Holder Vows To End Raids On Medical Marijuana Clubs


First Posted: 02-26-09 09:53 AM   |   Updated: 03-29-09 05:12 AM

What's Your Reaction?
Pot

Attorney General Eric Holder said at a press conference Wednesday that the Justice Department will no longer raid medical marijuana clubs that are established legally under state law. His declaration is a fulfillment of a campaign promise by President Barack Obama, and marks a major shift from the previous administration.

After the inauguration, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) continued to carry out such raids, despite Obama's promise. Holder was asked if those raids represented American policy going forward.

"No," he said. "What the president said during the campaign, you'll be surprised to know, will be consistent with what we'll be doing in law enforcement. He was my boss during the campaign. He is formally and technically and by law my boss now. What he said during the campaign is now American policy."

The exchange takes place at about the 25:00 mark here.

Holder's declaration is a high point for the movement to legalize medical marijuana, which has been growing for decades despite federal hostility.

"It's good news for people in California who are so ill that they have gotten a doctor's note in compliance with the law," said Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) when told of Holder's promise. "If you have a doctor's note, you should be able to get whatever medicine you need."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) was not as quick with approval. "I've got to think about that a little bit," she said. Feinstein was mayor of San Francisco when in the '70s and '80s when the issue was first being debated.

In 2007, for a book on drug culture and drug trends, This Is Your Country On Drugs, that will be released in June, I toured a number of the medical marijuana dispensaries in question and interviewed their owners and customers. This is what I found, excerpted from the book:

* * * * *

A first-time visitor to Harborside Health Center might have a hard time believing he's about to enter "an extraordinary environment of medical care, honesty, and friendliness," as the place describes itself online. Situated in a nondescript warehouse just off the freeway in Oakland, California, it's labeled only with the giant digits of its street number, 1840. Two security guards in blue are posted outside, and the facility is also equipped with motion detectors, video and audio surveillance, and laser alarms. The guards are, in fact, extraordinarily friendly, offering professional smiles to those who approach. But they're not exactly welcoming, and for good reason: at Harborside, no one gets in without a medical-cannabis card or a recommendation from a doctor.

I had come with a federal medical researcher who'd recently finished a long study of medical-cannabis clubs in the Bay Area and was able to vouch for me. But it's not exactly impossible to get a card or a recommendation. Ads in alt-weeklies throughout the state advertise doctors willing to give a consultation to anyone who has one of a seemingly endless list of symptoms and illnesses that might be treatable with medical marijuana. Take the ad for Aldridge Medical Care that runs in the LA Weekly and features a guy wearing a white coat with a stethoscope hanging around his neck. Walk-ins are accepted, the text states, as long as the patient suffers from "pain, migraines, cramps, anxiety, depression, ADHD, nausea, IBS, insomnia, etc."

Once you get the card, it's not much harder to find a shop. On the very same page of the Weekly, the Green Earth Pharmacy offers "Free Samples" to "first time patients with this ad." And for the consumer looking for choices, there's WeedTRACKER.com, which, yes, tracks the varieties of weed available at Harborside and similar centers, allowing patients to rate the quality of each establishment - a Better Business Bureau of sorts. ("[W]e carry over 50 different types of buds, plus all our edibles and concentrates. If we don't have what you are looking for, we probably have something you will like," Harborside promises.) If you're not an official medical-cannabis patient, WeedTRACKER suggests that you "click here"--which sends you directly to Google, a site almost as good at finding pot dispensaries.

We walked through Harborside's metal detector and waited for the two owners, a guy named David Wedding Dress and his partner, Steve DeAngelo. They opened the center in October 2006, on a day that three other clubs in the Bay Area were raided. "We had to decide in that moment whether or not we were really serious about this and whether we were willing to risk arrest for it," said DeAngelo. "And we decided we were gonna open our doors. And we did, and we haven't looked back since. The only way I'll stop doing what I'm doing is if they drag me away in chains. And as soon as they let me out, I'll be back doing it again." After less than a year, the shop was doing $1 million a month in revenue.

In the next room were a half-dozen glassed-over counters where Harborside personnel were describing the various strains of marijuana available to customers. Marijuana's major ingredient, tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, combines with more than thirty other active agents called cannabinoids. It's not clear how the interaction of THC and cannabinoids affects the user's experience, but THC taken by itself has an effect different from that of marijuana. Different varieties of the plant also have different effects. Cannabis sativa provides a speedy, uplifting high. ("Good for when you want to clean out your garage," said one sales rep.)

Cannabis indica, often recommended for pain relief, knocks you out stone-cold. Most of the pot on sale is a mix of the two, and a young woman behind one counter elaborately explained the benefits of each and whether it had been grown indoors, outdoors, in the shade, or in the open and when in its life cycle it was harvested. "Green Erkle is Purple Erkle picked before it turns purple," she offered. "It's a sativa-indica blend heavier on the sativa, with a nice fruity flavor to it."

For those without a green thumb, the shop offers classes on pot-growing, both indoor and outdoor. Would-be farmers who want a more professional-sounding degree can also enroll at nearby Oaksterdam University.

Story continues below

Continuing the tour, Wedding Dress pressed a finger to an electric scanner, opening the door to a back room. Three men sat in a waiting room with duffel bags full of marijuana. In the next room, two Harborside employees were sorting through the deliveries and negotiating prices with guys who could reasonably be called drug dealers.

* * * * *

Patriotic potheads love to point out that cannabis was grown at Jamestown, that George Washington might have used hashish, and that Thomas Jefferson wrote a draft of the Declaration of Independence on hemp-fiber paper. But recent history offers more compelling reasons that marijuana is a definitively American drug: since the 1930s, it has slotted neatly into the age-old debate over chemically induced pleasure versus chemically induced pain relief. Since the 1990s, it has been at the center of a conflict between states' rights and federal authority; it's considered by advocates and opponents alike to be the most likely of all controlled substances to change the terms of U.S. drug policy.

Of course, the medical-marijuana movement is hardly unprecedented in our national history. During prohibition, congressional hearings were held on "medical beer," a serious effort to get around the law. There has always been some legitimacy to the medical-use argument: alcohol and marijuana can both make people feel better. But there has always been some cynicism. In March 1921, under the scare-quoted headline "Brewers Jubilant Over 'Medical' Beer," the New York Times dryly noted that "one physician in Chicago wrote 7,000 prescriptions for liquor, none for less than a pint, in the course of a few weeks."

Medical marijuana clubs have come a long way since the August day in 1996 when Dennis Peron heard boots pounding up the stairs of his Cannabis Buyers Club in San Francisco's Castro district and thought he was being robbed. His club had been openly selling marijuana to the ill--and, allegedly, the non-ill--since at least 1991. That year, San Francisco voters passed Proposition P, which made enforcement of laws against medical marijuana the city police's lowest priority. Within days of Peron's arrest--which was made with a deliberate lack of assistance from local authorities--four more clubs had opened.

"Repression isn't used to that reaction," suggested DeAngelo. "Repression is used to bringing down the hammer and having a ripple effect. Instead, all they did with Peron was cut off the head, and now the four managers needed somewhere to go. So they started their own clubs."
A few months after Peron's arrest, the voters of California legalized medical marijuana with Proposition 215. The people who had opened the state's first shops quickly found themselves overwhelmed by demand. "The first dispensaries were started by activists, really well-intentioned people who didn't have any business experience, who didn't have any capital, who didn't know how to manage or run a business, who often didn't really know that much about the cannabis business because they were activists, not dealers," said DeAngelo, who proudly keeps detailed accounting records at Harborside. "There were so many patients flocking to them. They found themselves, without even trying to, in the middle of these very lucrative businesses bringing in millions of dollars a year."

In a pattern that would repeat itself in cities across the state, a second wave of entrepreneurs entered the fray. In San Francisco, pot clubs quickly outnumbered McDonald's franchises. Their owners had the same motivation as those of the Golden Arches: profit. Out went the idealism that had helped to police a business illegal on the federal level and quasi-legal on the local level. Though medical marijuana wasn't prohibited anymore, it wasn't regulated or licensed, either, with no central authority controlling zoning, licensing, or consumer protection. And despite the state law, some aggressive law-enforcement officials--including the far-right state attorney general Dan Lungren, who'd ordered the raid against Peron's club--still sought to prosecute dispensaries, citing federal law as justification.

"[The second wave of pot clubs] was started by people, unfortunately, who were more interested in those millions of dollars than they were attracted to doing service for the community or moving the medical-cannabis movement forward," said DeAngelo. "So [their clubs] were opened quickly, often in inappropriate locations. They weren't up to code. They were run by people that had shady backgrounds. And inevitably, problems started occurring. There were robberies, there were neighbors and nearby business that complained. Cars were double-parked. There were shootings. There were not good things happening," he said.

In Oakland in the late nineties, as in San Francisco a few years earlier, federal raids served only to increase the number of cannabis clubs. If a club owner was jailed and his place shuttered, his former staffers often kept themselves employed by opening new clubs. Soon, downtown Oakland was being referred to as "Oaksterdam," host to at least eight pot clubs and a culture of pot smoking. Even some cafes and bars began to allow patrons to smoke on their premises.
Jeff Jones, a longtime medical-marijuana activist, opened a pot club right around the corner from Oakland City Hall--with the full knowledge of those who worked in the building. He was one of those who, like Peron, jumped out ahead of the pack without any legal protection from the state. He told me that he opened his shop in July 1996, five months before the election. City politicians, he says, had been generally supportive but were unsure of what to do next. In March of that year, the city council had set up a task force to study the medical-pot issue and passed a resolution endorsing Jones's club. "'What do you want, another liquor store?'" Jones said he would ask cops and council members whenever they got squeamish.

Local politicos were certain that Prop 215 would fail and that he would then have to close his shop. Indeed, some were actively lobbying against the legislation. Senator Dianne Feinstein, who as mayor of San Francisco had opposed the movement, said that the proposed law was "riddled with loopholes so big that it would have the effect of legalizing marijuana."

She was partly right, but 56 percent of the state didn't care. "They were blown away when we won," Jones said of city officials. "'What do we do now, Jeff?'" Oakland politicians had company in their surprise: eleven days after California passed Prop 215 and Arizona approved its own medical-cannabis law, Clinton drug czar Barry McCaffrey convened a high-level meeting to formulate a response. The opposition had been caught flat-footed. California and Arizona, he vowed, would be the last two states to legalize medical marijuana.

McCaffrey summoned two of the initiative's most vocal opponents, Orange County sheriff Brad Gates and California Narcotic Officers' Association spokesman Tom Gorman, to D.C. to plot how to thwart implementation of the law. (At this same meeting, the participants conjured up the antipot advertising campaign that led to accusations of federally sponsored payola.) McCaffrey announced that the federal government would work hard against doctors and patients involved with medical marijuana, going after the licenses of physicians who recommended it. Doctors sued, arguing that the penalty violated their First Amendment rights, and won a landmark victory.

* * * * *

Since then, medical-cannabis centers have spread across the state of California, and they now represent the single greatest threat to current pot-prohibition policies. In 2003, the California legislature attempted to codify the new industry with the passage of a bill designated--seriously--SB 420. If the clubs remain successful--and, as Harborside's self-image has it, "professional"--they could fundamentally alter America's cultural relationship with drugs. The backers of prohibition know this, and they've dug in against medical marijuana, making it a major target of the drug war.

In McCaffrey's defense, there was little that he could have done to beat Prop 215. The movement had been gaining strength in response to another phenomenon that the federal government had initially ignored: the AIDS epidemic. "Once AIDS came on the scene, [the movement] exploded. That's what put us over the top," said Mykey Barbitta, who runs the Compassion Care Center, a descendant of the Cannabis Buyers Club located at the same spot on Market Street as Peron's clinic. "The medical-cannabis movement was a response to a need, HIV," agreed Randi Webster, founder of the San Francisco Patients Care Collective, who lost more than thirty friends in the early years of the AIDS epidemic. "It started as a treatment for patients with extreme bone disease."

Long before the Reagan administration was taking AIDS seriously, people suffering and dying from it spread the word that marijuana could ease nausea and increase appetite, both crucial to living with the disease. Some early AIDS patients turned to a little-known Food and Drug Administration pilot program that allowed those with legitimate medical need to get marijuana directly from the government. The program dated to 1976, when Washington, D.C. resident and glaucoma patient Robert Randall, using the medical-necessity argument, essentially forced the feds into growing pot on a farm in Mississippi. Today, a handful of surviving patients get a monthly canister containing three hundred prerolled joints.

The Compassionate Investigational New Drug program had very few initial participants. For one thing, marijuana was widely available, cheap, and of increasingly high quality. For another, the nation had a permissive attitude toward the drug, with even President Jimmy Carter calling for decriminalization. There was little incentive for a patient to apply, especially given a built-in disincentive: that your name would now be on a federal list associated with marijuana. That changed with HIV. As AIDS patients discovered pot's palliative effects, cancer patients took notice, too. In 1992, overwhelmed with applications, the feds closed the Investigational New Drug program to new members.

Two years before, the medical-marijuana movement had received a significant public-relations boost in the form of an elderly San Francisco General Hospital volunteer, Mary Jane Rathbun, who'd realized that marijuana eased the suffering of AIDS patients and allowed them to eat. Brownie Mary, as she became known, was arrested and charged with drug distribution for baking pot brownies and giving them to AIDS patients. Rathbun refused to take any plea bargain, demanding a jury trial and creating a media disaster for the district attorney. The charges were dropped, and Brownie Mary was free to help Peron open the Cannabis Buyers Club and advocate for Prop 215.

By the time that Prop 215 made the ballot, the medical-marijuana movement had some real money on its side. George Soros, an eccentric billionaire on a quest to spread freedom across the globe, had met Ethan Nadelman, a drug-policy wonk with an activist streak, in the early nineties. Soros offered to fund Nadelman's effort to reform drug policies and was soon bankrolling a large percentage of the Prop 215 campaign.

Soros's money made a difference, certainly, but without the grassroots movement behind it, the campaign couldn't have been won. By 1996, many Californians knew at least one cancer or AIDS patient who had benefited from using medical marijuana--either on the recommendation of a doctor or not. And if they didn't, they had probably heard of the charismatic septuagenarian who gave free brownies to the terminally ill. Recall that medical-cannabis clubs had opened in San Francisco even before they were legal by state standards, bolstered by the passing of 1991's citywide Proposition P, which urged that doctors "shall not be penalized for or restricted from prescribing hemp preparations for medical purposes." Some local officials, including City Supervisor Harvey Milk and Mayor George Moscone, had openly supported medical cannabis as early as the seventies. Milk's support of Peron even while he was in prison on a separate pot charge enraged the right-wing minority trying to hold back the wave. (In fact, conservative supervisor Dan White was apoplectic about Milk's defense of a convicted criminal, and there's plenty of reason to believe that it contributed to his decision to walk into City Hall in 1978 and assassinate him and Moscone. Moscone's acting mayoral replacement, Feinstein, immediately reversed Moscone and Milk's pro-medical-marijuana policy.) As the clubs began opening post-1996 throughout the Bay Area, as well as in other parts of the state, most cities decided to work with them, and the few Southern California towns that battled the clubs generally lost in court.

But the Clinton administration and California attorney general Lungren, a McCaffrey ally then considered a possible GOP vice presidential candidate, had more political firepower than officials in the conservative rural counties that opposed medical pot. On August 4, 1996, agents carried out the raid on Peron's club in the Castro, seizing computers, 40 pounds of marijuana, and medical records. Lungren, who is now a member of Congress, claimed that Peron had sold pot to an undercover agent for nonmedical reasons. According to Peron, the agent had claimed to be an AIDS patient intent on establishing a dispensary for other sufferers.

The attorney general's claim is noteworthy: Peron was selling to those other than medical patients. Prop 215 wouldn't be voted on for another few months, so at the time, it wasn't legal to sell pot to anyone. Public opinion, however, was such that Lungren knew that he couldn't take Peron down just for selling to patients.

That approach continued, up until Holder's announcement, at the federal level, with the DEAoften claiming that the cannabis-club owners whom it busts had been selling to people other than patients. In 1998, the feds filed suit against and closed down Jones's club, arguing not only that the dispensary had violated the Controlled Substances Act, but also that medical cannabis had not been declared safe by the FDA, making its distribution doubly illegal. The Oakland City Council responded, somewhat desperately, by declaring the club a city agency. The case eventually made it to the Supreme Court, where, in United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative, justices overturned the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and ruled that there's no medical-necessity defense in the war on drugs.

"It is clear from the text of the [Controlled Substances] Act that Congress has made a determination that marijuana has no medical benefits worthy of an exception," wrote Justice Clarence Thomas in the May 14, 2001, decision. "The statute expressly contemplates that many drugs 'have a useful and legitimate medical purpose and are necessary to maintain the health and general welfare of the American people,' but it includes no exception at all for any medical use of marijuana."

Having failed to strip the feds of the authority to raid medical-marijuana clubs, advocates have instead pleaded with them not to exercise it. It's working. In the middle of my interview with Harborside's owners, DeAngelo, looking at his desktop computer, threw his hands up and shouted, "Yes!" Hillary Clinton, campaigning for president in New Hampshire, had just told a video-camera-wielding marijuana-policy activist that, if elected, she would end federal raids on pot clubs in California. That meant that all three leading Democratic candidates--including the ultimate winner--had vowed as president to leave DeAngelo and Wedding Dress alone.

* * * * *

It hasn't been one long, smooth ride. In 2003, Oakland mayor Jerry Brown ordered an investigation of the city's cannabis clubs, hoping to clean them up before, as he had warned Jones, the feds did it for him. City Council president Ignacio De La Fuente went a step further, suggesting that Oakland needed only one medical-cannabis dispensary. The resulting regulation shut down all but a few of the shops and the whiff of pot smoke downtown subsided a bit. But the owners of the closed shops simply headed across the bridge to San Francisco, which was still a regulatory Wild West.

Soon enough, though, San Francisco was following Oakland's lead. In the spring of 2005, the city counted within its limits at least forty-three unregulated dispensaries, one of them in the same building as a center for drug and alcohol rehabilitation. Others were near schools, day-care centers, and other places that neighborhood folks justifiably tend to hold sacrosanct. In June of that year, the city council instituted a six-month moratorium that would allow it to write and review regulations covering the existing clinics. "The absence of laws has allowed adverse opportunities to emerge," Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, who proposed the ban, said at the time.

The dispensaries were also becoming difficult for the cops to countenance. "It's a huge scam," said Captain Rick Bruce of the San Francisco police, telling the New York Times that dealers were hiding behind the law. "We see guys coming out of these places, and the only description I can come up with is that it looks like a Cheech and Chong movie. They are what you would call your traditional potheads; whether they have a medical condition beyond that is subject to debate."

As municipalities struggled with the details of the reality of medical marijuana, they also joined with activists in the fight against federal intervention. By 2004, another nine states had passed medical-cannabis laws, and the debate in California began to take the turn that the feds feared most. At the time, I was working with the Marijuana Policy Project as a staffer assigned to state-level policy. The organization teamed up with activists in Oakland to help organize and fund the campaign for Measure Z, on behalf of which I did marginal paper-pushing, drafting messages to MPP membership and coordinating with folks on the ground.

Measure Z sought to make enforcement of marijuana laws--all laws, not just those relating to medical marijuana--the lowest priority of local law enforcement. In that ambition, it followed in the path of legislation by several other localities that had done the same. It went a significant step further, however, by declaring that the "City of Oakland shall establish a system to license, tax and regulate cannabis for adult use as soon as possible under California law."

It passed with 65 percent of the vote.

* * * * *

The same week that I toured Harborside, in the summer of 2007, the federal government sent letters to the landlords of about 150 Los Angeles-area dispensaries. The list would eventually expand to more than 300. The letters politely informed the recipients that their tenants were operating illegal drug-manufacturing and -distribution centers, and that if they didn't boot the renters out, the feds would seize their property. L.A. shop owners, recalled Jeff Jones, were petrified, telling him, "'The sky is falling! I have no protection!' Well, what did you think? You never had any protection."

Jones guessed that blatant advertising in alt-weeklies and pot-focused newspapers and on the Internet brought the federal response. Oakland, he said, had been shrewder. "The city hated advertising," he said. "They were fearful of it. They said, 'It's gonna bring the feds out.' They don't want it."

Today, it's much easier to find a pot club in Los Angeles than it is in the Bay Area. In 2007, when there were close to five hundred L.A. clubs, I pushed opened the door to one, prompting the tattooed owner to rush out from behind a Plexiglas wall: "Whoa, whoa! What are you doing?!" I told him I was a reporter covering the crackdown. Predictably, he consented to an interview only if I didn't identify him. "Some of these guys will sell to anybody. Kids, even," he said. "They're going after those kinds." He said that he, by contrast, checks all pot cards, doesn't sell to children, and provides only small amounts of marijuana to each customer. But ultimately, he conceded, he just prays.

Few, if any, medical-marijuana advocates saw the landlord move coming. Tactically, it was brilliant: Landlords, like most Californians, are generally sympathetic when it comes to medical marijuana. But how many are willing to lose property over it? Allison Margolin, a prominent Los Angeles pot lawyer--she calls herself "L.A.'s Dopest Attorney"--said that the landlord letters have led to a significant number of evictions and created a "culture of fear." "But there are still tons of clubs," she added. One club owner took his landlord to court to prevent the eviction and prevailed. His attorney hopes that if the feds now come after the club owner, he can argue that it was a selective prosecution and thus unconstitutional. "It's one of the better ideas I've heard," said Margolin. "I don't know if it'll work, but at least it's an idea."

In the meantime, pot clubs were becoming more and more legitimized in the Golden State. They're even becoming a significant source of above-board state revenue, which bodes well for not only such clubs' long-term survival locally, but also for their viability outside of California.

In the fall of 2006, California clarified to its cannabis dispensaries that they were, in fact, responsible for paying its 7.25 percent sales tax, and had been since 2005. (Depending on the jurisdiction, some clubs are also required to add on a bit for local and county taxes.) Some club owners, backed by ASA, had argued that, as quasi-pharmacies, their businesses were exempt, a line of reasoning dismissed by the state. Others, such as DeAngelo, initially opposed the tax but came to support it, arguing that the perennially underfunded state would get addicted to the tax dollars generated by its one thousand or so pot clubs--a number that will continue to climb absent any major federal intervention.

Harborside is charged an 8.75 percent tax. With revenue of around $1 million per month, its annual sales-tax bill comes in at something like $875,000 per year. And that's just one shop. Betty Yee, chairwoman of the State Board of Equalization, which oversees tax collection, told me that there's no way to break out exactly how much money the state is getting from pot clubs because it doesn't require them to state on their tax forms what product they sell. ("Regardless of legal status, anyone can get a seller's permit," she explained.) However, she did release the tax records of some clubs that had been raided by the federal government, noting that because they employed sizable numbers of people, they also paid state and federal income and payroll taxes. The Compassion Center, licensed by Alameda County, paid $3 million before being shuttered in October 2007 by the DEA. Nature's Medicinal, licensed by Kern Country, paid close to $1 million in 2007, which included $203,000 in state and federal income taxes, $365,000 in payroll taxes, and $427,000 in sales taxes. The Compassion Center employed and provided health benefits to fifty people; Nature's Medicinal twenty-five. (The demise of the latter wasn't universally deplored by the medical-pot community, however: It's alleged affinity for high-powered weaponry didn't jibe with the pacifist vibe the industry espouses.)

It's estimated that between 150,000 and 350,000 Californians have medical-marijuana cards. (There's no comprehensive state list, for obvious reasons.) A 1999 study by Australian economists Kenneth W. Clements and Mert Daryal found that a daily marijuana smoker consumes on average 18.57 ounces of pot annually. They found once-a-week-or-more smokers toke 13 ounces; once-a-monthers inhale 1.7 ounces. (The emphasis must be on the "or-more" in the former case, otherwise those folks were puffing a quarter ounce per sitting.) Let's assume, then, that out of about 200,000 medical-pot smokers, half are daily users. That number yields nearly 2 million ounces of pot. At $400 an ounce, we're talking about nearly $800 million worth of weed. At the lowest sales tax rate, 7.25, that's nearly $60 million. If there are 50,000 occasional smokers, they'd kick in another $20 million. The monthly smokers are worth another $3 million, for a total of more than $80 million. And that's just sales tax. In the case of Nature's Medicinal, sales tax made up 42 percent of total taxes paid, suggesting that the California pot industry would pay total taxes of about $200 million per year. Even if that estimate is wildly overblown, the state is unlikely to give up easily revenue anywhere near that amount: a special notice sent to clubs by the Board of Equalization assured sellers they "may decline to provide information on products sold due to concerns about self-incrimination."

A November 2006 report by the City of Oakland's Measure Z Oversight Committee came up with similar figures. It estimated that Californians consume between $870 million and $2 billion in medical marijuana per year, generating sales-tax revenue between $70 million and $120 million. In 2004, when Oakland's clubs were thriving, it took in, according to city records, $2.3 million in taxes on more than $26 million in revenue. As the feds swept through, that dropped, in 2006, to just $477,000 in taxes on $5.5 million in revenue. Two million dollars pulled from an annual city budget of about $900 million isn't exactly spare change.
NORML and ASA estimate that medical users make up about 10 percent of California's pot smokers. But given the laundry list of conditions that qualify someone as a legit patient, it's safe to assume that we're looking at a serious growth industry here. If the system eventually encompassed all of California's pot smokers, the tax revenue would be in the range of $2 billion. As the movement evolves into an industry, the feds will find it increasingly difficult to roll it back.

The pro-pot folks found out just what power entrenched industries can wield in 2008. Drug-policy reformers campaigned on behalf of a ballot initiative that would reduce marijuana-possession charges to small infractions and divert other drug offenders into treatment instead of prison. It had the backing of the California Nurses Association, California Society of Addiction Medicine and the California Academy of Family Physicians. But it had stronger opponents. The California State Sheriff's Association, the California Narcotics Officers Association, the California Peace Officers Association and the Police Chiefs of California, all lined up against it. In 2007, the state declared its overcrowded prison system to be in a state of emergency. But one prison-industry group didn't quite see the urgency. California's prison guards union spent some two million dollars fighting the proposition. It went down sixty to forty.

California's fiscal situation is becoming increasingly unstable, with towns, counties, and even the state teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. Maintaining the bursting prison system may be a luxury unaffordable in tough economic times. Extra tax revenue, too, is nice in good times. During bad times, it's an absolute necessity. And the nation is due for some bad times. "We're headed for the wall at lightning speed," former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill put it in December 2008, as the U.S. economy reeled. The movement to repeal Prohibition was given a major boost by the economic collapse of the late twenties and early thirties. Legalizing booze would create tax revenue and jobs, the argument went then. Today, as we head for the wall, opponents of the drug war make the same case, citing the billions in tax revenue and economic growth that could be generated by legalization.

* * * * *

The advent of the medical-marijuana industry is a crucial development in the medical-marijuana movement. But the industry's activist roots are what keep it from toppling under the weight of federal pressure. Marijuana might be good business, pro-cannabis do-gooders suggest, but it does actually help sick and dying people.

The San Francisco Patients Care Collective, founded in 1999, has a lineage stretching all the way back to Peron and Brownie Mary. It's an emphatically noncommercial venture, according to its owner, Randi Webster. "I want no mercantile terms associated with me. We don't 'buy' our supply; we 'get' it," she said, wearing a purple velvet dress, thick glasses, and a crown of pot leaves. "'Club' is like the N-word. We prefer 'facility.'"

A look around her facility confirmed that she's not profit-hungry: the clients all appeared to be in serious need of medical treatment with little ability to pay for it--no fakers here. The collective also serves as a community center. There's a small stage for open-mic night, and bingo night is also popular, said Webster. Peron's spot, which has gone through a series of names as it survived bust after bust, maintains an activist feel, too. It offers a free joint to patients with no money, free Internet access, and free video games on a flat-screen TV. A framed letter on the wall thanks the club for what it does for patients and the community. The writer thanks Peron for an offer of a tour, saying that she hopes to make it one day. Signed, Nancy Pelosi.

By about 2010, if the pace keeps up, more than half of the American population will live in states where it's legal to smoke pot for medical purposes--which in California means for the relief of not only glaucoma, AIDS, and cancer, but also of irritable bowel syndrome, insomnia, and that infinitely flexible catch-all, "etc." Although some states originally limited medical marijuana to specific ailments, these have gradually expanded access under pressure from patients not covered by the law.

The federal government, it would seem, is up against the tide of public opinion. Nearly half of Americans polled now say that marijuana should be taxed and regulated much like alcohol. Solid majorities--from two-thirds to three-quarters--support medical marijuana. Liberals, especially the young ones who run the blogosphere, don't have the same fear of being called soft on crime that dogged their Clinton-era predecessors, and they have embraced drug-policy reform as a defining issue. Meanwhile, the religious right that helped elect George W. Bush to the presidency has become disillusioned with his administration's moral failings and once again begun to fade from politics. As it has done so, it has taken its calls for temperance legislation with it, leaving the libertarian wing of the Republican party ascendant. The feds' fear is that, if they lose ground now, they won't ever regain it. (Which, if they knew their history, they would know isn't true.)

With that in mind, the President Bush's drug czar routinely called out the medical-marijuana movement as a fraud, an attempt to legalize drugs using sick and dying people as a cover. He reiterated that take in a discussion that the White House posted online in December 2007. "Funded by millions of dollars from those whose goal it is to legalize marijuana outright, marijuana lobbyists have been deployed to Capitol Hill and to States across the Nation to employ their favored tactic of using Americans' natural compassion for the sick to garner support for a far different agenda," he said. "These modern-day snake oil proponents cite testimonials--not science--that smoked marijuana helps patients suffering from AIDS, cancer, and other painful diseases 'feel better.' While smoking marijuana may allow patients to temporarily feel better, the medical community makes an important distinction between inebriation and the controlled delivery of pure pharmaceutical medication. If you want to learn more about this, we have information available that shows how medical marijuana laws increase drug-related crime and protect drug dealers."

Wedding Dress, of course, has a different way of describing what he's up to. "I still believe that our intention and what we're doing in the world is actually insulating us," he said, adding that Harborside's legit relationship with the city also helps. He offers Hope Net, a club that San Francisco police protected from the federal government, as a demonstration of the connection that a responsible pot clinic can forge with local officials. "That dispensary is still open and functioning," he said, "and no one was charged."

Not yet, at least. "I'm not as optimistic as my partner in terms of the federal threat," DeAngelo said. "The federal strategy is very difficult to read, and we don't know where they're going to hit next. Anybody who opens a dispensary has to be ready to go to federal prison."

Attorney General Eric Holder said at a press conference Wednesday that the Justice Department will no longer raid medical marijuana clubs that are established legally under state law. His declaration ...
Attorney General Eric Holder said at a press conference Wednesday that the Justice Department will no longer raid medical marijuana clubs that are established legally under state law. His declaration ...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
383
Pending Comments
0
View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7  Next ›  Last »   (12 pages total)
Show: 
photo
yankeetwo   01:50 PM on 2/28/2009
Commenting on the 1999 study by Australian economists Clements and Daryal that a daily marijuana smoker consumes 18.57 ounces of pot annually. I'd wager that few people who smoke 20 ounces of pot annually could afford the annual cost! "Someone very close to me" smokes almost every single day, usually several times a day, consuming only about 2 ounces of pot annually, which I think that is a much more typical case.

Most of us do NOT smoke to get wasted; we smoke to relax, to free up our creative processes, to enhance the music, the sunset, OUR WORK, etc. According to C&D, SOME users must smoke FAR more than 20 ounces annually! I've NEVER known ANYONE, of many hundreds of pot smokers I've known, who smoked that much! Like the comment included notes, "the emphasis must be on "or more," ... otherwise those folks were puffing a quarter ounce per sitting," these statistics, like way too many data on marijuana, must be created out of thin air, or maybe that was "smoke."

"Don't believe everything you read" was never more true than in the case of illegal recreational drugs! Most people care far more about winning their case, however doubtful, than in telling the truth. Funny how us "legalization proponents" need only tell the truth to "win" OUR cases! Unfortunately, being truthful, honest and RIGHT does not win every battle, but it WILL, eventually, win the war.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
doglove   04:28 PM on 3/04/2009
There is a reason people who have 'cards' and activists try to keep these 'consumption' figures high.

My state only allows me to grow twelve plants. Males go - there's half. I can expect to lose a few more for various reasons. Considering what it costs to start a small grow operation, ending up with maybe five plants makes it pretty futile. So, I tell the state I smoke three ounces a week. The law is modified often.

Grow co-ops are a better option, a group growing together, but the state does agree. This works very well for patients, many disabled who have a hard time coming up with $300 - $400 an ounce.

The dispensaries in my state work well, we are like a prototype for legalization. From Norm Stamper to our current Chief of Police being promoted to "Drug Czar" ( I still hate saying that!)

Basically - to get busted in Seattle, you have to be an ass, or growing way too much. Out in the rural county's it is bad though. Because of the border with Canada, they can pull you over anytime. Homeland Security here has been told by Mr. Kerlikowske to stop sending him people busted for small possession charges, the town can't handle it, we have real crime hear.

IF Obama brought him in to design a realistic and fair new drug policy, things are looking good for us smokers.

http://www.normstamper.com/
photo
TheBlackCat   06:43 PM on 2/27/2009
"Well the man said he was dying,
and the nausea and the pain left him wasting away
and unable to keep a meal down.
So he tried everything a prescription could obtain
but to no avail.
The side effects were worse than the pain.
So now he breaks the law
to use the one thing that seems to help him out.
But people say, 'Oh he's just getting’ high.'
And not to change the subject but,

didn’t you ever wonder why getting high’s a crime?"

-Phish
photo
yankeetwo   01:56 PM on 2/28/2009
Yeah, it's OK to "get high" on reading, tennis, swimming, computers, games, dancing, love, and even beer, wine of scotch, but CERTAINLY NOT ON POT! Hah! Getting high, provided one maintains self control and doesn't hurt anyone, is HIGHLY desirable!
SevereTireDamage   04:49 PM on 2/27/2009
I'm a client at Harborside. It really is a amazing place, I always feel better when I go there (I think they pump negative ions into the air).
photo
goodneighbor420   02:23 PM on 2/27/2009
yes we can!
RTIII   08:29 AM on 2/27/2009
Why hasn't this happened already?

It's not from "Reefer Madness" reruns....

Decriminalization would cut into the interests of many groups that have some interest in status quo, including the courts, prosecutors, judges, defense attorneys and especially including groups that have a substantial interest; police, the prison system, boarder patrol, Coast Guard, customs, ATF, DEA, FBI and, vitally, industries that supply these. We can truly say that we now have a prison _industry._ (disgusting) And, lets not leave out the "drug lords" who profit from the sale of illicit drugs, or the alcohol and tobacco industries which perceive Marijuana / Cannabis as a substantial threat to their (near) monopolies on legal intoxicants and smoking material. ...I'm probably overlooking a group or two as well...

All of these groups have significant power. Combined, they have enormous power.
.
photo
yankeetwo   02:15 PM on 2/28/2009
Right. This, OUR system, has no problem with persecuting, prosecuting and locking people up, often destroying the lives of people who have done nothing to anybody, people who have done no harm whatsoever, often amongst the nicest, finest people one would ever care to meet or know, simply for the money. Souls for cash! It's amazing what so many people will do, because they are "only doing their jobs!" Isn't that about the sickest thing you can think of?

It's the work of the Devil, if you believe in such things. It's the most evil thing our society does, perhaps apart only from our unprovoked wars of aggression, which actually slaughter millions of innocent human beings. Which does not diminish the evil of locking people up, virtually for nothing worse than disobedience, which in this case is justified. I do have hope, however, that freedom, at last, may be just around the corner. Mr. President, are you listening?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bob Soper   07:36 PM on 3/01/2009
The cartels (Mexican, Colombian and American) have a strong vested interest in continued drug prohibition. I have no doubt that some of the most vociferous opponents of legalization in our various legislative bodies are on the payroll of the illegal drug distribution organizations.
carter2009   08:20 AM on 2/27/2009
I've read several articles on marijuana use vs. cigarette smoking as it relates to instances of cancers and all the government studies are flawed. People don't toke up the same way smokers use nicotine. It's apples and oranges. There are some studies in CA that show no link at all between marijuana use and any onset of any cancer. If pot is SO DANGEROUS, please show me the bodies. The people don't want pot to be illegal, the Adolf Coors company does.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SCVADem   10:46 AM on 2/27/2009
Nicotine is the addictive additive, tar is the culprit in cigarettes.

And you're right. I've never known anyone to chain-toke like a smoker chain-smokes.
johnnyboy409   03:49 AM on 2/27/2009
if they legalized it that would solve all our problems right now...don't give up the fight!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Nicon   04:00 AM on 2/27/2009
Not "solve or all" but "lessen and most" marijuana prohibition has caused many social problems, many of which are still exponentially increasing, and its end would go along way to fixing the problem.

there is no quick fix to 80 years of bad policy and a war on ones own populace.
scorchedhottub   03:29 AM on 2/27/2009
I'm in my late 20s. I have never come across anyone my age who has a problem with marijuana. I offer my high school class as a scientific sample. There were conservatives, liberals, libertarians and nihilists. I can't imagine any of them protesting pot.

As an elected official you are confined to the fringe for advocating decriminalization. The loss of votes seems to be the only reason these people don't decriminalize when one considers all the socio-economic benefits of an instantly unburdened prison system. And legalization would do even more for the government coffers. There are no doubt still some older senators and congressman who have crazy and unfounded biases based on too many viewings of Reefer Madness and a preference for whiskey and cocaine.

But barring the fuddy duddy argument, who are the people instilling fear in the hearts of our politicians? Marijuana doesn't cause people to go out and barrel their car into a family of four like booze does. I understand MADD. Is there a MASD (stoned) lobbying up and down K Street? Whose lives have been so negatively affected by marijuana (aside from through unnecessary incarceration). Who is this invisible majority running through the streets cursing munchies and increased television watching?

You actualy see bigots protesting gay marriage on TV. Yet who is ever ushered out to represent the anti-marijuana position except for people employed by the government agencies who police drugs.

Where are the "people" who keep marijuana from being decriminalized?
RTIII   08:28 AM on 2/27/2009
And the answers are:

Decriminalization would cut into the interests of many groups that have some interest in status quo, including the courts, prosecutors, judges, defense attorneys and especially including groups that have a substantial interest; police, the prison system, boarder patrol, Coast Guard, customs, ATF, DEA, FBI and, vitally, industries that supply these. We can truly say that we now have a prison _industry._ (disgusting) And, lets not leave out the "drug lords" who profit from the sale of illicit drugs, or the alcohol and tobacco industries which perceive Marijuana / Cannabis as a substantial threat to their (near) monopolies on legal intoxicants and smoking material.

All of these groups have significant power. Combined, they have enormous power.
.
scorchedhottub   11:22 AM on 2/27/2009
Meh. That's an okay argument I guess. Can you show me articles about the tobacco and alcohol industries actually lobbying to support anti-marijuana laws? I'm sure a small part of their legal efforts go toward such preemption, but I would think both would be more focused on combating the dangers to their bottom line that already exist (remember, also, that marijuana already does affect that bottom line, especially in the case of alcohol), i.e., MADD, drinking age laws, smoking age laws, anti-smoking lobbies, class action lawsuits, etc.

All of the other interested parties (aside from the lawyers, judges) you've mentioned are government agencies. All we ever hear from the prison industry is the problems of overcrowding. As long as there are racists n' patriots, border patrol will always be fine. The Coast Guard, really? The FBI has a babillion other things to think about. And are you seriously positing that there is a Drug Lord lobby?

Your argument seems more conspiracy theory than anything else.
fresno500   03:40 PM on 2/27/2009
Don't forget Pharmco. If all the people on these mild psych drugs i.e. paxil, xanex etc were instead discover that "settling" effects MJ.

They would stand to lose a lot of mony. Pharmco are the ones' lobbying and being anti-MJ propagandist,.
photo
yankeetwo   02:38 PM on 2/28/2009
They are not out there because NO ONE actually feels any harm from marijuana use. Of course they still oppose it's use, on principal!

Well, what about locking people up who have never done any harm to anyone?! Why not oppose THAT on principal?!

It's incredible what some people's twisted values have become, due of course mostly to decades of outrageously false government propaganda. We need "minimization of harm," the criteria used in Europe today, not "back my bias," which is what we have had here in the US for most of a century.

Those who doubt me, check out someone you trust. Check out Rick Steves, the travel expert and mild-mannered travel show host, for example, someone who knows what of he speaks, and who supports the legalization of marijuana.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
madbear   03:11 AM on 2/27/2009
This over-the-top war on drugs has been a thorn in the American economy for so long, it must end. Treatment and education are the keys to fighting thismadness on the masses. Pot use needs to be on back burner of law enforcement. I have a joint, I go to Jail.....Madoff steals $50 billion, and lives the life of Reily.

WAKE UP AMERICA

LETS GET OUR PRIORITIES STRAIGHT!!!!!
taintedone   02:50 AM on 2/27/2009
I literally have a tear running down my cheek. A tear of joy. A tear of relief. A tear of change and hope. I am a prisoner of war in a struggle that has seemingly ended and I am overjoyed to have been a foot soldier in the revolution. Last night in a press conference Attorney General Eric Holder was asked about policy on medcial marijuana to which he stated, "What the President said during the campaign...is consistent with what we will be doing here in law enforcement. He was my boss in the campaign....He is my boss now. What he said in the campaign is now American policy."
It could not get much clearer than that and I am more hopeful than ever that this era of tyrany and injustice is over.
All I can say is WOW. What a day. What a moment. What a President. I am truly inspired by this policy and the end to the needless suffering that my family and I endured the last two years. Please do not forget that this was a long and hard fought war that we collectively have won and can share in the spoils of the victory. I hope we all breath a little easier and sleep a little better. Words can no longer suffice for the feeling I have at this moment in history. Just WOW.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Mort   01:53 AM on 2/27/2009
Just curious, so don't nas ty...
Cannabis doesn't treat or cure disease. It's simply a drug to get high, chill out, escape, whatever you want to call it. People do that legally with prescriptions or booze, and otherwise with harder core stuff. So how is it that the medical community and legislature are so willing to bend the law and call it medicinal? The list of "conditions" that qualify seems designed to allow almost anyone to be able to get a prescription.

I've heard lots of people crying for legalization and presenting lots of rationalizations for doing it. But nothing that really justifies reclassifying a street drug into a medical treatment. They used to say it treated glaucoma, but it doesn't. So is this advertising by the munchie companies, spin by potheads who don't want to get busted or is there a legitimate, medical reason why someone should be able to go to the local herbologist to treat their painful rec tal itch?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
bigbenny   02:18 AM on 2/27/2009
If you're going to make claims like this you need to provide some proof. Talk's cheap.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Mort   04:04 AM on 2/27/2009
What claims? I'm asking questions. Talk is good, snide is cheap.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
smoovejef   02:54 AM on 2/27/2009
Marijuana doesn't cure disease, but it is helpful and effective in the management of various symptoms of different conditions. Whether or not it can be useful in other health conditions is difficult to tell because the government only allows studies to be done using their cannabis, and only after a lengthy & extensive process. Medical marijuana proponents would be completely behind responsible regulation of these facilities. Of course, there is an undesired element one would want to exclude from the loop, but in working with activist to form responsible policies that don't criminalize doctors and patients, the government can allow for compassionate use, generate tax revenues and keep the criminal element at a distance. Even if you don't support the initiative, support the research. One day, it may be you in need, and believe me, you WILL want relief.

Since you're so curious, do some research, instead of criticizing patients. Rectal itch? Hope you never get a Stage 4 carcinoma; you won't be quite as flippant. Some of us have seen first hand the relief this substance can provide to the very ill; I'll be damned if I will deny comfort to the sick and dying. In healthcare, THAT is where the rubber meets the road.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Mort   04:02 AM on 2/27/2009
Like the other guy, you start by answering my questions and end with a jab. My remark was flippant about the ridiculous list of "terrible diseases" that allow you to qualify for an rx. Not serious problems like cancer, which my mother died of after a 12 year battle. I understand how painful and devastating some things are, and how any form of relief can be a good thing. At the end, mom was on oral morphine drops and they were a godsend.

My question, maybe to state it differently, would be... how much of this is medically justifiable rather than the usual rationalizations of stoners who just want their drug of choice legalized. We get a lot of that every time there's a story about drugs. I'm all for research, which is why I asked. There's just so much out there in the way of spin and propaganda and very little in the way of responsible dialogue. Passing our scripts for brownies at guarded clubs smacks of prohibition era speakeasies, not above board treatment by qualified physicians.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Nicon   03:18 AM on 2/27/2009
Treatment is loose term, but i think what your asking is does pot do something other than get sick people high?

answer yes. for many people with chronic sever pain, cause by any number of medical conditions marijuana allows takes the pain away, for people with AIDS and Cancer pot help 1, combat the constant need to vomit, and 2, help you feel hungry enough to eat.
Glaucoma is "treated" by pot is as much is pot is an anti-inflammatory, causing the swelling of the eyes to decrease allowing both re leaf and increased vision.

Try google, before you embarrass your self.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Mort   03:37 AM on 2/27/2009
Embarass myself for asking questions? You started out answering but ended with that. Hmmm...
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
hexham   01:43 AM on 2/27/2009
all this needs now is a federal excise tax.

honestly, think about it. TOBACCO is LEGAL. Duh!
photo
Zenith1959   01:01 AM on 2/27/2009
I also heard that the Seattle Chief of police is being considered for the new drug czar, his police department is following a voter approved bill making marijuana violations their lowest priority, ie, ignore.
photo
goodneighbor420   02:34 PM on 2/27/2009
yes, I thought that was an encouraging appointment too
OLMEQ   12:24 AM on 2/27/2009
Legalize it .... Very simple.... Will raise revenue for the state and local governments. Cut the number of criminal cases for possession significantly and the criminal element will be eliminated. Less people filling our jails over something that can be easily remedied. The legalization will make for a more open marketplace and the byproducts from the harvesting and manufacture of the herb will be significant...
x004Ronin   12:21 AM on 2/27/2009
In an era of terrorism, drug violence (I'm talking about heroin/crystal meth, real drugs), human trafficking, and financial fraud, the idea that the government would waste ANY resources targeting patients who are in chronic pain is just disgusting. There is no other word for it: Disgusting.

Twitter Edition