As early as this Thursday the U.S. House could vote on a bipartisan amendment to the Commerce-Justice-Science spending bill that would prohibit the federal government from wasting taxpayer money interfering with state medical marijuana laws. The amendment is being offered by five Republicans and five Democrats. A vote several weeks ago on allowing Veteran Administration doctors discuss medical marijuana with their patients received 195 yes votes. Support for letting states set their own marijuana policy without federal interference is rising quickly.
“This vote is about letting states help their citizens without interference from out-of-control federal agencies,” said Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance. “Members of Congress have an opportunity to both protect the patient/doctor relationship and save taxpayer money. No person should have to fear being arrested for following the advice of their doctor.”
The amendment is being sponsored by Reps. Rohrabacher (R-CA), Farr (D-CA), Young (R-AK), Blumenauer (D-WA), McClintock (R-CA), Cohen (D-TN), Broun (R-GA), Polis (D-CO), Stockman (R-TX), and Lee (D-CA).
A recent Pew Research Center survey found that nearly three-in-four Americans (72%) believe that efforts to enforce marijuana laws cost more than they are worth, including 78% of independents, 71% of Democrats and 67% of Republicans. There is strong support for state medical marijuana programs, with 80% of Democrats, 76% of Independents, and 61% of Republicans supporting the sale and use of medical marijuana in their state.
Twenty-two states and the District of Columbia have laws that legalize and regulate marijuana for medicinal purposes: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. Five states have laws regulating CBD oils, a non-psychotropic component of medical marijuana which some parents are utilizing to treat their children’s seizures: Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Utah, and Wisconsin. More states, such as Florida and New York, are likely to legalize medical marijuana soon.
Despite scientific evidence in support of marijuana’s medical benefits marijuana remains a Schedule I drug under federal law, the same category as heroin. In contrast, cocaine and methamphetamine are Schedule II drugs available for medical use. Patients, caregivers, and medical marijuana providers live in fear of federal arrest and prosecution for following the recommendation of doctors. Federal agencies also actively obstruct efforts to reschedule marijuana or even study its medical benefits.
The first petition to reschedule marijuana was submitted to the DEA in 1972, but it took 16 years (and several lawsuits) for the agency to finally make a ruling. Following two years of hearings, DEA Chief Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Francis Young ruled that marijuana should be rescheduled because it did not meet the legal criteria for a Schedule I drug. However, Young’s finding was overruled by former DEA Administrator John Lawn. The DEA rejected a petition to reschedule marijuana again in 2011.
The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) maintains a monopoly on the production of marijuana for research purposes. The federal government does not maintain a monopoly on the production of any other drug. As a result it has been impossible to conduct the FDA drug development trials necessary to develop the plant into a federally-approved prescription medicine. The experience of Professor Lyle Craker, director of the University of Massachusetts-Amherst’s Medicinal Plant Program, is a case in point. Dr. Craker had sought permission to cultivate marijuana to research its medical benefits. After years of legal wrangling, DEA Administrative Law Judge Ellen Bittner issued a ruling that it was in the public interest to end the decades-long NIDA monopoly on marijuana production for research purposes. Once again, the DEA Administrator overruled the ALJ’s decision and denied Dr. Cracker’s petition, protecting the federal monopoly over marijuana for research.
Patients and their families have turned to the states for help. The Rohrabacher-Farr amendment would protect people following their state medical marijuana from federal arrest and prosecution by prohibiting the Department of Justice and DEA from spending taxpayer money to block the implementation of state medical marijuana laws. The amendment wouldn’t prohibit federal agencies from arresting people for medical marijuana in states where it is still illegal. It simply protects the majority of states that have chosen to provide safe and legal access to medical marijuana from federal interference.
“Federal marijuana laws are going to be reformed; it’s not question of if but when,” said Piper. “I can’t think of any other issue with such strong polling numbers across the political spectrum. Bipartisan marijuana law reform is going to happen.”
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.