I’m Dr. Chris Magiera from Warsaw, Indiana, and I’m running for the United States House of Representatives from the third congressional district of Indiana.

Out on the campaign trail, I’m frequently asked many questions, and one concern I hear from the people is about cannabis or marijuana laws. Well, as a follower of the Constitution, I would like to run through this from a constitutional standpoint to give you an idea of the complexity of the situation—and the Constitution’s solution.

Upholding the Constitution is always the best solution. If elected to the United States House of Representatives in the 2020 election, I “shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution.” This statement is from Article 6, Section 3 of that document.

No federal law can be accepted as the supreme law of the land, unless it derives its justification from the enumerated powers of Congress, most notably as specified in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. Also, as clearly stated in Article 1, Section 1: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” This sentence is absolute. Neither the executive nor the judicial branches are capable of legislative action. This prohibition also carries over to the departments of the executive branch.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1: “The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts, and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3: “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.”

Amendment 10: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Considering the above Constitutional clauses, it would fall under the enumerated powers of Congress to regulate the importation and exportation of a plant, crop, or commodity such as cannabis and its derived products.

Also, it would fall under the enumerated powers of Congress to establish uniform duties, imposts, and excises on the cannabis plant and its byproducts.

The Constitution provides no justification for Congress to regulate domestic agriculture, medications, or medical care. There is no constitutional justification for a Department of Agriculture, a domestic DEA, FDA, HHS, and tens if not hundreds of other executive branch departments, agencies, commissions, boards, and bureaus. 

Powers not specifically enumerated to the federal government by the Constitution devolve to the States or to the people. It was well established in the writings of the Founders that such unconstitutional acts were to be considered simply null and void. However, Article 1, Section 8, Clauses 12,13, and 14 DO specify military-related items: “(12) To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; (13) To provide and maintain a Navy; (14) To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces.” Federal government involvement in veteran affairs would be justified by these clauses. 

Assuming that is the case, and if it was to be the action of Congress to specify regulation of medications for veterans and active-duty military personnel, and if current FDA/DEA/CSA drug schedules were to be adopted in such legislation, and if such acts were to be signed into law by the president, then I would support moving marijuana, marijuana extract, and the still specified Schedule 1 THC compounds from Schedule 1 to Schedule 2. This move would be solely for the purpose of promoting research into the efficacy of the various chemical constituents found in the Cannabis species. 

However, as a practitioner of modern medicine and an advocate of the scientific method, I do not support the consumption of raw cannabis as a medicine any more than I would advocate the chewing of digitalis leaves instead of standardized and refined digoxin, or the injection of Gila monster venom rather than the derived diabetic control products Byetta, Victoza, or Bydureon. 

Our veterans deserve the best medical services available, and this care should be the result of rigorous research and development and controlled clinical trials. If, after exhaustive research, it was to be concluded that a standardized raw botanical preparation of cannabis was to be more effective as a treatment for specified medical conditions than any refined or synthetic chemical compound or mixture of compounds, then I could support the use of such a raw botanical preparation to be used as a scheduled item for medical treatment in the military and veteran situation, until such time as continued research and development proves otherwise. Regarding the rules for military conduct and justice, intoxication, impairment, or addiction from cannabis products should be treated in the same manner as any other intoxication, impairment, or addiction.  

Moving back to the general population, does this mean that the several states cannot cooperate? No, it does not. Look to Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3: “No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.” 

There exist today interstate compacts, such as the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact, to facilitate commerce and regulation, so that each state does not have to “reinvent the wheel,” and states with common goals can choose to cooperate for their collective benefit.

It is within the above context that I place the situation of cannabis and its byproducts—raw, refined, or synthetic.

If elected to the United States House of Representatives, my primary duty will always be to uphold the Constitution. I do not hold positions simply because they are easy, convenient, or popular.

The post Dr. Chris Magiera – Cannabis appeared first on Dr. Chris Magiera.

Hello. I’m Dr. Chris Magiera, a candidate for the United States House of Representatives from the 3rd Congressional District of Indiana.

Every day, our God-given natural rights and liberties are being infringed by the massive administrative state. In the case of medicine, there also seems to be a collusion between the medical industrial complex and the administrative state. Considering the vast amounts of money involved, and the seemingly relentless campaign of disinformation and secrecy, it is very easy to see how rumors, confusion, and conspiracy theories can develop.

Nowhere is this more evident than with the subject of vaccinations for disease prevention. Literally, every time I speak to a group of people on the campaign trail, someone inevitably brings up the subject of vaccination. I hear things like, “There ought to be a law,” or “Congress must take action.” In response to these concerns, I always reply that there IS a Constitution solution.

Concern about the safety and efficacy of vaccines began following the first vaccination, when Dr. Edward Jenner showed that inoculation from cow blisters could protect children from smallpox. The anti-vaccination movement has intensified with time. People object to vaccination on many grounds: religious, personal, scientific, and moral.

Was the vaccine manufactured using cell clones from aborted fetuses? Does the vaccine integrate with human DNA? Is the vaccine effective? Is the vaccine associated with a wide variety of side effects? Why are some vaccines mandatory? 

Vaccination is held as one of the top 10 achievements of Public Health in the 20th century. As a physician, I can tell you that there are many diseases that you do not want to have that can be prevented by vaccination. I have seen old hospital wards full of iron lung machines that were used to support people crippled by poliovirus. Believe me, you do not want to contract polio. 

Vaccines work, but each individual is different. Each individual needs to be informed about the efficacy, risks, benefits, and alternatives in order to formulate a vaccination plan for themselves and their families. Should vaccines be given all at once? Should they be given separately? Over what period of time? These are questions that each person needs to have answered. 

I would advise you to interact with your primary physician. A very useful source for accurate and unbiased information can be found online at the website of the College of Physicians of Philadelphia. They have a separate web page called Historyofvaccines.org.

Allow me to move right to the point. Nowhere in the Constitution can it be found that Congress, or the federal government, has the power to regulate any medicine or medical procedure. By virtue of the 10th Amendment, these powers are reserved to the states. That is part of my Constitution solution, to transfer these powers to the individual states, so that there can be more accountability to the people.

Refusal of vaccines in certain circumstances can present problems because of the continued reservoir of infection. There are very vulnerable members of our society who could suffer severe consequences, even death, if infected by one of these preventable diseases. That is something each person must consider when evaluating their role as an individual, and as a member of a larger society. 

As always, the Supreme Court has been involved in these issues. In 1905, there was a case called Jacobson v. Massachusetts, where Mr. Jacobson refused to be vaccinated for smallpox, and the state fined him and put him in jail. The Supreme Court gave an opinion in favor of the state of Massachusetts. The court found that the “Liberty secured by the Constitution of the United States does not import an absolute right in each person to be at all times, and in all circumstances, only freed from restraint, nor is it an element in such Liberty that one person, or a minority of persons residing in any community and enjoying the benefits of its local government, should have the power to dominate the majority when supported in their action by the authority of the state. It is within the police power of a state to enact a compulsory vaccination law and it is for the legislature, and not the courts to determine in the first instance whether vaccination is or is not the best mode for prevention of smallpox and the protection of Public Health.” 

This Supreme Court precedent has not been overturned. However, I would make a comment that, when it comes to reproductive freedoms, the court has viewed liberty interest in bodily integrity as fundamental. Is this judicial hypocrisy and inconsistency? Is there a congressional remedy? 

In summary, the subject of vaccination in general, and compulsory vaccination in particular, is a very volatile subject. It may not have an easy resolution. However, I maintain that there is a Constitution solution, and these issues do not fall under the purview of the federal government.

If elected to Congress in 2020, I pledge to follow the Constitution 100%, in order to secure your God-given natural rights and liberties, which include life, liberty, property, defense of these, and religious freedom expression. Career politicians are unlikely to intervene with the massive collusion of the medical industrial complex and the administrative state. I will. Vote for change. Vote for Liberty. Vote for Dr. Chris Magiera for Congress in 2020.

The post Dr. Chris Magiera – Vaccinations appeared first on Dr. Chris Magiera.