Matt Macek Eng 101: Essay 4 A.

Cleary 18 June 2013 An Unscheduled Change Diane Monson was a normal woman living with chronic back pain and spasms. She had tried a multitude of different prescription medication, but none were successful. Since she lived in California, her doctor suggested trying marijuana. From 1999 to 2002, she used marijuana with no interference with her daily life. Then, one day in August 2002, agents from the federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and local police, raided her home. They confiscated and destroyed her six medical cannabis plants. The plants were deemed legal under local guidelines, and the states Compassionate Use Act, by the local district attorney. The DEA is yet to press charges. Similarly, Angel Raich was harassed by the DEA for possessing legal medicinal marijuana. Raich, a mother of two, has an inoperable brain tumor. The tumor causes her chronic pain and a slew of other conditions that her doctors say defy conventional treatments. Raich was so weak at one point that she was confined to a wheelchair. She decided, as a last ditch effort to relieve her pain, to follow her doctors advice and give marijuana a try. Raich soon retired her wheelchair, as her symptoms eased, due to the drug work[ing] wonders. Since 1996, eighteen states and the District of Colombia have allowed the use of marijuana as a medicine. Citing multiple test results and reports, the governments of these states have allowed marijuana to be a useful medicine in the fight against a wide variety of diseases and ailments, ranging from multiple scorosis, to chronic pain, to post traumatic stress disorder.

However, according to the Federal Drug Administration, cannabis is a Schedule I drug. Schedule I drugs, such as heroine, peyote, and Magic Mushrooms, are considered to have a high potential for abuse, no accepted medical use in the US, and a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug under medical supervision. The governments of the nineteen states/districts, have concluded themselves that marijuana doesnt meet the requirements of Schedule I classification, so where does it fit? Schedule II drugs, like cocaine, methamphetamine, oxycodone, and morphine have the same high potential for abuse and abuse of these drugs may lead to severe physical or psychological dependence, but have accepted medical use in the US. Marijuana doesnt even fit into Schedule II, it has the roughly the same addictiveness as caffeine, and is less addictive than alcohol. To be considered a Schedule III drug, the substance must have a potential for abuse less than the drugs in Schedules I and II, and abuse of the drug may lead to moderate or low physical dependence or high psychological dependence. Marijuana fits these requirements, but isnt accepted as a medical treatment in the US. However, it has been used as medicine for over 4000 years. Marijuana has been used medically since 2737 BC. It was first used in ancient China as a treatment for gout, malaria, rheumatism, and a handful of other illnesses. By 1400 BC, the Indians were using it medicinally, and by 70 AD the Greek empire listed it in a pharmacopoeia, a book designed to help users create home remedies for common health issues. In the mid-1800s marijuana made it into the United States. In 1860 the Ohio State Medical Society held the first ever clinical conference on marijuana. It was only downhill from there, as marijuana became widely used by immigrants as an intoxicant. By the 20th century, few members of mainstream, Protestant, Caucasian society were using marijuana, limiting it generally to lower socioeconomic groups. During the 1930s, public opinion had drastically turned against

marijuana following a misinformation campaign by the federal government, calling marijuana a killer drug in which lurks murder, insanity and death. Racist and anti-immigrant spattered newspaper articles blamed marijuana as a catalyst for the heinous crimes users were said to commit. Around this time the government funded Reefer Madness released. Reefer Madness depicts high school students smoking the devil weed, going insane, and murdering their parents. It wasnt until the 1970 Controlled Substances Act that marijuana was completely made illegal. According to the Controlled Substances Act, possession of marijuana for sale or distribution is a felony, whereas possession for personal use is a misdemeanor. In 1972 thenPresident Richard Nixon established the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse. The NCMDA decided that Congress had gone too far, and proposed decriminalizing possession of marijuana and casual distribution of small amounts not involving profit, would no longer be an offense. The findings were largely ignored. Also in 1972, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) made a petition to the Drug Enforcement Administration, requesting that marijuana be made into a Schedule II drug, so that it may be prescribed by physicians. It wasnt until 1986, and a court order, that the DEA actually held public hearings on NORMLs petition. In 1988 Administrative Law Judge Francis Young called marijuana one of the safest, therapeutically active, substances known to man. While he admits that marijuana can be abused he goes on to say the same is true of dozens of drugs listed as Schedule II, that are routinely prescribed by physicians. The DEA overruled Judge Youngs ruling, saying that the evidence presented was limited to testimony of individuals who had used marijuana for those conditions and the testimony of psychiatrists or general practice physicians. There is not a shred of credible evidence to support any of their claims. In 1996, after the states of Arizona and California legalized medical

marijuana the DEA threatened to take action against physicians to prescribed marijuana. In 1997, a group of doctors in California sued the federal government to block such action. Finally in October of 2003, Conant et al. v. McCaffrey was concluded, in favor of the doctors, when the US Supreme Court let the ruling of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals stand, allowing physicians to recommend marijuana to patients. However, in 1998, federal officials filed suit to shut down marijuana cooperatives that provided medicinal marijuana to patients. United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative argued that medical necessity made them exempt from federal laws against growing marijuana. The 9th Circuit Court agreed, but the federal officials appealed the ruling, and in May 2001, the US Supreme Court ruled that medical necessity wasnt a valid exemption from federal drug laws. In order for marijuana to be moved from Schedule I to Schedule III, there needs to be government approved testing. The DEA has the power to approve or deny any access to marijuana. In 1999, the University of Massachusetts requested to grow marijuana for research that the FDA had approved, it took four years and a court order to get a response from the DEA, they denied it and refused to comment on the matter. The DEA effectively is prohibiting research that might lead to FDA approval of marijuana as a federally authorized prescription drug, says the Orange County Register. The decision said, in effect, that the feds dont approve of the medicinal use of marijuana and they will block any research that might challenge that predetermined opinion. The only federal producer of marijuana is a farm at the University of Mississippi, and they arent applying for FDA approval. To get FDA approval, you must manufacture the drug so you know the exact makeup, and then test it, after these steps you apply for FDA approval. With the only federally endorsed producer of marijuana not researching and not applying for approval, Its really impossible says Steve Fox, director of government

relations at the Marijuana Policy Project in Washington, DC. In order to get FDA approval for research on marijuana the research must go through a special panel for approval, You have to show [that] the marijuana would be a more effective treatment for a condition than other drugs out there, which is a standard that is not applied to any other new drug proposal, Fox continues, [the government] is not being honest about what it is doing. A 1999 study done by the American Medical Association (AMA) and the federal governments Institute of Medicine (IOM) supported medicinal marijuana. Limited, controlled evidence supports the view that smoked marijuana and tetrahydrocannibinol (THC) can provide symptomatic relief in patients with MS, spinal cord injuries, and other causes of spasticity reads a report done by the Council on Scientific Affairs of the AMA. The report goes on to say that marijuana stimulates appetite and increases caloric intake in normal subjects. These effects help relieves the nausea faced by chemotherapy patients, and the wasting effects of AIDS. The California Medical Association, and the California Nurses Association, points out in a brief of Ashcroft v. Raich that the government does not dispute the facts that the plaintiffs here suffered painful, debilitating diseases that have not responded to conventional medicines, and that have responded to medical cannabis. Thus, the factual record is clear that for these patients, the use of medical cannabis ameliorates their suffering and pain, and affirmatively improves their condition. Mitch Earleywine, a drug researcher and director of clinical training in psychology at the University of Southern California notes that, thousands of medical [marijuana] users around the country dispute the idea that there are not any medicinal uses for marijuana. The state of Alabama, for example, filed an amicus brief in support of Raich. As a state that doesnt have legislature allowing medical marijuana, Alabama has a unique view on the proceedings of Ashcroft v. Raich.

The federal government said it has the power under the 1970 Controlled Substances Act to prohibit marijuana possession by individuals. Randy Barnett, a law professor at Boston University, and Raichs attorney told the justice that if patients in California patient grow marijuana for their own use, it doesnt fall under federal jurisdiction. The class of activities involved in this case are non-economic and wholly intrastate, he told the justices. However, the federal government claims that it must have the power to regulate all marijuana if it is to control the interstate market. The governments attempt to regulate non-economic activities within states raises many concerns even with unaffiliated parties, such as the state of Alabama. In its brief of the Raich case, the state says The question presented here is not whether enforcement of the nations drug laws is good criminal policy, it most assuredly is. The question, rather, is whether the Constitution permits the federal government, under the guise of regulation interstate commerce, to criminalize the purely local possession of marijuana for personal medicinal use. It does not. As the courts argue the semantics of marijuana, people are being arrested for simply possessing marijuana. Since 1992, there have been nearly 13,000,000 arrests on marijuana charges, nearly 12,000,000 are on simple possession for personal use. These arrests make up nearly half of all drug related charges in the US, costing the states approximately $10,400 per arrest, leading to a grand total of $7.6 billion annually. Despite the large amount of money being dumped into the prohibition of marijuana, almost 80 million Americans admit to using it at some point in their lives, including former Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. Speaking on the 40th anniversary of marijuana prohibition, then-President Jimmy Carter said: Penalties against drug use should not be more damaging to an individual that use of the drug itself. Nowhere is this more clear than in the laws against the possession of

marijuana. In 1997, a cancer patient, named Todd McCormick, was arrested, by federal agents, for possession and cultivation of marijuana. McCormick was sentenced to 5 years in federal prison, even though he broke no state laws. Another case of the feds stepping into state affairs include the case of Edward Czuprynski, who was convicted in federal court of possession of 1.6 grams of marijuana. In his home state of Michigan, he would have received a $100 fine. However, since he was in federal court, he was handed a 14 month stint in federal prison, and lost his license to practice law, and his law firm closed down. There are no criteria for a US attorney will enter a marijuana case. The government could prosecute all marijuana offenders in America if it wanted to, but it charges less than 2% of all arrests, all that needs to happen is a federal prosecutor may take a special interest in the case. However, for medicinal uses, there are alternatives. Dronabinol, known as Marinol, is a synthetic form of THC. Marinol was approved by the FDA in 1985, and had the DEA hold hearings on it in 1986. There are a few drawbacks to Marinol, unfortunately. It is only available in pill or suppository form, not allowing patients to get it into their systems quickly. The pill also prohibits the patient form adjusting the dose themselves. Moreover, THC isnt the only therapeutic substance that marijuana contains. Canadian and British scientists are working on another extract, called Sativex. Sativex is delivered via a spray absorbed under the tongue, making it easier to take and faster acting than Marinol. Earleywine, however, isnt sure that Sativex is any better than marijuana that is vaporized, to remove carcinogens, and inhaled, citing concerns about the pharmaceuticalization of marijuana. Given its effectiveness and safety, being able to grow your own medicine and not having to pay prescription prices is a huge benefit for people, says Hiliary McQuie of Americans for Safe Access. Marinol costs roughly $300 a month, and

Sativex costs about $275 per bottle, both prices are about 10 times more than street value for the comparative marijuana. Claudia Jensen, a physician in Callifornia who prescribes marijuana to treat attention deficit disorder (ADD), says that the real problem with allowing patiets to use canna bis as a medication is economics. If cannabis were approved for use in the [ADD] market alone, it could significantly impact the $1 billion a year sales for traditional [ADD] pharmaceuticals. She goes on to say that if you multiply those numbers across the multiple diagnoses that can be treated by marijuana it is easy to see the pharmaceutical industry would suffer beyond calculation. Effective pharmaceutical versions of marijuana could have widespread impact, on both sides of the issue. On the one hand, it could make it more diffiuclt to pass new state medical marijuana laws, because legislators may say You dont need to grow it yourself since you can buy it at the pharmacy, says Fox, At the same time, if marijuana is acknowledged as a medicine, the obvious question would be: Does it make sense to arrest people who are using the same thing but growing it themselves? Homegrown marijuana is likely to be much cheaper than pharmaceutical versions, and for some people the smoked variety works better. Countries like Canada and the Netherlands have very liberal laws regarding marijuana that America could learn from. In the Netherlands it is still illegal to buy marijuana, despite public belief. The government began permitting possession and sale of small amounts of marijuana in 1976. Over the next few years marijuana began to be sold in government licensed coffee shops and pharmacies. The limit on the leniency of the government is when more than 5 grams are purchased per person. Canada, on the other hand, completely legalized medicinal marijuana. Despite statistics saying that the number of Canadians that use marijuana doubled in a decade, from 7.4% in 1994 to 14% in 2004, the issue isnt with the new law. No one knows how much

of the increase is the result of users feeling freer to report their actual usage more honestly. says Eugene Oscapella, a founder of the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy. Oscapella, who is also an attorney, states that drug-prohibition is a large industry. Its an industry for organized crime. Its an industry for politicians. There are all these mom-and-pop operations across the country. Theyre making $50,000 to $60,000 a year growing something in the backyard. And theyre quite happy with the law the way it is. Making marijuana a Schedule III drug could be one of the greatest things for Americas economy. In 2010 alone, California saw an extra $150 million in taxes at the federal, state, and local levels. If marijuanas schedule was changed, this boom of money coming into the government could be used for a multitude of things. If it were taxed like tobacco is in Illinois, for example, the increase in revenue would help turn the ailing budget around. Illinois could put teachers back to work, fix the roads, or even pay back some of the debt that the state has acquired over the years. On the national level, things like the national debt, which is currently at $16 trillion and climbing, could have payments being made towards it. According to the Cato Institute, America spends $41.3 billion on the War on Drugs annually. Of that $41.3 billion, $8.7 billion is used on the prohibition of marijuana. Not only would the taxes bring money in, the money that is currently being used to control this medication could be averted into areas that could use the funding. Keeping marijuana as a Schedule I drug isnt only wrong, but inhumane. People are using it to great effect, yet the government refuses to believe it. People need to know that there are more options than just legalization, and prohibition. A schedule change of marijuana would be the best option and a great middle ground for all involved. It would allow patients that need marijuana to use it, and bring tax money into the government. The science is there, and the

people are willing. The government just needs to open its ears, and its mind to the idea that marijuana isnt the most deadly thing that has ever existed. It isnt as dangerous as crackcocaine, as DEA administrator Michele Leonhart would have you believe. Even Ms. Leonhart admits that the usage of medical marijuana should be between a patient and their doctor.

Works Cited Marshall, Patrick. "Marijuana Laws." CQ Researcher 11 Feb. 2005: 125-48. Web. 17 June 2013. "Schedules of Controlled Substances." LII. Cornell University Law School, n.d. Web. 17 June 2013. "The Truth About Sativex." CLEAR The Truth About Sativex Comments. Clear UK, n.d. Web. 17 June 2013. Miron, Jeffery A., and Katherine Waldock. "The Budgetary Impact of Ending Drug Prohibition." The Cato Institute. Cato Institute, n.d. Web. 20 June 2013.