRELY the result of a religious agenda and since this issue has become a religious one and I call for protection of religious freedoms. I further see abortion as a distinct separate type of reproductive contraception services that are more commonly used and see it as a terrible wrong to conflate the issues the way the right are doing. I take the right’s recent efforts to reverse one hundred years of family planning progress as a sign of their vision of the future, a return to the past of the gilded age where the rich were all powerful and citizens were at the mercy of the corrupt. I call for immediate rejection of ANY candidate who wishes to destroy women’s freedoms by chaining them to their unprotected ovaries and question the agendas of those who wish to constrict women’s access to reproductive services.




Saturday, June 23, 2012

Statement on Obama's Executive Orders on Immigration

I was recently asked by Joanna Dodder of the Prescott Daily Courier to make a statement regarding Obama's directive that immigration enforcement should not make long established residents who were brought here as children high priority targets when it comes to enforcement and deportation.

I think it is a great step forward, not far enough, but at least forward. That's the short version. Here is my official position:

Well, as has been demonstrated repeatedly during the course of the presidency, executive power is various and mighty, look at the assorted uses Obama's predecessor, Mr. Bush, exercised. Consider his unchecked assault on and abrogation of the Legislature's authority through signing statements. I feel I need to start there to derail the strident calls of imperial presidency that have kicked up. As the liberals warned at the time, Bush's redefinition of executive power set precedent for all future presidents to more fully exert their will. Obama's actions are totally in line with Bush's actions and actually executive orders regarding immigration occurred during Bush's watch and Reagan's, famously, which led to major changes in direction on the issue. Remember GOP idol Reagan instituted a major immigrant amnesty program as a compassionate, practical approach to a seismically large issue. So his actions are hardly the outrage the Right aims to claim.

That said, I hold that existing immigration law is in grievous error and results in untold misery for countless undocumented economic refugees. I call for a program to accelerate the naturalization of all immigrants already in the US and a streamlining of the immigration process to aid new refugees through the immigration process at existing established border checkpoints to eliminate alien trafficking entirely. As i wrote in 2007, if you want to end illegal immigration, make immigration legal.


Like the Affordable Health Care Act was a great step forward, though not my ultimate goal of universal health care, Obama's recent immigration actions make good sense as a stop gap measure. The agency is swamped as it is and this causes thousands of deportees to face extended stays in private prisons which increase their misery and extend our national expense on a wrong-headed policy. People who are already well established in our society and by and large contributing members of our American culture should not be a priority for arrest and detention when it comes to immigration enforcement. Of course not.

As with other forms of law enforcement, the focus should be the criminal enterprises that exploit the undocumented economic refugees in the first place and aid American businesses in perpetuating the exploitation of a secret underclass of borderline slave labor. So, yeah, go Obama, go Obama. If it is a political ploy, then it's a good one and small step toward creating a more humane attitude regarding the lives of immigrants. In a nation of immigrants that has transformed the world's tired and poor huddled masses into a mighty people, it is our duty to make sure all Americans and would Americans have the right to breathe free.


Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Press Advisory: Weisser -Gould Grudge Match, Two Years in the Making, Takes Place Wednesday



Contact: Mikel Weisser, 928-234-5633, mikelweisser@gmail.com

Event: Bullhead City Chamber of Commerce Congressional Candidate Forum

Location: Bullhead Chamber of Commerce, 1251 Arizona 95 Bullhead City, AZ 86429 (928) 754-4121

Time: Wednesday June 20, 2012 12:00pm



This Wednesday, June 20th, when the Bullhead City Chamber of Commerce hosts their District Four Congressional Candidate forum, Democratic hopeful Mikel Weisser will complete a quest that has been two years in the making: to ask Ron Gould a question.  “That’s right, back in 2010, Ron Gould told me, a private citizen, one of his constituents, in fact, that he was not going to let me ask him questions unless I was actually running against him. Well, it took two years but here I am, “Weisser laughs.

Mikel Weisser, a school teacher, poet, political humorist and activist, launched his run for the Democratic nomination for US House in January and qualified by May to be on the ballot as a nominee for the brand new Arizona Congressional District Four, a rural western AZ district that represents the majority of seven counties and covers more land area than the state of Illinois. Mohave and Yavapai Counties make up the majority of the population in the district, highlighting the fact that Mohave County has grown to become the fourth most populous in the state. All three of the candidates,

In 2010 Weisser’s wife, Beth Weisser, was Gould’s opponent when he ran for reelection as the state senator for the former LD3 state legislative district. Mikel served as his wife’s right hand man and helped coordinate many aspects of his wife’s “Clean Elections” state funded campaign. “That is where I got the idea that I knew enough about the process to launch my own campaign this round.” Beth Weisser is again running for the newly renamed LD5 state senate slot. Gould, on the other hand, has “termed out” of his spot in the state senate and aiming to use his record and name recognition to advance him to the new Congressional spot. Depending on Gosar’s popularity in a district that is largely not his territory, Gould is likely to be Mikel Weisser’s opponent in the general election come November, a rivalry Weisser jokingly suggests began at a candidate forum in Fort Mohave in the fall of 2010.

“I went along with Beth to listen in and take notes. To me, Ron Gould was spouting this egregious line of lies and distortions and I was taking notes, filling up my notebook,” Weisser chuckles at a story he has told many times to listeners on both sides of the aisle. “When the Q&A came around, I stuck my hand up all insistent, like the most annoying kid in class, and just kept it up there while Gould ignored me. Till he finally said, and I quote, ‘I am not going to take your question. You’re the candidate’s spouse. If you want to question me, you do it like a man, put your name on the dotted line and run against me.” At the time Weisser did not intend to take Gould up on the challenge; until the January Democratic State Party meeting when the party’s central committee intended to let the race go unopposed, having found no candidate to announce for CD-04, a sprawling seven country Congressional district, Weisser lovingly calls the ‘Left Coast of Arizona.” “I wasn’t sure it was right for me at first, but when I realized it was Ron Gould I’d be running against I had to do it. I hadn’t been telling that story for two years for nothing!”

Wednesday’s candidate forum in Bullhead City will be held on the shores of that very “coastline,” the state’s western border, when the candidates meet in Bullhead City’s riverside Chamber of Commerce auditorium on the banks of the Colorado River. Weisser lived in Bullhead City for several years and taught junior high social studies there for ten. In addition to the long awaited Weisser-Gould face-off, the candidate forum will also include Rick Murphy, a local candidate for the GOP nomination in the upcoming Aug. 28th primary. Murphy, a longtime Bullhead City media/nightclub/fitness center mogul, is currently lagging behind Ron Gould and US Rep. Paul Gosar in the race for the Republican primary. Weisser is facing latecomer Johnnie Robinson from Pinal County, who is yet to mount a visible campaign and will not be attending.  Since launching his campaign, Weisser has repeatedly reached out to Gould, offering the senator a chance to help fund the campaign he helped launch, sort of. So far the two had not crossed paths since election season began though Weisser tried to visit while in Lake Havasu (Gould’s home) for Presidents’ Day events, had discussed debate terms with Gould’s campaign staff by phone and even barely missed Gould when the two both appeared at the Chloride Heritage Days celebration earlier this month. As for that question Weisser has been waiting so long to ask? “Oh, I forgot that. I guess I could look it up, but I’ll come up with something.” Weisser grins.

The candidate forum is scheduled to start at twelve noon at the Bullhead City Chamber of Commerce, Wednesday June 20. The forecast that day is 113 in the shade, but it will be hotter in the air conditioned offices of the Chamber of Commerce when these two candidates meet at last. The forum is open to the public but seating is limited. The Chamber is in Community Park, 1251 Arizona 95 Bullhead City, AZ 86429. Call the Bullhead Chamber of Commerce (928) 754-4121 for further details about the candidate forum. For more information about the Weisser campaign, see below.

###

Mikel Weisser for US Congress



Mikel Weisser

4490 Sundown Drive

So-Hi, AZ 86413

928-234-5633






Democracy for America:


99% Declaration:


Act Blue:




Campaign Updates:

(6/5/12):


(5/6/12):


Phone-in Talk Show Guest Appearance:




Interviews:





Video:




Political Humor Archive:


On My Opponent, Paul Gosar:


Positions:


Rebuttals:


LGBT Issues:


Immigration:


Tea Party Rebuttal:




Spoken Word (profile):


Spoken Word (performances)




Coverage:










paid for by mikel weisser for us congress




Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Press Advisory: Medical Card Carrying Congressional Candidate Mikel Weisser to Address AZ NORML

Press Advisory: Medical Card Carrying Congressional Candidate Mikel Weisser to Address AZ NORML


Contact: Mikel Weisser, 928-234-5633, mikelweisser@gmail.com

Event:

Congressional Candidate Mikel Weisser Addresses AZ NORML

Wed. June 13, 7pm.

 Caballero Grill

1800 North Litchfield Road Goodyear, AZ 85395

For event details contact: Jeni Pfister, NORML Arizona, 509-531-8544



Outspoken reform candidate for US House of Representatives (AZ-CD-04), Mikel Weisser, added another issue to his  campaign’s laundry list of grievances his when he applied for and received an Arizona Medical Marijuana Card to treat chronic pain from a long time back injury.  “I knew with my back I could get one any old time, but I had to decide if it was an issue I was really ready to take on. Remember, a person’s life is not a stunt, no matter what your opinion of their actions.  I was diagnosed with chronic pain due to a poorly healed back, shoulder, and knee injuries. I have had repeated treatment for the back since I was first injured in 1976 during in high school marching band practice. The other two injuries are more recent, but decidedly limiting. I've visited regular doctors, specialists, physical therapists and a chiropractor over the years for the back. It was a major decision to get the medical card, but having one is the only way I can truly speak out on the issue.” Weisser revealed the news last week in a fiery speech he delivered to the monthly PHX NORML (National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws) meeting.

“Our country is headed right off of a cliff and it is being driven by the people who sell the public the war on drugs, Wall Street Bailout, WMDs and Rick Santorum and they are wrong on every count. My day job is teaching kids American history and to love our country. Sooner or later we get around to discussing Prohibition. This prohibition is just like that one. Prohibitions create three things: outlaws, criminals, and prisons and those last two are the folks who make money off of the prohibition. Average citizens become outlaws when they are taught to fear and disrespect their government because of this unjust law. The cannabis prohibition inflicted on the American people for these last 75 years has been incredibly destructive to our country and it’s time to move into the 21st Century,” Weisser roared to the full house assembled at the downtown PHX art spot, The Firehouse.

In PHX for a Glendale poetry performance and an ASU/Flinn Foundation bioscience symposium for legislative and Congressional candidates, Weisser attended the monthly meeting of PHX NORML at the request of leading cannabis reform advocate/former Green Party Congressional candidate Thane Eichenhauer. “This is a huge issue, but it is NOT the only thing. It’s just one thing, the list’s a mile long. I worried about the injustice of the wars going on. The US military is like 1% of the population, three million people, so I thought, better take action on that. But then i thought about the exploited undocumented immigrants in the country and they're like eleven million, and that’s really big so I better take action on that. But tell me how many people suffer injustices every day because of this unjust law? How will we fix that? I don't know; but I am trying to find out."

In the audience the night Weisser spoke to the PHX chapter, Jeni Pfister from the state chapter office of NORML, was quick to contact the Weisser campaign to offer the invite. “It's inspirational to hear people fighting for our beliefs!” NORML, a nationally recognized non-profit 501 c3, works to promote knowledge of “the benefits of medical cannabis, the safety of recreational use and value of industrial hemp.” Founded in 1970 on a grant from the Playboy Foundation, the organization now boasts 135 chapters and over 550 lawyers. In Arizona, in addition to a state wide association there are also local chapters in Flagstaff and Tucson in addition to the Phoenix group. As a 501c3, NORML cannot offer Weisser an endorsement or direct support, but Weisser expects to receive plenty of support from individual members

Recent statistics show as many as 800,000 people a year are arrested on marijuana charges and more than half of all criminal charges are drug related. In a short speech and extended Q&A session, Weisser encouraged the crowd to take their own actions to challenge for drug law reform and other progressive issues. “The Right have been wrong in so many ways. Fiscally, in foreign relations and most of all socially, the decisions made in the name of ‘conservative values’ have been a poison on our nation. I have known for much of my life that the drug laws were wrong and causing immense misery, but like so many people I was afraid to address the issue because I didn’t want to be stigmatized. But I think America is ready for a shift. I heard in 2010 more people voted for medical marijuana that voted for Jan Brewer.” In 2010, Weisser’s wife, Beth Weisser included support for Prop 203 in her state senate campaign and debated Ron Gould over it at repeated public forums. Currently Beth Weisser is again running for the state senate seat for western AZ, now known as AZ-LD-05.

Before bringing the issue to the public, Mikel Weisser contacted several party members and close advisers about best ways to discuss his new card and the issues it creates.  While Arizona is one of the seventeen states that now provide patients access to medical marijuana, federal law still holds the substance as illegal. As a candidate for US House, Weisser will directly be able to challenge and possibly revise US law, should he win election. “I generally try to get people to talk about the now and not the ‘what if.’ I was only interested in championing this issue if I felt I could make enough of a difference now no matter what and I think we have a strategy to address that.” So far, prior to receiving the card, Weisser has received wide-spread support in various Democratic audiences for taking a stand on an issue that is still for many a 3rd rail in American politics. “It is yet another example of why the Right have been wrong about our country and why they need to be stopped. The failed US drug war has failed because it is a war on America itself. Wars, education, Wall Street, they’re wrong. They’re wrong about LGBT rights, wrong on immigration and they’re wrong about weed and now is the time to tell them.”

###

Mikel Weisser for US Congress



Mikel Weisser

4490 Sundown Drive

So-Hi, AZ 86413

928-234-5633






Democracy for America:


99% Declaration:


Act Blue:




Campaign Updates:

(6/5/12):


(5/6/12):


Phone-in Talk Show Guest Appearance:




Interviews:





Video:




Political Humor Archive:


On My Opponent, Paul Gosar:


Positions:


Rebuttals:


LGBT Issues:


Immigration:


Tea Party Rebuttal:




Spoken Word (profile):


Spoken Word (performances)




Coverage:









paid for by mikel weisser for us congress