What we have to look forward to


Everyone knows Amendment 3, legalizing marijuana in Missouri, was approved last week in the mid-term election. Just over 53 percent of Missourians voted yes, giving the marijuana cartel a victory.

Why do we allow a simple majority to change our state constitution? Changing the U.S. Constitution takes a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Then it has to be ratified by three-fourths of the States (38 of 50 States). Another option is a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures. 

In my humble opinion changing our state constitution is too easy. 

Out of the 114 counties in the state, only 14, plus St. Louis and Kansas City, approved the change in our constitution.

Barton County — in the southwest corner of the state — deserves accolades. They rejected this amendment by over 71 percent. Voters in 14 counties rebuffed Amendment 3 by 65 percent or more. Gasconade, Maries and Osage voters should be proud. We were three of those rural counties. 

In comparison, our new state senator, Eric Schmitt, won with 55.4 percent of the vote in the state and an average of 79 percent in our three counties. 

Missouri was not the only state to vote on drug use this election cycle.

The marijuana lobby also succeeded in Maryland but failed in three other states — Arkansas, North Dakota and South Dakota.

Apparently, marijuana is not good enough for Colorado anymore. Last week voters in the Centennial State approved legislation to decriminalize psychedelic mushrooms — a Schedule 1 drug under the Controlled Substances Act.

A Schedule 1 drug has a high potential for misuse and has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.

Critics of this legislation in Colorado blame the same deep-pocket commercial interests behind the legalization of marijuana in that state with this new expansion into psychedelic mushrooms.

 Give it ten years. That is what we have to look forward to in Missouri.

Heroin is next on the list that Democrats want to legalize. The Cato Institute has been calling for the legalization of heroin for more than a year.

Carl Hart, a psychology professor at Columbia University, is calling for the legalization of heroin. In his book “Drug Use for Grown Ups,” Hart says,“My heroin use is as recreational as my alcohol use. Like vacation, sex, and the arts, heroin is one of the tools that I use to maintain my work-life balance.”

Why not stop there?

Democrats in the state of Washington introduced Senate Bill 5476 in 2021, which would legalize the possession of meth, oxycodone, heroin, cocaine and acid.

Democrat State Reps Cori Bush, Mo. and Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey agree. Last year they introduced The Drug Policy Reform Act in the House of Representatives to decriminalize all drug possession in the U.S.

Is this what rural Democrats want?

Perhaps the most shocking outcome from last week’s election came from the red state of Montana, where residents voted ‘No’ on a measure to protect babies after they’re born alive.

The Republican-backed referendum would have ensured medical care for babies delivered alive at any point in pregnancy. The measure would have declared a living child after birth as a “legal person” and hold any health care worker that doesn’t provide medical care criminally liable.

Defense attorney and conservative commentator Marina Medvin tweeted, “Police are required to give medical care to homicidal maniacs who shoot at them. Society demands that convicted serial killers be given medical care and food in prison. But Montana says that innocent babies should not be given milk or medical care. This doesn’t compute.”

Republican state representative Matt Regier, according to Kaiser Health News, said the bill was intended “to protect infants who have survived abortions from being denied medical care and being left to die.”

The March for Life Twitter account lamented the vote, tweeting, “Abortion has wounded our nation so deeply that we are refusing to ensure proper medical care for newborn infants.”

How would you have voted?



No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here