It is immensely disappointing that, yet again, the administration has declined the opportunity to discuss the very serious issue of ending marijuana prohibition in this country. For the ninth time, the White House has solicited the American people for direct input on the issues they cared about, and then, when the resulting answers called overwhelmingly for marijuana law reform, President Obama ignored the will of the American. Over half of the country now supports regulating and taxing marijuana; we can only hope that during the general election the issue is addressed with the respect and urgency it demands. (Alternet)

You can read more details here.

This seemed to be a logical opportunity to ask the administration about marijuana legalization. Last Tuesday, I posted NORML’s question to the White House YouTube page for consideration. We asked, “With over 850,000 Americans arrested in 2010, on marijuana charges alone, and tens of billions of tax dollars being spent locking up marijuana users, isn’t it time to regulate and tax marijuana?”

The reception was overwhelmingly positive, in just several hours the question received over 4,000 “thumbs up” votes and was one of, if not the, most popular question on the service. Then a peculiar thing happened, the question was removed. After becoming the most positively voted upon question in less than a day, the White House removed the question, deeming it “inappropriate.”

We informed our audience of the censorship and encouraged them to engage the White House on their own, using our question or a one of their own choosing. Over the next several days the program was inundated with marijuana law reform questions. At first, many met the same fate as our original question and were removed from the site. It seems our persistence ended up paying off and the page administrator finally gave up trying to censor the incoming questions and most marijuana inquiries have remained up since.

Voting closed last night at midnight and I made some rough calculations of the final results to see how we performed. Of the top 160 questions asked, marijuana reform questions accounted for 105 of them. Reposts of our question brought in an estimated 17,524 up-votes in addition to the 4,028 the original received before being removed. Combined, that is over 21,000 votes for one question, which is 5 times as many votes as any other question on the page. The 105 marijuana reform questions in the top 160 brought in over 74,000 votes, dwarfing any other topic. Our friends at LEAP posted a question as well and it ended as one of the top rated questions. You can read their coverage here.

Now, we wait. “Your Interview With the President” is scheduled to take place tomorrow, January 30th. Considering this is the same individual who previously stated that, “we need to rethink and decriminalize our marijuana laws” and that legalization is a “perfectly legitimate topic for debate,” maybe he will take this opportunity to address the issue seriously for once. In an election year, this could go a long way towards winning back those who feel disenfranchised with the administration over a perceived lack of progress on the issue and amped up raids on medical programs in states such as California and Colorado.

The American people are ready for our debate Mr. President, are you?

(Note: NORML is not endorsing any of the candidates listed below and this is intended only as an educational overview of the candidates positions on marijuana policy.)

Republican Presidential Candidates 2012

Ron Paul

House of Representatives for Texas’ 22nd (1976-1977, 1979-1985, 1997-Present)

Public Statements:

“This war on drugs has been a detriment to personal liberty and it’s been a real abuse of liberty, Our prisons are full with people who have used drugs who should be treated as patients — and they’re non-violent. Someday we’re gonna awake and find out that the prohibition we are following right now with drugs is no more successful, maybe a lot less successful, than the prohibition of alcohol was in the ’20s.”

(Comments Post-Iowa Caucus, 01/04/12 – source)

“Well, removing [marijuana] from the jurisdiction of the federal government and allowing the states to regulate it, like they would alcohol. And this seems to be strange for a lot of people, but I’m only going back to 1937 when that’s the way it was handled. The states always did this, and I’m motivated strongly also because the states legalize it for the use of medicinal purposes and it is helpful to people who have cancer or are getting chemotherapy. So this is not a huge radical idea, it’s something that was legal for a long, long time. And the war against marijuana causes so much hardship and accomplishes nothing. So I would say that marijuana, as far as causing highway problems, is miniscule compared to alcohol, and yet we knew prohibition of alcohol was very bad. So this is just getting back to a sensible position on how we handle difficult problems. And, for me, it should be the states.”

(Kudlow Report, June 23, 2011 - source)

“The role of the federal government is to protect our liberties. That means they should protect our religious liberties to do what we want; our intellectual liberty, but it also should protect our right to do to our body what we want, you know, what we take into our bodies.”

(Jay Leno Show, Dec. 2011 – source)

UPDATED 01/12/12

“Q: Why don’t the other candidates talk about drug policy?

Ron Paul: I think they are easily intimidated and they think people are going to hold it against them if they talk sensibly about drug policy.  Yet I think they are about 20 years behind the time. I think prohibition of anything doesn’t work, the only thing we should prohibit is violence.”

(Manchester, NH January 10, 2012 – source)

Prior Activity:

Co-sponsored HR 2306: Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2011

Sponsored HR 1831: Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2011

Rick Santorum

House of Representatives for Pennsylvania’s 18th District (1991-1995)

US Senator from Pennsylvania (1995-2007)

 

Public Statements:

“There is a difference between legitimate issues of character — someone’s behavior — and the issue of whether someone who has done something wrong in their life, now because of those mistakes, can’t talk about what is the right thing to do. Politicians who have stumbled personally, are capable of making values-based arguments. I don’t think that’s hypocritical. That’s a dangerous line that many folks tend to cross over — that because you made a mistake, you can’t talk about this or that issue. We all make mistakes.

For example, I smoked pot when I was in college. Does that mean that I can’t talk about drug use? Does that mean that I can’t talk about how that’s a bad thing? Of course not. You learn from those experiences.

Even during that time, I knew that what I was doing was wrong. But just because I failed, that does not mean that I shouldn’t be able to talk about it. That’s a different issue. It’s not hypocrisy, as long as you don’t say, ‘I thought it was right, and now think it was wrong.’ If you knew what was going on, and mostpeople do, you have moments of weakness. It happens to all of us. But that should not deter people from talking about what they believe is right.”

(National Review, March 2011 – source)

 

“Well, yeah, I admitted you know, back when I was running for the Senate, that when I was in college that I smoked pot and that was something that I did when I was in college. It was something that I’m not proud of, but I did. And said it was something that I wish I hadn’t done. But I did and I admitted it. I would encourage people not to do so. It was not all it’s made up to be.”
(Piers Morgan Tonight, August 31^st, 2011 – source)

 

“I would think that [legalizing marijuana] would be an activity that is not consistent with American values.”
(Ames Straw Poll, September 2011 – source)

 

“I am adamantly opposed to the legalization of marijuana and other illegal narcotics I believe that this would lead to increased drug usage, especially among young people. While it is true that many Americans blatantly defy federal laws against the trafficking, sale, and use of illegal drugs, I believe a greater number of people are deterred from illegal drug use by the threat of arrest and prosecution.”

(1998 Constituent Letter Supplied to NORML – source)

 

“I believe that the drugs which are currently illegal should remain illegal. I am committed to maintaining the federal government’s role in the “war on drugs”, which is fought on many fronts by federal agents, local law enforcement, substance abuse counselors, teachers, parents, and concerned citizens.”

(1998 Constituent Letter Supplied to NORML – source)

 

UPDATED 01/09/12:

“Q: As a champion of family values and keeping America strong, would you continue to destroy families by sending non-violent drug offenders to prison?

Santorum: Uh, wow. The federal government doesn’t do that.”

(College Convention 2012 in Concord, NH – source)

 

“Santorum: I guess I would take the opinion that federal laws are laws that are in place right now that say these are narcotics, right?  I don’t know, I assume they are…

 Audience Member: I’m sorry, they’re not.

 Santorum: Ok, alright, I don’t know my medical marijuana laws very well. I know should know everything, but I don’t, I apologize, I’m trying my best. But I think they are a hazardous thing to society. So I would..

 Audience Member: How did you form that opinion?

 Santorum: I formed that opinion from my own life experiences, and having experience that…I went to college too. So, I would make the argument that states have the rights, but they don’t have the right to do anything they want to, states don’t have the right to sterilize people. They did at one time, but we said, “No, we aren’t going to do that anymore.” States under the constitution probably have the right to do it, just like they have the right to do marijuana laws…legally, but I don’t think they morally have the right to do things that are harmful to the people in their community and therefore I think the federal government should step in.”

(College Convention 2012 in Concord, NH – source)

 

“Q: I’m a marijuana user should I be arrested?

Santorum: Well, depends on what the laws in your state are, I guess.”

(Hollis, NH on January 7, 2012 – source)

 

“Well you know, obviously state drug laws are the principle drug laws. I have concerns about obviously drug use and its impact on our society. So, I would say that the federal government does have a role, that states don’t go out and legalize drugs, there are drugs that are hazardous to people, that do cause great harm to both the individual as well as to society as a whole. The federal government has a role to make sure that those drugs are not in this country and not available and that people who use them illegally are held accountable. Ideally, states should enforce these laws, but the federal government has a role because it is a public health issue for the country.”

(Nashua, NH on January 9, 2012 – source)

Prior Activity:

Voted ‘Yes’ on HR 3540 in 1996 to add an additional $53 million (raising the total to $213 million) to international narcotics control funding, and pay for it by taking $25 million from international operations funding and $28 million from development assistance.

Newt Gingrich

House of Representatives for Georgia’s 5th District (1979-1999)

House Minority Whip (1989-1995)

Speaker of the House (1995-1999)

Public Statements:

“I think Jefferson or George Washington would have rather strongly discouraged you from growing marijuana and their techniques with dealing with it would have been rather more violent than our current government.”

(New Hampshire Voter Event, January 2012 – source)

“I would continue current federal policy, largely because of the confusing signal that steps towards legalization sends to harder drugs…I think the California experience is that medical marijuana becomes a joke. It becomes marijuana for any use. You find local doctors who will prescribe it for anybody that walks in.”

(Yahoo! News Interview, November 28th, 2011 – source)

“I don’t have a comprehensive view. My general belief is that we ought to be much more aggressive about drug policy. And that we should recognize that the Mexican cartels are funded by Americans. In my mind it means having steeper economic penalties and it means having a willingness to do more drug testing.”

(Yahoo! News Interview, November 28th, 2011 - source)

“I think that we need to consider taking more explicit steps to make it expensive to be a drug user. It could be through testing before you get any kind of federal aid. Unemployment compensation, food stamps, you name it.

It has always struck me that if you’re serious about trying to stop drug use, then you need to find a way to have a fairly easy approach to it and you need to find a way to be pretty aggressive about insisting–I don’t think actually locking up users is a very good thing. I think finding ways to sanction them and to give them medical help and to get them to detox is a more logical long-term policy.”

(Yahoo! News Interview, November 28th, 2011 - source)

UPDATED 01/09/12

“Q: I’m a recreational drug user, should I arrested?

Gingrich: No you shouldn’t be arrested, but you also shouldn’t do it.”

(January 4, 2012 at Concord, NH Town Hall Meeting – source)

“Gingrich: There is a general belief over the last couple hundred years that people who are drug addicted citizens are not capable of participating as independent citizens. They are not capable of exercising independent judgment. So if you look at cocaine and heroin addicts, they loose the ability to be fully participating citizens.

Q: That doesn’t seem to match with the consistency of how many people seem to use drugs in this country. So, I’m saying well over the majority of individuals in this country use or have used drugs, what you are saying is the majority of individuals are incapable of participating…

Gingrich: No, what I’m saying is even among the majority of those who have would agree they shouldn’t be legalized.

Q: What polls are you referring to?

Gingrich: The polls in terms of legalizing heroin and cocaine, there’s never been any support for that.

Q: Oh, well I’m talking about marijuana.

Gingrich: Well…I’m just talking about cocaine and heroin.”

(Gingrich Town Hall in Concord, NH, January 4, 2012 – source)

UPDATED 01/12/12

“Every place where drugs become legalized, matter of fact is more people on welfare, more people who are dependent, more people with bad health outcomes, fewer people who are able workers who can pay attention on the job, and a drain of money into illegality.  Because immediately behind legalized marijuana, comes cocaine and heroin. And the very people who were busy selling marijuana branch into even more aggressive sale of the harder illegal drugs.  So, I think it is a big net economic loss and a job killing idea.”

(Florida, 2009 – source)

Jon Huntsman

Governor of Utah (2005-2009)

US Ambassador to China (2009-2011)

Public Statements:

“Question: would you prosecute growers and sellers of marijuana in states where it has been made legal?

Jon Huntsman: I would let states decide that.”

(Townhall in Exeter, NH, June 2011 – source)

“I never saw him inhale.”

(Huntsman’s Childhood Friend in Politico – source)

Prior Activity: None

The Fall of 2011 saw a major increase in reach and support from around the country and the world. The Alliance is now active on three continents and in five countries. The Facebook page has more than 20,000 followers and reaches over 65,000 people a week. Over 15,000 supporters have signed up for our email list and almost 1,000 have signed up to volunteer.

The NORML Women’s Alliance/SSDP Sister-to-Sister program has matched almost 500 women. While the NORML Women’s Alliance is still in its infancy (the program is barely 2 years old), it is evolving quickly into an effective platform (and forum) for women to speak out and support marijuana legalization. It’s a very exciting time to be a woman in the marijuana law reform movement.

• Get Involved

  Thank you so much for your interest in becoming a local representative for the NORML Women’s Alliance. You will be standing up for millio…

  

  Norml
• ________________________________________________________________________________________________

• California Tour: In November of this year Diane Fornbacher, Melissa Sanchez, Sabrina Fendrick and Kyndra Miller held several outreach events as they toured California from Humboldt County to Los Angeles.

• From 707 to the City of Angels

  From the majestic redwoods of Humboldt county to the glitz and glamour of Hollywood, the NORML Women’s Alliance’s Sabrina Fendrick, Kyndr…

  

  Norml

• Media

  Re-Leaf Magazine conducted an interview with Diane Fornbacher.

  The Daily Caller notes the NORML Women’s Alliance in an article about the now infamous Miley Cyrus Birthday Video in which she declares herself a “true stoner.”

  [Podcast] A Different View: Sabrina Fendrick was interviewed by Moms for Marijuana Director Serra Frank, Iva Cunningham and others about the importance of the Women’s Alliance as well as the different efforts and projects currently being developed.
• “

  A Different View #8 – RadicalRuss ustre.am/:1hyuU

  
  

   

  NORML Women

  
  

  December 26, 2011 4:29:11 PM EST

  ReplyRetweet
• The Plain Dealer (Cleveland’s local publication) quoted Tonya Davis discussing her work with the Ohio Patient Network and the group’s effort to put a medical marijuana initiative on the 2012 ballot.
• Medical marijuana project moves along, while Lewis proposals on hold: Whatever Happened To … ?

  A push to legalize marijunana use that was started in May by billionaire Peter B. Lewis has been waiting for a decision since several pro…

  

  Cleveland
• Upcoming Events in 2012
  **If you are interested in holding an event in your area please call 202-483-5500.
• NORML Canada Women’s Alliance Calgary & Area Meeting | Facebook

  Facebook is a social utility that connects people with friends and others who work, study and live around them. People use Facebook to ke…

  
  

   

  Facebook
• NORML Canada Women’s Alliance – Victoria Meets! | Facebook

  Sign UpFacebook helps you connect and share with the people in your life. NORML Canada Women’s Alliance – Victoria Meets! Going (4)…

  
  

   

  Facebook
• Spring Fling 2012

  Come out of the cold and join us for a cocktail mixer/silent auction where you can meet the National NORML Board of Directors, high-profi…

  

  Pingg

• Support the NORML Women’s Alliance

• If you too believe in a better and safer world, please consider donating to the NORML Women’s Alliance today. Thank you so much for your financial and moral support.

• Women will be the deciding factor in moving public opinion towards repealing marijuana prohibition. In order to reach out to more women, and continue to build a powerful coalition, the NORML Women’s Alliance is looking to raise money to spread awareness in several different ways:

  1) PSAs and educational announcements on websites, blogs and magazines.

  2) Produce and distribute literature/educational materials about the NORML Women’s Alliance, and the negative effects of marijuana prohibition on women and families.

  3) Develop resources for our community organizers. Funding for travel, training and recruitment.

  4) Provide scholarships to send more women to NORML conferences and related conventions/festivals.

• Donate

  Women will be the deciding factor in moving public opinion towards repealing marijuana prohibition. In order to reach out to more women, …

  

  Norml

The conversation found its way to marijuana legalization which led to Barney Frank calling out the hypocrisy of most of his conservative colleagues.

“It’s a great embarrassment to the conservatives,” said Frank, “They want to tell people who they can have sex with. Come on, all this is big government! Who can I have sex with? Who can I marry? What can I read? What can I smoke? You guys, on the whole — not all of you — but the conservatives are the ones who intrude on personal liberty there.”

The debate got heated between Frank and George Will. “I mean, personal liberty, if someone wants to smoke marijuana who’s an adult, why do you want to make them go to jail?” Frank questioned.

“I need to know more about whether it’s a gateway drug to other drugs, I need to know how you’re going to regulate it,” George Will replied.

“Anything is a gateway to anything,” Representative Frank shot back, “That’s the slippery slope argument which is a very anti-libertarian argument. The fact that if somebody is doing something that’s not in itself wrong, that it might lead later on to something else then stop the something else. Don’t lock them up for smoking marijuana.”

Will defended himself claiming, “What you’re calling a cop-out, I’m calling a quest for information.”

“How long’s it going to last, George?” Frank asked, “We’ve been doing this for decades.”

Watch the clip below:

You can read more coverage of this story here and here.

Georgetown, MA – This evening, attendees at the Second Annual Massachusetts Cannabis Convention hosted by the Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition/NORML (MassCann/NORML) at the Crowne Plaza in Natick heard the major results of a live telephone poll conducted in November by DAPA Research Inc. of 600 Massachusetts voters with a margin of error of +/-4%.

The most significant findings:

*Fifty-eight percent (58%) support legalizing marijuana and regulating it in the same manner as other agricultural commodities with sales prohibited to underage persons (69% Democrats, 44% Republicans, 54% Other).

*Sixty-two percent (62%) are more likely to support legalization if the proposed law would regulate the cultivation and sale of marijuana to adults and tax it in the same manner as the state currently regulates alcohol (70% Democrats, 56% Republicans, 60% Other).

*Fifty-four percent (54%) oppose the federal government disregarding state law in states legalizing marijuana, while only 35% support the federal government’s disregarding state law.

“The data strongly suggests that Massachusetts voters are more ready than voters in any other state to end prohibition and establish reasonable regulation of cannabis cultivation and commerce for all purposes,” said Steven S. Epstein, a founder and currently an officer of MassCann/NORML. “The data also establishes that if the legislature does not enact a law allowing medical use of marijuana this session the voters will overwhelmingly, perhaps 80%+, approve the voter initiative for the Humanitarian Medical Use of Marijuana at the ballot box in November.”

“Legalization is essential to ending crime created by the prohibition of cannabis,” said Cara Crabb-Burnham, a member of MassCann/NORML’s Board of Directors. “It is important to recognize legal vendors will card customers and keep it out of the hands of children.”

* * *

For more information contact:
Michael Crawford, 978-502-4080
Attorney Steven Epstein, 978-352-3300

The latest poll to ask the American people their opinions on medical marijuana and marijuana legalization reveals some disturbing trends for opponents of marijuana prohibition.

21st Century Legalization Polls by major news and polling organizations (click for full size version)

According a recent CBS News poll conducted at the end of October, a slim majority of 51 percent continues to think that marijuana use should be illegal. But support for specifically allowing doctors to prescribe marijuana for serious medical conditions – or legalized “medical” marijuana – is far stronger: 77 percent Americans think it should be allowed.

CBS’s poll compares well to the bulk of polls on the issue over the past two years, which have ranged from 40% to 46% support for full-legalization.  It’s interesting to note that no news organization has ever shown a poll with majority support for full-legalization; the five polls showing 50% or greater support all come from Zogby, Angus Reid, and Gallup.

Still, even though most Americans support this, just three in 10 believe that the marijuana currently being bought in this country under state-authorized medical marijuana programs is being used in the way it has been authorized: for alleviating suffering from serious medical conditions.

In previous posts we’ve noted the gap between medical-only and full-legalization has shrunk from 44% to 20% in the Gallup Polls.  This CBS poll shows 77% nationwide for “Do you think doctors should be allowed to prescribe small amounts of marijuana for patients suffering from serious illnesses?” but also shows only 31% of the country believes “marijuana that is purchased in this country through state authorized medical marijuana programs is being used to alleviate suffering from serious medical illnesses”.  Majorities of Republicans (62%) and Independents (51%) and a plurality of Democrats (44%) believe “most of it is being used for other reasons”.

As usual, people between the age of 18-29 support legalization (52%) as do liberals (66%).  Greatest support geographically is again found in the West (48%).  But surprisingly, the Midwest (43%) beats the Northeast (41%) in support and Independents (48%) have greater support for legalization than Democrats (45%).  Also as usual, and still vexing for legalization proponents, is the gender gap of 11 points between men (46%) and women (35%).

NORML’s mission is to move public opinion sufficiently to achieve the repeal of marijuana prohibition. Similarly, one of the intended goals of the NWA is to sufficiently move public opinion forward among women. Because without increased public support among women, we will arguably never bring about an end to this failed, destructive war of cannabis consumers.

There exists a startling gender gap between men and women when it comes to the issue of marijuana legalization. And even though over the past decade the work of NORML and likeminded organizations have effectively shifted public opinion overall in favor of rational marijuana policies – from just 36 percent public support in 2005 to 50 percent public support today – the gap between men and women’s support for legalization remains nearly the same now as it was then.

Here’s some statistics:

According to a 2005 nationwide Gallup poll, 41 percent of men said they favored cannabis legalization versus 32 percent of women, a gap of 9 percent;

According to a 2007 Zogby poll commissioned by NORML that asked, ‘Do you support amending federal law to remove criminal penalties for the use of marijuana by adults,’ 57 percent of men supported such a measure versus 41 percent of women, a difference of 16 percent;

According to a 2010 Gallup poll, 51 percent of men favored legalizing cannabis versus 41 percent of women, a gap of 10 percent;

A finally, the most recent Gallup survey from 2011 found that 55 percent of men favored legalization, but only 46 percent of women did so, a difference of 9 percent.

Are we making progress in shifting public opinion overall? Yes. But there continues to exist a significant and troubling gender gap that limits our efforts to bring about majority support for responsible cannabis liberation. The NWA seeks to close this gap by reaching out, engaging with, educating, and addressing the unique concerns of women. You can learn more about the NORML Women’s Alliance and their work here.

If you live in Missouri, and want to get involved, MO NORML and Show-me Cannabis Regulation will be holding a strategy meeting this Saturday, November 19th. For more information see the message below from Dan Viets, Missouri NORML Coordinator.

Dear Friends and Supporters of Missouri NORML:

Missouri NORML in conjunction with Show-Me Cannabis Regulation is holding a special meeting next Saturday, November 19, 2011 from noon to 6:00 p.m. at the Arts & Science building at the University of Missouri here in Columbia. this event will be a kickoff for the campaign to place marijuana legalization on the Missouri ballot in November, 2012.

We will be brainstorming ideas for how to move this campaign forward effectively and efficiently. We will be sharing ideas with our fellow activists from the state of Missouri. We will be talking with folks who have experience in similar campaigns to get their advice on how we can gather the signatures we need as quickly as possible.

SMCR has chosen to proceed with a Constitutional amendment proposal. This means we will need to gather nearly 150,000 signatures on petitions to place this issue on the ballot before next May. We will need the help of every one of our supporters to make this happen.

Following the meeting Saturday afternoon, we will hold a Dinner/Party/Fundraising event at one of Columbia’s finest restaurants. We ask everyone who attends to please bring something, large or small, which can be auctioned to help us raise funds for the campaign.

Please join us and become part of this historic effort to end the terrible injustice of cannabis prohibition in Missouri. For more information about the proposed initiative, go to www.showmecannabis.org. There is a football game in Columbia next Saturday so hotel and motel rooms will be in short supply. If you plan to stay in Columbia, you should probably search for a room immediately. You may need to look at accommodations in towns nearby since the hotels here may be full.

Sincerely,
Dan Viets, Missouri NORML Coordinator

You can see coverage of the proposal on Missouri’s local FOX affiliate here.

I have the lead essay in the journal, which also features forthcoming contributions from NORML’s Executive Director Allen St. Pierre and other notable drug law reform advocates.

Below is an excerpt from my commentary, entitled, “Cannabis Impact on Health Justifies Its Legalization, Not Its Criminal Prohibition.”

CANNABIS’ IMPACT ON HEALTH JUSTIFIES ITS LEGALIZATION, NOT ITS CRIMINAL PROHIBITION
via CATO Unbound

In July 2011, the Obama Administration rebuffed an administrative petition filed by a coalition of public interest organizations, including NORML, which sought to reassess cannabis’ Schedule I status under federal law. Yet little if any scientific basis exists to justify the federal government’s present prohibitive stance, and there is ample scientific and empirical evidence to rebut it.

… Ultimately, … none of the potential health risks associated with the adult, responsible use of cannabis in any objective way justify the substance’s present Schedule I prohibitive status or legitimize the use of state and federal force to restrict consumers from engaging in the plant’s production, distribution, or consumption. Nor do they justify the Obama Administration’s present heavy-handed attempts to interfere with the rule of law in states that have enacted policies that diverge from that of the federal government’s.

The concerns raised by federal lawmakers and the present administration regarding the potential health implications of cannabis do not validate the drug’s continued criminalization. Just the opposite is true. There are numerous adverse health consequences associated with alcohol, tobacco, and prescription pharmaceuticals – all of which modern scientific inquiry has determined to be far more dangerous and costlier to society than cannabis – and it’s precisely because of these consequences that these products are legally regulated and their use is restricted to particular consumers and specific settings. Similarly, a pragmatic regulatory framework allowing for the limited legal use cannabis by adults would best mitigate the health risks associated with the drug’s use and abuse. At a minimum, this framework would require federal lawmakers to reschedule cannabis from its archaic and unscientific Schedule I prohibitive status. At best, such a scheme would demand that cannabis be ‘descheduled’ and removed the from the federal Controlled Substances Act altogether.

You can read my entire essay here.

Continue to check back often to the CATO Unbound website as several other essays on the topic, including a commentary by LEAP‘s Norm Stamper, will be added to the site and discussed in the coming days.