A Matter of Time

In a strange overlap of cultural and political values, Libertarian Republicans and culturally tolerant Democrats join the massive groundswell among younger voters (where marijuana usage is considerably greater than in other segments) to support legalization of medical and ultimately recreational marijuana. Colorado is one of these “battleground” states, purple with a reasonably even spit of Democrats and Republicans in the state legislature, alternating back and forth between Republican and Democratic governors in recent years… but hardly the lock-step Democratic configuration that one would think might be necessary to enable a vote for legalization of cannabis usage for recreational purposes.

With increasing evidence of rather significant benefits of cannabis (reducing or even eliminating seizures, controlling chronic pain, countering life-destroying stress, etc., etc.), with much of that usage focused on the direct medical benefits without an accompanying “high,” medical marijuana (MMJ) is approaching the halfway point in garnering state approval across the land (23 states and growing every year). Initiatives in the most populous states suggest that full-on adult recreational usage is simply a matter of time. But what we need desperately in this sea of ending the new “Prohibition” is clear labeling standards that are easily understood by anyone, purity processing requirements and tons and tons of new information (research) about this substance.

For the record, except for the most minimal usage a long time ago (less than half a dozen times in college), I do not use any form of marijuana. My view supporting legalization is based on accepting the reality of such a vast number of users, understanding the futility of banning what so many enjoy, knowing that true containment and reduction of marijuana usage does not come from harsh bans, recognizing the very legitimate medical benefits of cannabis, my knowledge that governments receiving new easy tax revenues has to be better than funding murderous cartels and fomenting a lethal gun trafficking industry and the horrific combination of ruined lives and absurdly-costly failed enforcement/incarceration efforts to stop the marijuana trade.

The big ogre in this mix is the slow-to-adapt-to-reality federal government. The Controlled Substances Act (CSA) was passed in 1991, expanding on the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, passed during the Nixon administration. The specific drugs that fall within the CSA’s various categories of controlled substances are determined by the Department of Health and Human Services, often with recommendations from other agencies, like the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) or based on U.S. treaty requirements with other nations. Schedule 1 are the “bad boyz” of controlled substances. Crack, meth, heroin, etc. … and currently marijuana.

Here’s a little background on the issue:

Schedule I substances are those that have the following findings:

The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.

The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.

There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.

No prescriptions may be written for Schedule I substances, and such substances are subject to production quotas by the DEA.

Under the DEA's interpretation of the CSA, a drug does not necessarily have to have the same "high potential for abuse" as heroin, for example, to merit placement in Schedule I:

[W]hen it comes to a drug that is currently listed in schedule I, if it is undisputed that such drug has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and it is further undisputed that the drug has at least some potential for abuse sufficient to warrant control under the CSA, the drug must remain in schedule I. In such circumstances, placement of the drug in schedules II through V would conflict with the CSA since such drug would not meet the criterion of "a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States." 21 USC 812(b). (emphasis added)

—Drug Enforcement Administration, Notice of denial of petition to reschedule marijuana (2001)

Wikipedia. Marijuana is technically subject to tighter controls than many of the other rather stronger banned narcotics.

And if a substance is on Schedule 1, a whole host of criminal and civil penalties as well as enforcement efforts automatically apply. It’s even hard for legitimate researchers to do normal work with these substances. Even as memoranda circulate (like the one in 2013 from Deputy Attorney General James Cole) to contain zealous prosecution of many marijuana-related federal crimes, federal agents and US Attorneys have frequently ignore these DOJ’s guidelines. The fact that so many states (and Washington, D.C.) allow MMJ, that two medium-sized states even allow recreational usage suggest that a Schedule 1 list for cannabis is wholly inappropriate. One would even have to question whether the lighter-consequence and control provisions of Schedule 2 and 3 should even apply, or whether the matter should really be determined by the relevant states.

For those mainstream researchers trying to answer the most basic questions about the value of cannabis in medical treatment, there are often insurmountable barriers. The August 9^th New York Times provides one rather representative example: “Nearly four years ago, Dr. Sue Sisley, a psychiatrist at the University of Arizona, sought federal approval to study marijuana’s effectiveness in treating military veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder. She had no idea how difficult it would be.

“The proposal, which has the support of veterans groups, was hung up at several regulatory stages, requiring the research’s private sponsor to resubmit multiple times. After the proposed study received final approval in March from federal health officials, the lone federal supplier of research marijuana said it did not have the strains the study needed and would have to grow more — potentially delaying the project until at least early next year… Then, in June, the university fired Dr. Sisley, later citing funding and reorganization issues. But Dr. Sisley is convinced the real reason was her outspoken support for marijuana research…

“To obtain the drug legally, researchers like Dr. Sisley must apply to the Food and Drug Administration, the Drug Enforcement Administration and the National Institute on Drug Abuse — which, citing a 1961 treaty obligation, administers the only legal source of the drug for federally sanctioned research, at the University of Mississippi. Dr. Sisley’s proposed study also had to undergo an additional layer of review from the Public Health Service that is not required for other controlled substances in such research.

“The process is so cumbersome that a growing number of elected state officials, medical experts and members of Congress have started calling for loosening the restrictions. In June, a letter signed by 30 members of Congress, including four Republicans, called the extra scrutiny of marijuana projects “unnecessary,” saying that research “has often been hampered by federal barriers.”

“‘It defies logic in this day and age that marijuana is still in Schedule 1 alongside heroin and LSD when there is so much testimony to what relief medical marijuana can bring,’ Gov. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island said in an interview. In late 2011, he and the governor of Washington at the time, Christine O. Gregoire, filed a petition asking the federal government to place the drug in a lower category. The petition is still pending with the D.E.A.

“Despite the mounting push, there is little evidence that either Congress or the Obama administration will change marijuana’s status soon. In public statements, D.E.A. officials have made their displeasure known about states’ legalizing medical and recreational marijuana.

“The agency’s position seems at odds with that of President Obama, whose Justice Department has allowed states to legalize either medical or recreational marijuana as long as they follow certain federal priorities, such as not allowing sales to juveniles. Mr. Obama has also said that he believes marijuana is no more dangerous than alcohol and that he is bothered by the disproportionate number of minorities incarcerated for possession of the drug.”

We seem to be a nation of hypocrites, hell-bent on legislating morality despite absolutely clear and convincing evidence of overwhelming changes in national values. We are condemning too many people to being branded as felons for practices legal in so many states. What ugly pleasure do we derive in such meaningless morality-driven prosecutions? It’s time to make the bad man stop, and it can be accomplished with little more than an administrative hearing and a change in classification standards!

I’m Peter Dekom, and in times of hideous government waste and decreasingly available governmental budgets, there is one more good reason to stop this ignorant prosecution of marijuana usage: we just cannot afford it anymore!