President Obama came into office promising to reverse George W. Bush administration practices and elevate science over politics. He explicitly applied that principle to drug policy, an area long driven by ideology and prejudice. He quickly began to make good on the pledge by promoting three evidence-based drug policies: eliminating the ban on states using federal funding for syringe exchange programs to reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS and hepatitis; reforming the racially unjust crack-cocaine sentencing disparity that punished crack offenses more harshly than powder offenses; and vowing to end years of federal interference in the implementation of state medical marijuana laws.
But as a recent L.A. Times article makes dismayingly clear, the White House is putting the "science-free zone" sign back up.
Two weeks ago, the U.S. Department of Justice issued medical marijuana guidelines to U.S. attorneys that are at best confusing and at worst a flip-flop on administration policy. The department's much-heralded 2009 memo on the subject fulfilled candidate Obama's campaign promise and established a principle that federal resources would not be wasted prosecuting medical marijuana patients and providers who are in "clear and unambiguous compliance" with state medical marijuana laws. The department's update reiterates that the feds won't target individual medical marijuana patients but might bust large-scale, commercial medical marijuana providers. The memo unequivocally threatens federal prosecution of large-scale medical marijuana providers even if they are in compliance with state law, a significant step away from the principle at the heart of the 2009 policy. Disturbingly, the new "clarification" doesn't explain what the federal government considers to be the line between small and large-scale production -- likely an attempt to slow state-sponsored medical marijuana distribution programs while sowing anxiety and confusion for patients.
Most recently, the Drug Enforcement Administration rejected a formal citizen petition filed nine years ago to reschedule marijuana to make it available for medical use. When the DEA considered a similar petition during the Reagan administration, the agency's administrative law judge concluded, "Marijuana has been accepted as capable of relieving the distress of great numbers of very ill people." The Obama administration's rejection of the petition claims marijuana "has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States ... lacks accepted safety for use under medical supervision... [and] has a high potential for abuse." Lest one think the DEA's ruling is just law enforcement run amok, the White House released its 2011 National Drug Control Strategy earlier this week, calling marijuana "addictive and unsafe." That document devotes five pages attacking marijuana legalization and medical marijuana.
The administration's disconnect from science is shocking. A federally commissioned study by the Institute of Medicine more than a decade ago determined that nausea, appetite loss, pain and anxiety "all can be mitigated by marijuana." The esteemed medical journal the Lancet Neurology reports that marijuana's active components "inhibit pain in virtually every experimental pain paradigm." The National Cancer Institute, part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, notes that marijuana may help with nausea, loss of appetite, pain and insomnia. Sixteen states and the District of Columbia, home to 90 million Americans, have adopted laws allowing the medical use of marijuana to treat AIDS, cancer, glaucoma, multiple sclerosis and other ailments. The federal government itself cultivates and supplies marijuana to a handful of patients through its "compassionate-use investigative new drug program," which was established in 1978 but closed to new patients in 1992.
Marijuana use, like any drug, certainly carries risks. When it comes to policy, however, these risks should be weighed against the harms associated with current marijuana laws. It is notable that every comprehensive, objective government commission that has examined marijuana throughout the past 100 years has concluded that criminalization of adult marijuana use does more harm than marijuana use itself. Moreover, the risks associated with marijuana use are demonstrably far less than those associated with Oxycontin, methamphetamine, morphine and other drugs currently available for medical use. It defies not just science but common sense for the Obama administration to be so aggressively anti-marijuana, especially for medical use.
It is not too late to reverse this science-phobic trend. The Department of Justice's recent medical marijuana guidance is vague enough that the administration can clarify it intends to scrutinize only massive, rogue medical marijuana operations and that the DEA won't waste resources going after most providers in most states. The administration should clearly support responsible state and local regulations designed to make marijuana legally available to patients while enhancing public safety and health. If the federal government is unable to provide leadership in this area, then the very least it can do is get out of the way and allow local governments to determine the policies that best serve their interests. The president who promised change rooted in rational reflection shouldn't stand in the way of it.
This piece was co-written by Stephen Gutwillig, California State Director of the Drug Policy Alliance. Bill Piper is Director of National Affairs of the Drug Policy Alliance.
This article first appeared in the L.A. times on July 14th.
Scott Morgan: If You Think Supporting Marijuana Legalization Is Political Suicide, You're Wrong
You can't fix stupid.
Science and Religion does not gel! Faith is believing in what is not real.
Science is believing in what is real.
Since she made him stop smoking, I suspect it probably would be defying his wife, Michelle, if he were to support marijuana use, and that is th biggest reason for this flip-flop.
It really blows for all us. It may be a good lesson for his kids, but he's not our father, Moreover, there's no 'currently accepted medical use for liquor either.' Is that next on Mommie's or the Federal government's list?
Some people have issues that they cannot back down on. Good for you!
No one who has ever suffered pain like that would seek to refuse a medicine that can allow us to have a normal life. Opiates or otherwise. You cannot tell me these medicines do not work after you see a cancer patient. Or even such a simple thing as medicating a painful animal. Any dolt can see these things work.
I am sorry you have to endure it. Go to the American Pain Foundation and join. It is long past due for us chronic pain patients to stop conceding treatment for those who break the law or overdose.
respect for the law and the government..
should be an all important goal for our elected officials.
and this phony war on pot is not helping!
But as long as our politicians have cranial rectumitis, the sounds of facts will remain muffled, and they will interpret them they way that benefits them the most.
www.offthegridmpls.blogspot.com
The War on Drugs (a war on persons) ranks high among the ten worst ideas of the 20th century. It is akin to punching a giant marshmallow. The profitability of contraband drugs supports a highly diversified industry. Shortages are easily replaced with substitutes. The net result is that vested interests thrive at the expense of everyone. The costs go beyond crime associatied with drug acquisition. This robust industry serves: craven politicians; law enforcement/corrections; third rate scientists; and criminal cartels. The money corrupts all levels of society. Yet we could easily eliminate most of the crime associated with substance abuse by "medicalizing." The costs of law enforcement and incarceration would plummet. Why then are we so committed to a bad idea? Isn't a century of failure enough?
Pharma / Private Prison Complex - Law Enforcement / Drug Testing co.s/ Alchohol
And if MJ is legalized across the board, naturally there'd be no reason to keep it's non-drug cousin, Hemp, illegal to produce thus threatening:
Timber & Paper / Cotton / Petroleum (excellent plastic-like materials) as well as being much more viable as an alternative to Ethanol for fuels, and it requires virtually no pesticides or fertilizers to thrive.
Take a look at the lobbies and interests and you'll see why such a viable, versatile medicine/product is still illegal.
Nice post.
In addition to its established effectiveness as an analgesic, in nausea reduction in Chemo patients, and muscle spasticity in Multiple Sclerosis patients as approved in the states that already have MMJ programs
MJ has shown favorable outcomes in a number of ailments; everything from
- breast cancer http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7098340.stm
- brain cancer- http://www.webmd.com/cancer/brain-cancer/news/20090401/marijuana-chemical-may-fight-brain-cancer
- Huntington's Disease - http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-addiction/201102/thc-huntingtons-disease-cb1-receptors-important-more-drug-use
- Alzheimers - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15145917/ns/healthalzheimers_disease/t/marijuana-may-help-stave-alzheimers/
One commenter noted earlier that there's a possible link between MJ and Schizophrenia
- http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2005559,00.html
It's not a simple issue, as the article explains, but it is possible.
It's not all rainbows and kittens, but there's a legitimate reason why MMJ advocates believe in the potential of this drug - cancer, alzheimers, et. al.
Naturally more study needs to be done, thus the frustration with the denial of change of Scheduling in the face of promising studies and evidence.
For more info, "The Union," is an excellent documentary on MJ prohibition available on Netflix.
The AMA (American Medical Association) a notoriously conservative group is in favor of rescheduling to allow for more study.
http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/the-human-condition/2009/11/13/the-american-medical-association-reconsiders-marijuana-will-the-justice-department-follow.html
As is the American College of Physicians - the country's second largest physician's group.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/02/15/us-marijuana-usa-idUSN1560610120080215
Vote Ron Paul 2012
Tobacco is highly addictive and has no medical use.
Alcohol has a high potential for abuse (and death) and has no medical use.
Marijuana - Has potential for abuse but is non-toxic and non-addictive. Has all kinds of medical use.
Marijuana is a plant, not a drug. It does contain THC, which would be/is a drug when science gets a hold of it.
Marijuana comes from a seed, grows in natural sunlight, is havested and consumed without outside modification. That is a Plant. Sheez.
A drug is manufactured and process from extracts and additves, which normally involves heat or pressure, modifying genetics. Drugs are man made, imperfect, and kill.
Marijuana is God given, made perfectly, and has never had a recorded death due to overdose, that I have ever heard of.
MMPatient
I really do not enjoy coming to the DOJ defense, due to their recent activities, however ...
MM Patients are allowed to grow their own. The DOJ has not told anyone to reenforce prior policy.
I am sure there are growers out there with great expectations of getting rich ... especially with what they charge.
The allowance, use, advancement of MM does not require Mass Growers.
Not sure how poison ivy fits.