Pompo

Medical marijuana and the federal government
2/20/08|The Willits News| by Linda Williams/TWN Staff Writer

It remains unclear why the U.S. Food and Drug Administration continues to classify marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug, the most dangerous classification available along with heroin, PCP (angel dust) and LSD, while in 1998 classifying Marinol, a synthetic THC (the main psychoactive ingredient in marijuana), as a Schedule 3 drug. This despite polls showing most Americans would support reclassification.

Even a reclassification of marijuana to a Schedule 2 category such as cocaine and coca leaves, raw opium and poppy straw, morphine and methamphetamines, would allow physicians to prescribe it for medical patients and pharmacies to dispense it.

In 1996, when California led 12 other states in passing medical marijuana protection, the language in Proposition 215 encouraged the federal and state governments to work together to resolve any conflicts. Many who voted for Prop. 215 assumed it would take little time before doctors could legally prescribe marijuana and patients could pick it up at their local pharmacy.

More than 11 years later, the situation remains conflicted between state, federal and even local laws, which has encouraged an entire new class of lawless "bootleggers" to supply medical marijuana needs, reminiscent to many of the time of Prohibition (1920-1933) when drinking alcohol was illegal in the United States.

Prohibition brought with it the rise of organized crime to supply the illegal market and "speakeasies" with bootleg alcohol. At the time, the cost to enforce Prohibition was high, no tax revenues were received on the illegal hooch and a highly profitable and violent black market system supplied alcohol to nearly every corner of the nation. Some of the alcohol was made locally and some imported illegally from Canada and Mexico. The parallel between the current marijuana culture in Mendocino County and the Prohibition years is striking.
The continued classification of marijuana by the federal government with such serious drugs as heroin and PCP appears to contradict the government's own research. If the Food and Drug Administration had reclassified marijuana sometime since 1996, much of the conflict between state and federal laws associated with medical marijuana would have been resolved. Doctors prescribe Schedule II drugs and pharmacies fill those prescriptions every day throughout the country. Unauthorized use and sale of Schedule II drugs are still illegal but the rules provide a way for doctors legally to prescribe them to patients.

Much of the literature associated with keeping marijuana as a Schedule I drug centers around its addictive qualities, this despite substantial research that has debunked this. It has also been dubbed the "gateway drug" despite the federal governments own research to the contrary. Even the Office of National Drug Control Policy states "smoking marijuana may allow patients to temporarily feel better." Most Schedule 2 drugs are also addictive and many have serious side effects.

There are two ways for a drug to be reclassified, the FDA can do it administratively or Congress can act. The administration of the FDA under both presidents Bill Clinton and George Bush have consistently refused to consider the reclassification in large part because it is a plant and not a formulated drug with full scale testing sponsored by a pharmaceutical drug company. "The federal government along with many state governments and private antidrug organizations staunchly maintains that botanical marijuana is a dangerous drug without any legitimate medical use," according to a 2006 congressional policy assessment.

Bills have been defeated during the past five Congressional terms, which would have either reclassified marijuana or prevented the U.S. Department of Justice from prosecuting medical marijuana users, cultivators or distributors.

"Rescheduling seems to be supported by public opinion. A nationwide Gallup Poll conducted in March 1999 found that 73 percent of American adults favor "making marijuana legally available for doctors to prescribe in order to reduce pain and
suffering." An American Association of Retired Persons poll of American adults age 45 and older conducted in mid-November 2004 found 72 percent agree that adults "should be allowed to legally use marijuana for medical purposes if recommended by a physician."

Who me?

Exactly. Forget about the holy grail, work for steps. Having it reclassified would take away the whole reality of federal raids in medical marijuana states. I wonder what our presidential candidate's views are on this topic?
Anybody know where a handy list of those voting to defeat them would be? I'm partial to not re electing any incumbent though.
Wow. We're pretty apathetic as a nation then, aren't we.

Buzzby

Unlike marijuana prohibition, alcohol prohibition never made it illegal to consume or possess alcohol. Alcohol prohibition was against selling the drug and (also unlike marijuana prohibition) exemptions were made for medical and liturgical uses. Some people filled up their basements with booze before prohibition went into effect, knowing that such hoarding was not illegal.

You can find out on this site's political forums. Clinton and Obama have both stated that they will stop DEA interference with medical marijuana in states where it's legal. On the Republican side, Ron Paul wants to get rid of all drug laws. Other than that, go to church and stop smoking that demon weed.

No. We have many things we're looking for in political candidates and easing marijuana laws is way down the list for most voters. Marijuana users constitute only 8% of this nations citizens and even they don't seem to be that interested in getting it legalized. Fewer than 0.25% of the estimated number of cannabis consumers in this country have even bothered to join and contribute to one of the three major organization working for legalization. Potheads are pretty apathetic as a "nation". If each of us put $25 towards legalization efforts, the movement would have $600,000,000 a year to spend. Currently, it has around $18 million, and half of that comes from a few billionaire supporters.

National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML)

Marijuana Policy Project (MPP)

Drug Policy Alliance (DPA)

__________________

Who me?

All federal drug laws. I don't think he would have a problem with the state being as obstinate as the feds when it came to state law.
I would disagree.
As it should be. But the very act of moving it down the list is apathy, isn't it?

Personally, if you are all fired up over health care, this should be a pretty close companion to it. But that's just me.
While I agree with all this, doesn't change the fact that to my mind, if 73% of americans think it should be legally medicinally, then (and yes I am being very general) 73% or so of the states should have that sucker passed. I'm glad we seem to be voting every voting year for more states to join, I just wish it was happening faster.

Been waiting a long time for the day the majority have some kind of medicinal marijuana (hopefully as good as Colorado's or better).

Buzzby

I wouldn't say so. It's a matter of voters weighing their self-interest and putting the things that most affect their lives first. If you aren't a cannabis consumer, if medical marijuana isn't vital to your life or that of anyone you know, if you are uncertain that medical marijuana is not just a scam, and a candidate promises things you want but is against medical marijuana, why not support him?

Concern over health care is generally about being able to afford health insurance. Medical marijuana is hardly even on the radar. A huge majority favor medical marijuana, but, unless they need it or their families need it, they're not going to choose their representatives on that basis.