Skip to main content

Medical Marijuana

Assemblyman Ammiano at the Students for Sensible Drug Policy Conference

Tom Ammiano addressing the conference
California Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-SF), the author of California's marijuana legalization bill, is not just a serious guy, he's a seriously funny guy, and Ammiano's comedic talent was on full display Saturday afternoon as he closed out the first full day of the Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) conference at the Fort Mason Center in San Francisco. After a long day of grueling panels on medical marijuana, psychedelics, state and local drug reform, the Mexican drug war, marijuana legalization, and harm reduction, among others, a taste of Ammiano was just the thing to revive flagging student activists. Mixing earthy language and humor, the openly gay Ammiano sketched the intertwined history of gay activism, the AIDS crisis, and medical marijuana in the Bay Area, and he didn't let party loyalty get in the way of telling it like it was. "Bill Clinton was shit on this issue," he said. "He put out that edict that doctors couldn't prescribe it," referring to the Clinton administration's effort to try to intimidate doctors by threatening to jerk their DEA licenses to prescribe drugs if they recommended medical marijuana to patients. "That's not an adult way to deal with an issue, and it's certainly not a statesman-like way." The administration lost that one in the Supreme Court. Ammiano was a bit kinder to the current White House occupant. "In terms of Obama," he said, "the messaging is good, but it's sometimes contradictory. Still, history isn't always linear. But I'm here to tell you this movement has never been stronger; we've never been on the cusp in such a pronounced way." Mentioning the Tax and Regulate Cannabis 2010 initiative that will in all likelihood be on the California ballot in November, Ammiano said he was working closely with initiative organizers and that their efforts were not competitive, but complementary. He also unleashed a bit of pot humor, noting that 57 people had signed initiative petitions twice. "You can imagine what they were doing just before that," he said before switching into a stoner voice. "Dude, let me sign this again to make sure it passes," he role-played to gales of laughter.
students and others attending Ammiano talk
Regarding his bill's prospects in Sacramento, the dapper and diminutive Ammiano reported that there is a lot of sympathy, even among conservatives, but many are still afraid to say so out loud or to vote yes for the record. "If we voted in the capitol hallways, we'd be home free," he said, before engaging in a replay of dialogues he's had with other lawmakers. "They come up to me and say, 'Man, I used to smoke that shit in college, let's tax the hell out of it.' And I'd say, 'Are you with me then?' and they'd say, 'Oh, no, man, I can't do that.'" Ammiano also mentioned Barney Frank's federal decriminalization bill. "I guess it's a queer thing," he said, mincing mightily and pretending to swoon over Frank. "You guys ought to get married," someone yelled from the audience to more laughter. Ammiano predicted victory -- if not this year, soon. "We have a strategy," he said. "We have our shit together, boys and girls, and that's something they're not ready for." And then he was gone, leaving an appreciative audience reinvigorated, still laughing, and clapping wildly. There is much more to report about on the SSDP conference. Look for a feature article on it sometime this week. in the exhibitor space

Boycott Idaho Over Thuggish Marijuana Law Enforcement? Well, We Have to Start Somewhere

Idaho has some great scenery and some great skiing, it has the Snake River Canyon, and it has a huge knot of mountains in the middle of the state that are very appealing to those who like rugged, isolated beauty. I had intended to explore them this summer, but I've changed my mind. And this story is the reason why:
Medical Marijuana Defense Falls Flat REXBURG — The Fremont County prosecutor says a drug bust in Island Park illustrates that claiming a medical use of marijuana with a certificate from another state won't help you in Idaho. Aurora M. Hathor-Rainmenti, 35 , of Garberville, Calif., was arrested Friday after she was stopped for speeding near Mack's Inn. Fremont County deputies found a baggy containing marijuana in her car with the help of a drug dog. Hathor-Rainmenti was charged with one count of possession of marijuana and two counts of possession of drug paraphernalia, all misdemeanors. Fremont County Prosecutor Joette Lookabaugh said Hathor-Rainmenti said she had a certificate from the state of California allowing for medical use of marijuana. "We want the public to know that medical marijuana certificates, even if they're from surrounding states, are not honored in Idaho," Lookabaugh said.
Okay, I understand this. Idaho is under no obligation to honor a medical marijuana card from a different state. Medical marijuana users be forewarned: If you're headed for benighted redneck country, don't expect your card to protect you. There is, however, no suggestion that Hathor-Rainmenti is anything other than a legitimate medical marijuana patient. Still, the local prosecutor takes the opportunity to pile on the charges: Not only does she get a pot possession charge, she also gets two paraphernalia charges (did she have two rolling papers, or what?). Absolutely typical, of course, and absolutely disgusting. Just another way for prosecutors to stack the deck. And not limited to Idaho. Similarly, a judge in Idaho, if he had an ounce of compassion in his body, could take her medical marijuana patient status into account during sentencing. There is no sign he did that:
On Monday Hathor-Rainmenti pleaded guilty to the possession charge and one of the possession of paraphernalia charges. The other paraphernalia charge was dropped. She was sentenced to five days in jail, with 115 days at the discretion of the court along with an $800 fine.
Nice. Throwing a patient in jail for a victimless crime—and rip her off for $800. Remember, she was not charged with drugged driving—and you better believe she would have been had there been the least suggestion she was impaired. Okay, the sentence was ugly and reprehensible, but still nothing unusual in the fascistoid heartland. But here's the kicker; here's what's got me thinking boycott:
In addition, there is a civil forfeiture under way on the borrowed car Hathor-Rainmenti was driving, as well as on the $514 in cash that was confiscated during the arrest.
Say what?!?! Asset forfeiture laws are supposed to be directed at people getting rich from selling drugs. They're problematic enough in that regard, since they create an incentive for cops to trawl for cash, distorting law enforcement priorities in the constant search for the next big score—with the loot typically used to pay for more cops and more drug dogs to find more cash to seize to pay for more cops and more drug dogs and…In short, they are little more than a form of institutionalized, legalized corruption. But Hathor-Rainmenti only had a bag of weed. She was not charged with drug distribution. And the state of Idaho is going to steal her car and every penny she had on her? This is nothing but robbery under color of law. This is the criminal justice system as organized thuggery. The thieving state of Idaho can go to hell. I am sick to death of this sort of crap. It happens all the time, and not just in Idaho. But we have to start somewhere, and that's why I'm suggesting that perhaps a boycott is in order. Idaho is a relatively small state in terms of population, and it is highly dependent on tourism. In other words, it's vulnerable. I am aware that boycotts are a blunt instrument that may not directly harm the people they are aimed at—the cops who make the busts, the prosecutors who try to hammer good people down, the judges who routinely impose such obscene sentences, the politicians who write the laws. But if the ski resorts in Sun Valley or the river guides and hotel owners along the Snake River Valley start seeing cancellations, perhaps they will be motivated to start putting some money into campaigns to end this evil. To be honest, I'm getting frustrated with playing games with state legislatures and I'm thinking it's time for some creative direct actions. We can spend years at the statehouse only to win a piddling decriminalization bill. Whoopee! Now you can only steal my stash and a few hundred of my hard-earned dollars instead of stealing my stash and my money and giving me a criminal record and some jail time. That is progress of a sort, but not nearly enough. Ditto with medical marijuana. Why is it that it seems like every new medical marijuana law is more restrictive than the last? Pretty soon we're going to end up with a medical marijuana law somewhere where you have to be dead already to qualify. So…what about an organized boycott of Idaho, for starters? Would medical marijuana defense groups like Americans for Safe Access get on board with that? Why or why not? What about NORML and the Marijuana Policy Project? Or the Drug Policy Alliance? Just the announcement of a boycott ought to start a real ruckus among the good burghers of Boise. There are 20 million or so pot smokers in the US, and they have friends and families. We are talking about tens of millions of people who could potentially participate. It could even have a real economic impact, and if that's what it takes to beat some sense into these yahoos, so be it. Individuals could do their part by writing letters to the state and local chambers of commerce, to the state tourism bureau, and to state newspapers explaining why they are going elsewhere this year. Reservations could be made and then canceled. Let 'em feel the pain. As I've said, I'm getting really tired of progress by the millimeter. I'm open to some creative tactics. A directed boycott is one of them. Here's another one: The drug defense bar grows rich defending pot people. How about after charging us $5,000 to show up in court and cop a guilty plea and $15,000 to pursue an appeal on constitutional grounds a few hundred times, you give back to the community you grow rich off of? How about a group of you picking a particular egregious locality and pro bono defending every drug case like you meant it? I mean filing motions, going to trial, no plea bargains, demanding jury trials, the works. You could probably freeze the system in a few weeks. Yeah, I know there are issues, but we could work them out. Sure, things like boycotts and forcing the criminal justice system are messy and difficult. But in the meantime, the wheels of injustice keep grinding away, chewing up our people in the process. Anybody got any better ideas? Do we begin with boycotting Idaho? Count me in.

Long-time Drug Warrior Changes His Mind, Supports Medical Marijuana and Decriminalization

John J. Dilulio Jr. once coauthored a 1996 book entitled Body Count: Moral Poverty...And How to Win America's War Against Crime and Drugs. The other two authors were Bill Bennett and John Walters, both former drug czars and infamously rabid prohibitionists. I haven't read the book, but I'm sure it's a thick serving of ugly drug war propaganda.

And I'm sure it sounds nothing like what Dilulio wrote this month in Democracy Journal:

… legalize marijuana for medically prescribed uses, and seriously consider decriminalizing it altogether. Last year there were more than 800,000 marijuana-related arrests. The impact of these arrests on crime rates was likely close to zero. There is almost no scientific evidence showing that pot is more harmful to its users’ health, more of a "gateway drug," or more crime-causing in its effects than alcohol or other legal narcotic or mind-altering substances. Our post-2000 legal drug culture has untold millions of Americans, from the very young to the very old, consuming drugs in unprecedented and untested combinations and quantities. Prime-time commercial television is now a virtual medicine cabinet ("just ask your doctor if this drug is right for you"). Big pharmaceutical companies function as all-purpose drug pushers. And yet we expend scarce federal, state, and local law enforcement resources waging "war" against pot users. That is insane.

Well, it certainly is and Dilulio deserves credit for his candor, particularly given the likelihood of hugely pissing off his former colleagues (not that they don't deserve it). I hope we hear more from him, both because there's nothing more powerful than former drug warriors speaking out for reform, and because I'm just intensely curious if there were specific events or observations that triggered the evolution of his thinking on these issues.

Moments like this illustrate something powerfully important: any of our opponents could come around at any time. Most won't, and predicting who will is probably impossible, but recognizing that any of these people could potentially end up on our side someday is instructive in terms of how we might choose to interact with them on the rare occasions that big-time drug warriors emerge from their bunkers for public engagement.

It's so easy to just hate the hell out of these people that want to put us in jail, that lie reflexively and professionally, and that preside over monumental injustices with smug callousness. But we have nothing to gain by loathing them and much to lose if our frustration betrays opportunities to build bridges that could one day foster further defection from the ranks of the great drug warrior army.

As the war on drugs continues to cascade out of favor with academics, politicians and the public, those whose careers have been defined by defending it will suffer the greatest disillusionment and may soon crave the embrace of the kind, generous and forgiving people they spent so many years trying to destroy. It would serve our interests well to make it clear that they are always welcome among us.

Stupid Arguments Against Medical Marijuana, Part 2

Some legislators in Vermont aren't thrilled about a bill to create 5 medical marijuana dispensaries in the state:

The bill has drawn opposition from the Department of Public Safety, where officials say they worry that dispensaries would fuel increased illegal drug use.

Well, I certainly understand your concerns, ladies and gentlemen, and I thank you for sharing them. Allow me to clarify one thing though, if I may; this is legal drug use we're talking about here. This is for sick people using marijuana legally with a doctor's recommendation.

You see, Vermont's patients can only obtain their medicine from illegal sources currently, so this is actually about creating a legal option and reducing illegal activity. If anyone is still anticipating problems here, I would refer you to the fact that you live in Vermont. Your neighbor grows marijuana. Vermont's epic pre-existing marijuana supply will not be substantially impacted by 5 little dispensaries that only sell to sick people. If your happy life in Vermont hasn’t already been ruined by hippies, then you have nothing to worry about with this, I assure you.

Everything You Need to Know About Marijuana Legalization

As more states begin to consider reforming marijuana laws, legislators are struggling to sort fact from fiction in the marijuana debate. Fortunately, we've already made enough progress that we have plenty of practical experience studying the impact of marijuana reform.

Our friends at NORML have compiled this useful and revealing information in a new report, Real World Ramifications of Cannabis Legalization and Decriminalization. It's an excellent resource that ought to help any reasonable person understand why ending marijuana prohibition will make the world a better place.

Colorado Congressman Fights Back Against DEA's Medical Marijuana Raids

The DEA's recent tough-guy tactics in Colorado aren't winning them any friends in the press, the public, or even in politics. Colorado Congressman Jared Polis sent a scathing letter to Attorney General Holder and President Obama demanding that DEA be required to uphold the administration's policy of respecting medical marijuana laws. Here it is in part:

Despite these formal guidelines, Friday, February 12, 2010, agents from the U.S. Department of Justice's Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) raided the home of medical marijuana caregiver Chris Bartkowicz in Highlands Ranch, Colorado. In a news article in the Denver Post the next day, the lead DEA agent in the raid, Jeffrey Sweetin, claimed "We're still going to continue to investigate and arrest people...Technically, every dispensary in the state is in blatant violation of federal law," he said. "The time is coming when we go into a dispensary, we find out what their profit is, we seize the building and we arrest everybody. They're violating federal law; they're at risk of arrest and imprisonment."

Agent Sweetin's comment that "we arrest everybody" is of great concern to me and to the people of Colorado, who overwhelmingly voted to allow medical marijuana. Coloradans suffering from debilitating medical conditions, many of them disabled, elderly, veterans, or otherwise vulnerable people, have expressed their concern to me that the DEA will come into medical marijuana dispensaries, which are legal under Colorado law, and "arrest everybody" present. Although Agent Sweetin reportedly has backed away from his comments, he has yet to issue a written clarification or resign, thus the widespread panic in Colorado continues.

On May 14, 2009, Mr. Kerlikowske told the Wall Street Journal: "Regardless of how you try to explain to people it's a 'war on drugs' or a 'war on a product,' people see a war as a war on them," he said. "We're not at war with people in this country." The actions and commentary of Mr. Sweetin are inconsistent with the idea of not waging war against the people of the State of Colorado and are a contradiction to your agency's laudable policies. [Westword]

Right on. We're witnessing a conspicuous disruption of the White House's carefully crafted effort to reduce controversy in the war on drugs, and it's clear that the silence must soon be broken in Washington. It's easy to say "we're not at war," but until you order the soldiers under your command to lay down their arms, it won't be possible to sugarcoat any of this.

New Synthetic Marijuana Products: Are They Medicine?

Recent press coverage about synthetic marijuana products (commonly known as Spice and K2) is unsurprisingly leading more people to try them. Interestingly, the drug is catching on with sick people in Kansas, where medical marijuana remains illegal:

Spice is designed to produce profoundly similar effects to herbal cannabis, so it makes sense that patients are finding it helpful. There's still a lot we don't know about it, but cannabinoid research is generally associated with a number of promising medical applications and it wouldn't surprise me to learn that the drug has something to offer.

At the very least, I'd give more weight to the claims from sick people who say it's helping them than to the claims from police and politicians that say it's potentially deadly.

Update: Uh-oh, it looks like the prohibition effort in Kansas is moving faster than I thought:

Topeka — The Senate on Thursday approved a bill that makes illegal the substances in K2 that law officials say produce a marijuana-like high. The legislation now goes to Gov. Mark Parkinson, who has said he supports the ban. [LJWorld.com]

I suppose you can make something illegal pretty fast if you don't waste time on scientific research or rational discussion.

Opponents of Medical Marijuana Should Just Give Up

This month has brought some of the most high-profile backlash we've seen since Obama's new medical marijuana policy took effect. DEA raids of a grower and two laboratories in Colorado as well as an escalating campaign by the Los Angeles DA to completely prohibit sales on his turf have again raised the stakes in a debate that many believed was almost over.

Given the rich history of obstructionism and demagoguery we've learned to expect from hard-line drug warriors, none of this is terribly surprising. But in light of the current political climate, it's really rather unclear what the opposition's gameplan is. Who's calling the shots? What's their motive? How do they expect this to play out? Having lost one public battle after another, it seems the anti-medical marijuana crusaders would want to perform some sort of cost/benefit analysis before wading once again into the political waters where they've been slowly drowning for a decade now.

Does the DEA really want to defend raiding laboratories that do nothing but test cannabis for harmful impurities? What law-enforcement interest is served by this? They tried to frame it as an administrative matter necessitated by the lab's formal permit application, but they sure as hell didn't make an appointment before crashing in there. Maybe they're more interested in the clients than the lab itself, but even if you had a database of every medical grower in the state, what would you do with it? Arresting even one of them is a political minefield.

Similarly, Los Angeles DA Steve Cooley's efforts to ban sales are so far out of step with everything around him that it's just impossible to guess what he hopes to accomplish. Even Attorney General Brown's guidelines explicitly permit distribution and there's no question at all where the people of California stand on this. Cooley is playing with fire here and he should really get a hold of himself before his madness becomes Exhibit A for the full-legalization campaign that's hitting the ballot in California this Fall.

Under Bush, I tended to assume that periodic raids and harassment were a political strategy aimed at confusing legislators in prospective medical marijuana states, but the new DOJ policy preemptively nullifies whatever dubious value that tactic may have had. Presently, it seems that medical marijuana's most impassioned enemies are at war with an inevitable reality. This isn't going to go away because nobody wants that except you. A career in law-enforcement offers many opportunities to be a hero, but this isn’t one of them.

Employment Discrimination Against Medical Marijuana Patients Must End

If 80% of Americans support medical marijuana, why do we keep hearing stories like this one:

Jane Roe has suffered from severe migraines for years… Jane tried every prescription drug imaginable but none gave her relief. She finally found the answer after receiving authorization for medical marijuana from a doctor. Not long after that, Jane was hired at a company called TeleTech. Her position involved answering customer service calls for Sprint at TeleTech's Bremerton office. Jane was up front about her situation with the company from the very start.

Roe: "I knew that I already had medical marijuana; I didn't want to have to hide it. So I went to the Human Resources Department and provided them with a copy, they said they did not want one. They told me to still go take the drug test."

Jane did as she was asked and then began her training program. On her tenth day, she was called out of the training. She was told her drug test had come back positive and she would have to leave immediately. Jane felt humiliated. [KUOW.org]

She's not the one who should be embarrassed by this. TeleTech is the second company this month to get ugly press attention for discriminating against patients. In the current political climate, only an idiot would want their business associated with this sort of reckless cruelty and prejudice.

Unfortunately, those enforcing such arbitrary policies are still hiding behind claims of conflicting laws and vague liability concerns. It might be totally incoherent, but it goes to show how federal intransigence continues to leave patients vulnerable to abuse despite improvements in enforcement policy. It's time for the White House to move beyond the argument that medical marijuana raids are a "poor use of resources," and directly acknowledge that medical use is a basic human right.

Even the worst drug warriors will be the first to insist that patients aren't arrested and jailed in the war on medical marijuana. Shouldn't firing patients from their jobs be considered comparably reprehensible?
Subscribe to Medical Marijuana