Municipal elections in British Columbia Saturday saw Vancouver get another in a string of pro-drug reform mayors, while a marijuana reformer was returned to the mayor's office in Grand Forks in the

Like other interest groups, the drug reform movement has the Obama transition under a microscope, searching for clues on the new administration's intentions as it scrutinizes those appointments for

The medical marijuana advocacy group Americans for Safe Access (ASA) filed a

• read full post
• 1 comment

It’s hard to overstate the extent to which marijuana does the opposite of what the government says it does:

The more research they do, the more evidence Ohio State University scientists find that specific elements of marijuana can be good for the aging brain by reducing inflammation there and possibly even stimulating the formation of new brain cells.
…
"When we're young, we reproduce neurons and our memory works fine. When we age, the process slows down, so we have a decrease in new cell formation in normal aging. You need those cells to come back and help form new memories, and we found that this THC-like agent can influence creation of those cells," said Yannick Marchalant, a study coauthor and research assistant professor of psychology at Ohio State. [Physorg.com]

Over and over again, research finds that marijuana appears to prevent the exact conditions we were told it might cause. It’s amazing and we’re only just getting started. Not long from now, it’s quite likely that we’ll be faced with a new climate in which marijuana’s seemingly endless medical applications become impossible to ignore, even among those most determined to do so.

In the meantime, how do we explain to skeptics that marijuana is something completely different than they’ve been led to believe? Even the most sympathetic people look at me like I’m crazy when I explain that marijuana doesn’t cause cancer and may even cure it. We’re conditioned to instinctively reject a notion such as that and it usually takes a considerable amount of personal research and reflection to even become receptive to the reality that marijuana is a fascinating substance of untold potential.

If nothing else, it shouldn’t be terribly difficult to understand why marijuana users so often report wonderful outcomes in their lives. Many of the drug’s effects are decidedly positive and the only way to obscure that fact is to constantly obstruct users from participating in public discussions of what marijuana actually is.

For Immediate Release: November 19, 2008

Medical marijuana lawsuit filed against Department of Motor Vehicles

Americans for Safe Access fights baseless revocation of patient's driver's license

Merced, CA -- A lawsuit was filed today by medical marijuana advocacy organization Americans for Safe Access (ASA) against the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) on behalf of Rose Johnson, a 53-year-old patient from Atwater. Despite Ms. Johnson's clean driving record, not having caused an accident in 37 years of driving, the DMV revoked her license on July 26, 2008 because of her status as a medical marijuana patient. The DMV refused to renew Ms. Johnson's license only after obtaining her medical records and finding out that she was a qualified medical marijuana patient. According to the DMV, Ms. Johnson's license was revoked "because of...[an] addiction to, or habitual use of, [a] drug," thereby rendering her unable to safely operate a motor vehicle, even though no evidence existed to substantiate this claim.

"The DMV cannot simply disregard California's medical marijuana law," said ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford, who is representing Ms. Johnson in her claim against the DMV. "When the voters of California enacted the Compassionate Use Act, they never intended to authorize the DMV to strip medical marijuana patients of their drivers' licenses," continued Elford. "The DMV should not be in the business of revoking the licenses of drivers like Ms. Johnson simply because she is a medical marijuana patient."

Advocates assert that the DMV policy of suspending and revoking the licenses of medical marijuana patients is widespread, occurring in at at least 8 California counties, including Alameda, Butte, Contra Costa, Glenn, Merced, Placer, Sacramento, and Sonoma. License revocations by the DMV, which have been based on a person's status as a medical marijuana patient, are often rationalized by calling the drivers "drug abusers" despite no evidence of the claim.

In 2007, Merced -- the county in which Ms. Johnson lives -- implemented a police policy that instructed its Sheriff deputies to respect state law and not to cite medical marijuana patients or seize their medicine. "The DMV is not under a different set of requirements than local police in California," said Elford. "The failure to uphold California's medical marijuana law is entirely inappropriate for any local or state agency."

The lawsuit filed today by ASA is expected to be heard in Merced Superior Court in the next few months. The lawsuit against the DMV is part of a campaign by ASA to fully implement California's medical marijuana laws.

Further information:
ASA's lawsuit against the DMV: http://AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/DMV_Writ.pdf

# # #

The drug czar's recent claim that there are more medical marijuana dispensaries than Starbucks stores in San Francisco has finally achieved the level of public embarrassment it so thoroughly deserved.

San Francisco's Department of Public Health, which issues permits for medical marijuana dispensaries, is also befuddled by the federal data.

"It was extremely incorrect," said Larry Kessler, a senior health inspector at the department. "I don't know how they got that." [San Francisco Chronicle]

SF Chronicle obtained the alleged dispensary list from ONDCP and found double listings, closed businesses, and even a business in Los Angeles. With their fraud fully exposed, ONDCP has issued a totally bizarre reply saying it's "good news" that their story got press.

It’s straight-up insane. By the time you get to the part about how many Taco Bells there are in San Francisco, you’ll join me in hoping Sarah Palin is the next drug czar so we can at least get MSNBC to give these clowns the daily fact-checking they deserve.

[Courtesy of Ohio Patient Network]

SPONSOR AND PROPONENT TESTIMONY HEARING SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 19

A Sponsor and Proponent Testimony Hearing for SB 343 has been scheduled by the Ohio Senate Criminal Justice Committee for 10:00 am on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 in the North Hearing Room at the Ohio Statehouse. Known as the Ohio Medical Compassion Act, SB 343 would allow patients and their caregivers to possess and cultivate marijuana to treat the patients' serious illness. The Proponent component of this hearing will be grounded in testimony from seasoned medical professionals. If you would like to encourage your state Senator to vote for this important legislation, please visit https://ssl.capwiz.com/mpp/issues/alert/?alertid=11445816. It is hoped that this bill will be accorded swift passage in consideration of the highly successful Michigan Initiative.

MICHIGAN LEGALIZES MEDICAL MARIJUANA

Before the statewide initiative was started in five citywide medical marijuana votes, medical marijuana won in a landslide (with 62% in Flint in February 2007; with 63% in Traverse City and 61% in Ferndale in November 2005; with 74% in Ann Arbor in November 2004; and with 60% in Detroit in August 2004). All these efforts were spearheaded by Michigan NORML http://www.minorml.org/ and it's affiliated chapters. Based on these efforts Tim Beck wrote 'Taking the Initiative; A Reformer's Guide to Direct Democracy' online at http://www.drugsense.org/caip#take.

When the Michigan Coalition for Compassionate Care http://stoparrestingpatients.org/ launched it's statewide signature drive they sought the help of Michigan NORML. The NORML members gathered a substantial share of the signatures, and then went on to support the initiative in every way possible. They wrote letters to the editor and OPEDs, which were published. They placed thousands of Yes on 1 yard signs.

What they did not do was connect their effort in any way at with NORML to preclude any perception that they were really working to legalize marijuana. Thus they set a standard of professionalism for other NORML chapters to emulate.

On Election Day, the initiative, on the ballot as Proposal 1, passed by 63% with 3,005,678 Yes votes. It passed in every county in the state. The new Michigan law, now known as The Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, will be certified and go into effect later this year. However, implementing regulations to include the patient and caregiver I.D. Card system may take until May of next year to go into effect. Unique among the 13 states with medicinal marijuana laws, covering a quarter of the U.S. population, Michigan's law recognizes the patient identifying documents of the 12 other states.

The Ohio Patient Network salutes Michigan activists for their success with the hope that it will catch not only the attention of Congress but also the Ohio State Legislature.

MEETING WITH OHIO SENATOR TOM ROBERTS

The meeting of Ohio medical marijuana activists, called by Ohio Senator Tom Roberts (D-5), was held on November 6, 2008, in the Senate Minority Conference Room on the Southeast corner of the Ohio Statehouse. Excluding the Senator and his staff, around fifteen people participated in this meeting, including Ohio Patient Network officers Jeff Horvath, Nikki Plassenthal, and Mary Jane Borden, each of whom introduced themselves by their respective titles (Vice President, Secretary, and Treasurer) and were recognized by the Senator as such.

Others in attendance included Eleanor Ahrens, Christy Becker, Jim Cowen, Tonya Davis, Dennis Day and Dawn Dunlap (Ohio Patient Action Network); Damien Hardy (Senator Roberts' aide), Brian McCann, Cher Neufer, Ed Orlett (Drug Policy Alliance), and Penny Tipps (State street Consultants).

Topics covered included LTEs; meetings with editorial boards; consumption (the Senator wanted to know how much patients typically consumed); Marinol and Sativex; possible pharmaceutical industry resistance; and opposition to the bill from government agencies. Medical marijuana advocates should be inspired by the harmony and unified purpose displayed at this meeting.

OPN ANNUAL MEETING HELD ON MAY 31, 2008

The Ohio Patient Network held its Annual Meeting on Saturday, May 31, 2008, at the offices of the Columbus Free Press at 1000 East Broad Street, Columbus, OH. Forty-three people participated in this meeting to elect the organization's officers for the coming year.

After the meeting, OPN Past President, Mary Jane Borden commented, "This is a very special board. Well over half of the original co-founders came together to seat this board, which includes three of them in the positions of President, Vice President, and Treasurer." Board President Brandy Zink said that she looks forward to setting the organization on a course to better achieve its goals and be of service to patients. "With the introduction of the Ohio Medical Compassion Act, there is a greater need for educational resources from a credible, professional organization such as the Ohio Patient Network.

The OPN Board Members are listed at http://www.ohiopatient.net/v2/content/view/16/34/

RIGHT, MORAL AND GOOD

It has been said that we are living in a time of great change. There are new voices in Washington, the legislature, and even in the world of activism. If we could offer leadership advice at this pivotal moment, we wish that change, which has been given so much lip service, would be based on the principle of right, moral, and good. We encourage leadership to weigh decision making and subsequent action using this three-legged principle. Right, moral, and good means:

Right: Right refers to the information on which decisions are made and asks if that fact base is correct. What are the holes in it and where might it be potentially wrong? Is the information on which actions are planned logical? Does it pass the smell or common sense test? Can it be substantiated by independent, third party sources? Right is not a feeling; it is the truth and cold hard facts that withstand repeated tests to discredit them.

Moral: Morality concerns principles of conduct. For moral teachings, we often look to the Golden Rule or the 10 Commandments. The Golden Rule quite simply states, "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." As most people don't seek harm, we should behave toward others as we would want them behave toward us. The 10 Commandments also provide a moral compass. "Do not bear false witness against your neighbor" - don't lie. "Do not steal" - don't take things that aren't yours. "Do not covet." - don't desire or scheme to obtain that which belongs to another. Morality doesn't equate to any specific religion or doctrine; all religions have their tests of moral conduct. Still, moral conduct pivots on the query: does action find its roots in lies, harm, theft, or greed? Would I want to be treated this way?

Good: Good is actually a two-part test. There is the definition of good as beneficial and also good as of high quality. The beneficial test of good deals with well being. Good draws a direct line to positivity, prosperity, health, and vitality. It easily bridges to its benefits to others through the greater good. Good being of high quality equates to functional excellence. When something is good, all parts work, all pieces fit together, beauty radiates, and intended results are achieved. In both definitions, good refers to a plural or to the larger whole. As a two-part test, good asks, is action both beneficial to and functional for the larger whole and for the greater good?

The right, moral, and good paradigm of decision making is a three legged stool that will topple when one leg becomes compromised. Actions cannot be moral or good if their fact base is lacking. They are neither right nor good if based in lies, theft, or greed. They can't be right or moral, if they function improperly or harm overall well being.

We encourage leadership both nationally and locally to weigh these three tenets in the decision making process and as it considers actions based on this process. If we are to engender change at this pivotal time, then change should mend the rips and tears in our culture. Engaging in thinking that is right, moral, and good - holistically - gives all of us the best chance of achieving the results that we all want and for which we chanted change in the first place.

You may wish to read another essay on this topic, "On Harmony," http://www.ohiopatient.net/v2/content/view/817/2/

You can also participate in an online discussion about it on our forum at http://www.ohiopatientnetwork.org/zot/viewtopic.php?t=535.

Come join the celebration! There will be hors d'oeuvres, a cash bar, a silent auction, and friends...

For more information, including a printable ticket, see http://ripatients.org/.

Why can’t The Economist acknowledge the political progress of marijuana policy reform without resorting to derogatory stereotypes?

Meanwhile stoners continued their slow, shuffling march to social acceptance. Massachusetts voters decided to downgrade possession of less than an ounce of cannabis to an infraction, punishable by a mere $100 fine. Michigan legalised medicinal marijuana.

Grow up. This isn’t a joke, not anymore. In Massachusetts, voters overwhelming supported reforming harsh marijuana laws that ruin lives. It’s not about getting stoned. It’s about getting an education and getting a job.

In Michigan, voters overwhelmingly agreed that it’s wrong to arrest seriously ill patients for using medical marijuana on the advice of their doctors. What the hell does that have to do with being a "stoner"? Seriously, I’d like to know. This isn’t journalism, it’s childish name-calling.

If anyone remains confused about what marijuana policy reform really is, this ought to answer your questions:

President-elect Obama has pledged to end the federal government’s war on medical marijuana, but he doesn’t take office for several weeks. Meanwhile, the DEA has spent the last 8 years periodically raiding medical marijuana dispensaries in California based on undisclosed criteria, stealing money, scaring patients, and even convicting good people on harsh charges for activities that are legal under state law.

So what happens now? With their livelihood threatened, will the bloodsucking narc-warriors dive in for one last bite? They’ve got everything mapped out and they’ve spent years investigating this (which is embarrassingly easy since these are legal, storefront co-ops). No one really knows what the marching orders will be after January, so you can bet there are scores of pissed-off drug cops just dying to throw one last flurry before the bell rings.

You’d think the election of a more supportive president would enthrall the medical marijuana community, but I’m hearing that people on the ground in California are buzzing nervously about the coming weeks with no clear indication of what direction things will go. The potential withdrawal of prosecutorial resources could have a chilling effect, but prosecutions are only one dimension of the problem. Asset forfeiture is another major concern following DEA’s recent threats against landlords, and you can bet there’s no limit to the greed and spite that has defined the federal war on medical marijuana since its inception.

So while I’ll decline to speculate what’s to come, I keep reminding myself that the federal drug warriors’ actions always carry political consequences. These raids have long sought to create the perception of impracticality surrounding state medical marijuana laws, and that strategy has failed. Medical marijuana continues to gain momentum as a political issue, as evidenced by the strong showing in Michigan and universal support from candidates in the democratic primaries.

The faceless drug war army perched over California must consider the ramifications of any ugliness they unleash in the weeks to come, because any action they take will provoke tremendous rallying cries that will surely reverberate all the way to Washington, DC. A final exhibit in the repugnance of the federal war on medical marijuana might be exactly what it takes to bring about the burial of this bullshit once and for all. If DEA wants to play hardball, it would seem wise to wait until the new referee takes the field.

The Marijuana Policy Project is seeking a Campaign Manager for MPP's Arizona ballot initiative campaign to legalize the possession and cultivation of small amounts of marijuana for patients who have a doctor's recommendation.

The overarching goal of the Campaign Manager is to successfully implement the campaign strategy from the campaign’s inception through Election Day and ensure that every possible measure is taken to win the campaign. All aspects of the campaign will be overseen by MPP’s Director of State Campaigns, with the Campaign Manager playing a key supporting role to the Director of State Campaigns and the campaign consultants. This position is based in Arizona and runs through November 2010. The Campaign Manager’s salary is $50,000 to $60,000, plus full health insurance and a modest retirement plan.
[Courtesy of MPP]

Qualifications include a minimum of two years of statewide campaign experience in a senior management position, though five or more years are preferred. The ideal candidate will be a goal-oriented, fastidious, hands-on manager. The Campaign Manager must be hardworking, get along well with people, and have excellent communication and management skills. Applicants who have ties to the Arizona political community will be given priority, although such ties are not a requirement.

Responsibilities include overseeing and successfully completing the signature drive to place the initiative on the November 2010 statewide ballot; managing all day-to-day campaign operations; acting as first point of contact for the general public and the local activist community; ensuring that the local activist community is happy and engaged; identifying, training, and successfully managing and utilizing regional volunteer spokespeople; overseeing the distribution of all written campaign materials, such as campaign literature, Web site updates, etc.; working closely with MPP’s State Campaigns office in Las Vegas to ensure that the campaign complies with all applicable campaign laws and successfully files all campaign finance reports; working closely with the campaign’s in-state consultants; conducting fundraising meetings with potentially major donors; assisting in-state, paid consultants with coalition-building efforts as requested, resulting in a substantial number of community leaders and organizations publicly backing the campaign; and assisting the consultants with media operations, as requested.

To apply, please see http://www.mpp.org/jobs/process.html and follow the instructions there. Interviews are being conducted on a rolling basis, so interested candidates are encouraged to apply as soon as possible.

Dear friends:

Not only did Tuesday's election produce two major marijuana policy victories — MPP's sweeping wins in Michigan and Massachusetts — but we also saw signs of progress in Congress and the White House.

President-elect Barack Obama has said — often in response to questioning from MPP — that he does not support the federal government arresting medical marijuana patients in states where medical marijuana is legal.

As recently as Monday of this week, his campaign said: "Many states have laws that condone medical marijuana, but the Bush Administration is using federal drug enforcement agents to raid these facilities and arrest seriously ill people. Focusing scarce law enforcement resources on these patients who pose no threat while many violent and highly dangerous drug traffickers are at large makes no sense. Senator Obama will not continue the Bush policy when he is president."

The congressional landscape also changed for the better. With several contests still undecided, the Democrats are likely to pick up at least 23 new seats in the House of Representatives — 21 of which belonged to medical marijuana opponents in the last Congress. And three senators who opposed medical marijuana were replaced with newcomers who have already voted or spoken out in favor of protecting medical marijuana patients. 

Some of Congress' most outspoken medical marijuana opponents lost their seats, like Congressman Tom Feeney (R-Fla.), Congressman Ric Keller (R-Fla.), and Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colo.). In fact, on the Democratic side, every single incumbent who lost Tuesday consistently opposed protecting medical marijuana patients from arrest and jail.

And candidates who are close allies of MPP won spots in the House of Representatives, like Nevada state Sen. Dina Titus (D), a strong supporter of medical marijuana access.

There is still more work to do in coming election cycles, of course. MPP's team on Capitol Hill will be working to ensure that presidential appointees (like the head of the DEA and the drug czar) are aligned with the commitment to marijuana policy reform that President-elect Obama expressed on the campaign trail. And we expect that medical marijuana legislation will be introduced in 2009, presenting an enormous opportunity to protect medical marijuana patients at the federal level.

You can help make the most of this changing dynamic in Congress and the White House. Any donation you can make today will help MPP push for the change that conditions are so ripe for.

Sincerely,

Rob Kampia
Executive Director
Marijuana Policy Project
Washington, D.C.

P.S. As I've mentioned in previous alerts, a major philanthropist has committed to match the first $3.0 million that MPP can raise from the rest of the planet in 2008. This means that your donation today will be doubled.

[Courtesy of the Coalition for Medical Marijuana--New Jersey, Inc.]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Ken @ (609) 394-2137

Michigan passes medical marijuana law; when will New Jersey?

WHO: Residents of Michigan

WHAT: Passed a medical marijuana law, becoming the 13th state in the U.S. to do so

WHEN: Tuesday, November 4, 2008

WHERE: In the voting booths of the State of Michigan

WHY: To protect seriously ill or injured patients who use marijuana therapeutically with the recommendation of licensed physicians

The Coalition for Medical Marijuana--New Jersey, Inc., (CMMNJ) congratulates Michigan on becoming the 13th state in the U.S. to remove statewide penalties for the use of medical marijuana. Michigan voters yesterday approved the measure that would protect patients who use marijuana on the recommendation of a licensed physician. CMMNJ Executive Director, Ken Wolski, RN said, “The American people understand the need for this safe, effective and inexpensive therapeutic agent. Nearly 25% of all Americans now live in a medical marijuana state and eventually, medical marijuana will be legal throughout the country. How long will it take New Jersey to approve this? Every day, seriously ill New Jersey patients are either being arrested for using medical marijuana, or are suffering needlessly without it.”

New Jersey residents, unlike those in Michigan, are unable to pass laws through the initiative process, so they must depend on their state legislators for lawmaking. While 86% of New Jersey voters approve of medical marijuana according to the latest poll, New Jersey’s bill has been tied up in legislative committees for nearly four years. The "New Jersey Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act" (A804 & S119) http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bills/BillView.asp?BillNumber=S119 would allow patients or their caregivers to grow and use a small amount of marijuana when a licensed physician recommends it for chronic pain, nausea, cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis, Crohn’s disease, etc. New Jersey patients would be issued state ID cards so law enforcement personnel could easily see they are legal medical marijuana users, as does Michigan’s law.

The American Nurses Association, the American College of Physicians, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, the American Public Health Association, the American Academy of HIV Medicine and many other professional healthcare organizations have endorsed medical marijuana. However, the federal government opposes the medical use of marijuana and so it is not available to patients in pharmacies yet. Michigan residents will have to grow their own marijuana, as patients are allowed to do in the 12 other states that approve its use.

CMMNJ is a non-profit educational organization whose mission is to educate the public about the benefits of safe and legal access to marijuana for patients who are under the care of licensed physicians and nurse practitioners. CMMNJ is a 501(c)(3) public charity. For more info, contact:

Ken Wolski, RN, MPA, Executive Director

Coalition for Medical Marijuana--New Jersey, Inc.
844 Spruce St., Trenton, NJ 08648
609.394.2137 www.cmmnj.org ohamkrw@aol.com

ASA Court Win on San Diego ID Cards Affirmed

State Supreme Court Refuses Review, Patients Pressure Counties to Uphold Law

California counties will have to implement the state's medical marijuana identification program now that the California Supreme Court has refused to review a landmark case argued by Americans for Safe Access. The case stems from resistance in a handful of counties to provisions of California's medical marijuana law.

ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford

County officials in San Diego, San Bernardino and Merced counties filed suit against the State of California in February 2006, arguing that state law was preempted by federal law. That argument was rejected by the San Diego Superior Court in December of 2006, causing San Bernardino and Merced officials to drop their challenge. San Diego County appealed the ruling, only to be denied by the Fourth District Court of Appeals in July of this year and now by the state Supreme Court's refusal to hear their appeal. County officials have said they intend to attempt a challenge before the U.S. Supreme Court, though it has already ruled that state medical marijuana laws do not conflict with federal prohibition.

The San Diego lawsuit challenged the validity of the state identification card program, which was established by Senate Bill 420 in 2003, as well as the foundation of California's medical marijuana laws. But California courts at all levels have concluded that the ID card program and state law are valid and do not violate the state constitution.

"The San Diego case is now final under California law," said Joe Elford, Chief Counsel of Americans for Safe Access, who argued before the appellate court on behalf of patients. "The courts have made clear that federal law does not preempt state law relating to medical marijuana and that local officials must comply with California's medical marijuana laws."

In a unanimous opinion earlier this year, the Court of Appeals ruled that the federal Controlled Substances Act "signifies Congress's intent to maintain the power of states to elect 'to serve as a laboratory in the trial of novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country' by preserving all state laws that do not positively conflict with the CSA."

ASA was joined by the ACLU Drug Law Reform Project in defending the interests of patients before both the state Supreme Court and the Superior Court in San Diego. The City of San Diego registered its opposition to the County's lawsuit by filing an amicus or 'friend of the court' brief in December 2007, siding with the Attorney General and medical marijuana patient advocates in favor of implementing the law.

After the appellate court ruling, ASA put all California counties that had not yet established a voluntary patient identifcation program on notice of their obligation to implement state law, in particular the state ID card program, which both assists law enforcement and affords greater protection to patients. As a result, Fresno and Kings counties voted to issue the patient ID's almost immediately. Now, ASA is again following up with a warning for remaining California counties that refuse to obey the law.

"We expect the remaining holdout counties to implement the medical marijuana card program immediately," said Elford. "And if they continue to refuse to comply with state law, we will ask the courts to require them to do so."

For more information, see ASA's web page on the San Diego case.

Activists Protest Dispensary Owner's Conviction, Ask Congress to Intervene

A major protest by medical marijuana activists in Los Angeles this month demanded that Congress to do something about the conviction of a California man who was operating a cannabis dispensary.

Over 350 people attended a protest to support former Morro Bay dispensary collective operator Charles Lynch, whose case drew national attention when he was raided by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and prosecuted, even though he complied with state law, had a business license from the city, and was even a member of the local Chamber of Commerce.

Charlie Lynch cutting the ribbon on opening day

Organized by the Los Angeles chapter of ASA and a team of dedicated activists, the protest was attended by numerous criminal justice and patient rights organizations, and took place in front of the LA Federal Courthouse on the day Lynch was to have a hearing on a motion for a new trial. This hearing has been delayed to November 4.

Even though Lynch operated his collective within the mandates of state law and local regulation, the San Luis Obispo County Sheriff took issue with his facility and called in the DEA to close him down. Central Coast Compassionate Caregivers had been open for 11 months when federal agents raided it on March 29, 2007.

As a result of that raid, San Luis Obispo Sheriff Pat Hedges is being sued by a former patient of Lynch's for seizing her medical records and violating her privacy.

During a widely watched trial, that included segments on Reason.TV by the television host Drew Carey, the Morro Bay mayor and city attorney testified on behalf of Lynch, and he took the stand himself to describe attempts he made to operate within even federal law.

Lynch was found guilty of five federal felonies. Defense attorneys will file a motion for a new trial on November 17. Sentencing is currently scheduled for November 24 in Los Angeles.

ASA Joins Legal Fight Against Dispensary Bans

Files Amicus Brief in Suit Against Anaheim

Americans for Safe Access has thrown its support behind a dispensary that has challenged a city ban on medical marijuana patient collectives. ASA Chief Counsel Joe Elford, fresh off victory in the San Diego case, is filing an amicus or friend of the court brief on behalf of patients in the appeal of Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim. This marks the first appeal of a dispensary ban challenge.

The suit contends that the city of Anaheim cannot legally ban all patient collectives. ASA's brief argues that such bans on medical marijuana collectives are wrong on two counts.

The first reason is that conflict with California state law, and, as a result of that conflict, local bans are preempted because the state has clearly expressed an intent that dispensaries be considered legal entities.

The second reason is that interpreting state law as requiring cities and counties to tolerate dispensaries does not create a conflict with federal law. The ruling in the case of San Diego's challenge to California's medical marijuana law makes it clear that state and federal law are separate.

"Federal authorities will do what they will do," said Elford. "But they can't conscript the state to do their work for them."

The case will be heard by the 4th Appellate District, the same court that made the landmark finding in the Garden Grove case, which established that law enforcement must return cannabis seized from qualified patients.

So far, 35 cities and counties have filed amicus briefs against Qualified Patients Association, as has the California Peace Officers Association and the California Sheriff's Association. But ASA's Elford remains confident. He believes that the decisions in Garden Grove and San Diego mean that federal pre-emption only exists when there is a positive conflict, as would be the case if state law required someone to violate the federal prohibition.

"This is yet again an example of local officials wishing to enforce federal instead of state law," said Elford. "You don't have to regulate dispensaries. You just can't ban them."

A study of local communities conducted by ASA found that not only do dispensaries pose negligible problems for the communities in which they operate, they serve a critical function for the most seriously ill of California's medical marijuana patients. That report can be downloaded at www.AmericansForSafeAccess.org/downloads/dispensaries.pdf.

A decision in the case of Qualified Patients Association v. City of Anaheim is expected within the next few months.

Barack Obama wasn't the only big winner in Tuesday elections; marijuana polled just as well, if not better.

New rules governing the amount of medical marijuana Washington state patients can possess and grow went into effect Sunday.

When Barack Obama enters the White House in January, will he make good on his promise to end federal interference with state medical marijuana laws? Reformers have not easily forgotten the broken promise of George Bush, who spoke of "state's rights" regarding medical marijuana on the campaign trail only to subsequently declare war on patients and providers in states that protect medical use.

While the terms of engagement between DEA and the medical marijuana community under an Obama administration won’t be fleshed out for many months, I’d like to remind everyone what exactly we’ve been told to expect. This is the Obama campaign’s response to emails about medical marijuana:

Dear Friend,

Thank you for contacting Obama for America to inquire about the Senator's position on allowing severely ill patients to use marijuana for medical purposes.

Many states have laws that condone medical marijuana, but the Bush Administration is using federal drug enforcement agents to raid these facilities and arrest seriously ill people.  Focusing scarce law enforcement resources on these patients who pose no threat while many violent and highly dangerous drug traffickers are at large makes no sense.  Senator Obama will not continue the Bush policy when he is president.

Thank you again for contacting us.

Sincerely,

Obama for America

As I've argued previously, it's really quite silly to argue that arresting patients is a "poor use of resources" as though we'd persecute the sick if only we could afford to. The hysteria about "many violent and highly dangerous drug traffickers" is also utterly irrelevant and distracting, a frivolous pander to law & order types who may or may not require constant reassurance that Obama doesn't plan to end enforcement of all criminal laws on day 1.

And yet, despite the almost complete incoherence of Obama's position on medical marijuana, it somehow arrives at the conclusion that we must stop arresting medical marijuana patients and providers. Is there any ambiguity about that? If nothing else, the above statement insists convincingly that Obama has every intention of promptly discontinuing one of the worst excesses of the modern war on drugs. If this happens, it will be the functional equivalent of the chronically doomed Hinchey Amendment, and one could scarcely overstate the significance of such an event.

Bruce Mirken at MPP points out that marijuana reform initiatives in Massachusetts and Michigan pulled higher percentages than Obama. The numbers really are incredible:

Consider this: As I write this, with 67% of precincts reporting, marijuana decriminalization is passing in Massachusetts with 65% of the vote. Obama, who is carrying the state handily, is getting 62%.

In Michigan it’s similar. With 40% of the vote in, medical marijuana is passing with 63% while Obama is carrying the state with 55%.

These victories were expected, but the margins are just staggering. This is testament to the apparent impotence of the typical scare tactics brought to bare by our opposition. On many levels, this election left "tough on crime" politics in the dust, as a host of new issues, ideas and concerns took their place. But the significance of that would be much harder to articulate without scoring towering victories for marijuana reform. The results in Massachusetts and Michigan are the exclamation point on an electoral season that ought to entirely reshape the way crime politics are perceived by public officials.

As I’ve argued at length, the future of reform relies heavily on our ability to depict a popular mandate for changes in our drug policy. Indeed, it seems we are increasingly able to meet that challenge. A new administration brings new obstacles and new opportunities, but enter into the next stage with considerable momentum.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE   
NOVEMBER 4, 2008

Medical Marijuana Heading for Big Win in Michigan
Federal Shift Seen as One in Four Americans Now Live in a Medical Marijuana State

CONTACT: Bruce Mirken, MPP director of communications ............... 415-668-6403 or 202-215-4205
                   Dan Bernath, MPP assistant director of communications ..........................202-462-5747 x2030

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Medical marijuana supporters hailed apparent passage of Michigan's medical marijuana initiative, Proposal 1, as an important harbinger of a national shift on the issue. With Michigan becoming the 13th medical marijuana state, one in four Americans now live in a state where medical marijuana patients with a physician's recommendation are protected by law.

    AP called the race at just after 9 p.m. EST, and with eight percent of precincts reporting, Proposal 1, the Marijuana Policy Project's Michigan medical marijuana initiative, was leading, 60 percent to 40 percent. Outgoing White House drug czar John Walters personally campaigned against the measure.

    "Michigan voters just dealt a fatal blow to the federal government's cruel, dishonest war on medical marijuana and sent a stunning message to the new presidential administration and Congress," said MPP executive director Rob Kampia. "One in four Americans now live in a medical marijuana state, and the federal government has no business fighting a war against a quarter of our citizens. It may take a year or two, but the federal war on medical marijuana is dead. Finished. Over."

    With more than 25,000 members and 100,000 e-mail subscribers nationwide, the Marijuana Policy Project is the largest marijuana policy reform organization in the United States. MPP believes that the best way to minimize the harm associated with marijuana is to regulate marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol. For more information, please visit http://MarijuanaPolicy.org.

####

Michigan voters have approved Prop. 1 to protect medical marijuana patients from arrest. We now have 13 medical marijuana states. For any politicians still struggling with these concepts, I’ll be providing free tutoring sessions on remedial contemporary drug war politics.