President Obama's Policy On Drug Legalization: No On Legalization, Yes On Demand Reduction

Pot And Why Not, By Alexandra Datig

Those walking the tightrope of “casual” marijuana use question; “is pot really that bad?” The short answer is yes, it’s really that bad. The long answer is also yes and entails critical details everyone should be aware of before they think “pot is really not that big a deal” or that it’s about “something other than what it is.” The facts are pretty simple. As U.S. Drug Czar, R. Gil Kerlikowske states: “Drugs are not bad because they are illegal. They are illegal because they are bad.”

The war on drugs exists because there is a demand for drugs in the United States. According to Mexico’s President Philippe Calderon, “the United States is the world’s largest consumer of drugs.” Those who choose to consume illegal drugs like marijuana, meth, cocaine or heroin to name a few are responsible for conflict, carnage and continuous abuse and addiction. As long as the U.S. has a demand for illegal drugs or exhibits a lack of discipline by abstaining from drug abuse, Mexican cartels will keep on pushing dope into our communities. Want to end the war on drugs? Don’t do them. It’s that simple. We don’t hear about Mexico’s rampant drug problem. We hear about vicious cartels manufacturing dope and pushing it on Americans who are not being forced to do drugs. They are making the choice.

Choosing drugs is not a good thing. Legal or not, when under the influence of drugs, addicts can be unpredictable. Some drugs render a person incompetent and unproductive like P.C.P., crack or heroin, other drugs impair motor skills and enhance creative overindulgences and endanger others on roads and highways, such as today’s marijuana. Drug abuse has become a hot topic because there is a wide array of elements people want to know about like “is pot legal?” But the people are being lied to. The Pied Pipers of drug legalization are lying to us all. Whether it’s parents, students, addicts and society as a whole. As Americans, we have a great responsibility towards each other if we want a healthy society. We must be honest and forthright to one another about he harms which may face us. We have gotten none of that from drug legalizers who are eager to push their agenda, yet claim no responsibility to the devastating harms and costs of addiction.

First and foremost, pot, under Federal law, is illegal in all of the United States and is considered a Schedule I drug, meaning it is dangerous, habit forming and has no medicinal use. If you’re not close to this issue I know what you’re thinking, because some states have allowed, under state law, for marijuana to be used as a “medicine” it should mean there is some allowable use? That still doesn’t make it legal such as "you are now free and clear to move about the cabin." Not at all.

Calvina Fay, Executive Director of the Drug Free American Foundation points out the obvious: “crude marijuana grown in someone’s backyard is not medicine. It is a toxic, cancer causing weed.” Furthermore, are Americans truly to believe that marijuana is the only “medical” compound in the United States that requires no warning label on its side effects like pharmaceuticals and over the counter medicine?

John Redman, drug policy expert and Executive Director of Californians for Drug Free Youth explains it like this: “"In prevention there are two indelible truths about drug use: 1. If you reduce the perception of harm of a drug, you increase its use. 2. If you increase the availability of any drug, you increase its use. Legalizing marijuana does BOTH."

Mr. Redman also points out the great misunderstanding is that (1) marijuana is not legal, it is decriminalized by some states. This, in plain English means that decriminalization gives people who use marijuana an assertive defense in court. That’s it. (2) Doctors cannot issue a prescription for a medical marijuana card, that would be illegal under Federal and state law, as the prescription process is controlled by the FDA, a federal agency and marijuana is federally illegal. Doctors can only recommend marijuana, like they did cigarettes in the 1950s “because it was the brand doctors recommend most.” Sound familiar? Only now they figured out how to charge people for their “recommendation.” (3) The FDA recently ruled marijuana is not recognized as a medicine for various reasons. One of the most important is that there is no way to control efficacy. Meaning if one takes a Bayer aspirin, it creates a certain kind of effect. If one takes two Bayer aspirin the effect is predictable and one knows what the effect will be. With marijuana this is not the case, unless the THC content, which is the psychoactive ingredient in the marijuana plant, is gauged through a very sophisticated laboratory process. There is no way of knowing how the substance “could” affect a user and it should be obvious to us all that any such research belongs into the hands of pharmacists and licensed laboratory experts, not a bunch of hacks “dispensing voodoo medicine” out of a pot shop for large amounts of cash with bouncers at the door.

Those who are allowed by government to conduct such research, like they are in England for instance, take away the psychoactive ingredient from marijuana (the part that gets people high) and isolate the cannibanoids, which is the part of the marijuana plant that can aid cancer patients. It is then processed through a laboratory and prepared to be sold through licensed pharmacies, in a small glass bottle in the form of a mint flavored oil based oral spray for cancer patients. Furthermore, shouldn’t we ask since when is medicine dispensed in drug dens in the forms of butter, cookies, lollypops, sodas, joints, bongs, vaporizers and pipes? The answer is, since someone had the bright idea to fool people into believing that Prop. 215 was legitimate idea which it clearly was not.

Many people may also not be aware that the THC content in the marijuana of today is staggering when compared to the late 1960s. Today’s marijuana has been found to have a THC content of more than 30 percent in plant based products and 60 percent in oil-based products. When compared to the marijuana from the late 1960s, which had 1-3 percent THC content, we can’t help but wonder why some say that “pot isn’t really that bad.” Pot has gotten worse, a lot worse. Yet pot advocates tend to downplay these critical facts that have created a lot of confusion. No wonder back in the first and second century the Chinese called marijuana “ma” which means “chaotic!”

Since 1996, after Californians voted for the Compassionate Use Act, also known as Proposition 215, we have seen very little compassion and a whole lot of drama from marijuana manufacturers, distributors, advocates and even some consumers. The best thing that could ever happen to Proposition 215 is that it would be repealed, while in the process we isolate the truly ill and place our compassion where it belongs. In our hearts, not in the pockets of domestic marijuana cartels, hacks and greedy drug dealers! Over the years the people of California keep on learning that those who voted for Proposition 215, mostly made an uneducated guess, at best, when they cast their vote in favor of the measure. As a result of enacting Prop. 215 into law, our roads are not safer, our schools are exposed to dispensaries right next door and drug legalizers are selling the passive message to students that “pot is not as bad a alcohol.” Not as bad "how" dare we ask?

The Compassionate Use Act did a lot more than just aid the dying. It also violated them with no protections. Enter the conveniently organized “Patients for Safe Access”, an organization that could look after people who had problems obtaining their “medicine.” The confusion of it all became clear when a statistic came out cited by the California Police Chiefs Association, which showed only 4 percent of all medical marijuana users were considered seriously ill and could possibly benefit from THC isolates.

Reasonable people asked the obvious question: How could a “medicine” that helps relieve complications with cancer be good for you if it is smoked? A Harvard Law study later showed that marijuana caused pre-cancerous conditions in the lungs when smoked. The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), in 2009 finally included marijuana smoke as a carcinogen under Proposition 65 and concluded marijuana smoke causes cancer. Enter another organization, the “Drug Policy Alliance”, bankrolled by billionaire George Soros, sugar daddy for the drug legalization movement, formerly convicted for insider trading in France. The Drug Policy Alliance went on the media circuit and explained that marijuana has oil based smoke and that smoking it was the only “helpful” way a patient would fully absorb THC and all that goes along with it. THC would lodge in the fat cells and in some instances stay in the system for as long as those fat cells exist. And that means forever, unless removed surgically. This of course begs the question, didn’t we learn our lesson with cigarettes?

Prop. 215 gave a green light to what we should have taken a much closer look at. Were Californians foolish to believe that this was about helping cancer patients only? As Gilroy California community organizer and prevention advocate Ron Kirkish put it “kids think marijuana is medicine!” Yes, Californians were hoodwinked, make no mistake about it. Any legal text, enacted into law, which states the word “any” brings on ambiguity that causes the kind of trouble Californians and other states have bought into. Proposition 215 states: “To ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes where that medical use is deemed appropriate and has been recommended by a physician who has determined that the person's health would benefit from the use of marijuana in the treatment of cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine, or any other illness for which marijuana provides relief.” This is where the wheels came off and before voters realized they couldn’t do a darn thing about it, this verbiage containing the word “any” opened Pandora’s Box in many cities in the State of California. The reason voters or even the legislature could not do anything about it (and they did try) is because according to the California Constitution, once enacted, a ballot measure cannot be amended. Now dispensaries would spread all over the state where at one point in Los Angeles, the City was plagued with nearly 1,000 pot shops, which outnumbered Starbucks Coffee shops. Los Angeles dispensaries quickly became frowned upon and viewed as shady operations, which they are. The pot shops attracted robberies, shootings resulting in death and as it later turned out, many unreported crimes, such as the trafficking of narcotics and money laundering.

With Los Angeles City Attorney Carmen Trutanich at the forefront, cities and counties became so frustrated by the rampant spread of dispensaries, more than 150 cities and several counties placed an outright ban on dispensaries. Whereas 300 of the 478 cities in California have either a ban or some form of ordinance to control the pot shops which attracted crime and blight in communities. Few others were able to create a stronghold in their city like Richard Lee did with his Oaksterdam University, well at least for a while. Lee started a "college" where people could, in violation of federal law, learn how to grow, use and sell marijuana. Lee, also funded the signature drive for Proposition 19, The Tax Regulate and Control Cannabis Act, in which he and his minions and loyalists outspent the opposition ten to one and still lost. Proposition 19 was authored by an environmental lawyer by the name of James Wheaton and the text was quickly discarded as “one of the most poorly written measures ever to enter California politics.” The Obama Administration took an immediate position against the legalization of all illicit drugs, as well as dismay over the situation with “medical marijuana.” John Lovell, veteran law enforcement lobbyist for the California Peace Officers Association had the floor when pointing out “The last thing we need is yet another mind-altering substance to be legalized.” Proposition 19 quickly gained worldwide attention.

The Drug Policy Alliance and the California NAACP pounced all over incarceration and black arrests due to pot possession. Bishop Ron Allen of the International Faith Based Coalition, a powerful alliance of Black bishops and ministers, debunked these arguments backed by NOBLE, the National Association of Black Law Enforcement Executives, citing that the legalization of marijuana would not solve the devastation of drug abuse in the Black community. Astonishingly to many, Bishop Ron Allen himself was recovering from addiction for more than a decade and publicly stated: “When I was doing drugs I wanted them to be legal too!” and “Why would anyone legalize something that causes an addiction?” To put a complete end to this argument, then California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed SB 1449, which brought pot possession of an ounce or less down to an infraction and a $100 fine, just about equal to a parking citation.

In the mean time L.E.A.P., a drug legalization organization of retired cops took center stage with all kinds of rhetoric. You see, L.E.A.P. stands for Law Enforcement Against Prohibition and they were adamant about telling police officers how to do their job on the front lines of the drug war. 99% of all law enforcement agencies in California opposed Prop. 19 and L.E.A.P. was left in the dust. Besides they were completely out of touch with the reality of the drug problem. Something that seemed quite obvious to anyone but L.E.A.P.

One of the many issues Proposition 19 also missed was that anyone who received more than $100,000 in Federal grants had to abide by the Drug Free Workplace Act of 1988. This meant especially schools and non-profits as well as others. Also, there was no test in existence law enforcement could use for marijuana impaired drivers and any such test would have to have been approved by the FDA, a federal agency. Campaigning in concert with the Wayne Johnson Agency and Acosta Salazar, the California Chamber of Commerce explained, corporations with employees handling explosives, such as oil companies, electric and gas companies have strict policy guidelines on drug testing and THC was known to show up in a drug test for up to 45 days. Lastly, among many other clear and credible arguments against Proposition 19 the RAND Corporation conducted several studies on the effects legalization would have on the black market and it soon became clear that legalization would have no effect on cartel activity, in fact it would have made it worse. Case closed.

Marijuana legalization efforts for recreational use have been before voters nine times starting in 1972. In 1975, the State of Alaska legalized marijuana for recreational use and according to Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley, the result was an increase in auto accidents, a spike in industrial accidents, low job performance and teens using at twice the rate of adults. Alaskans began to realize this was not working. The United States Drug Enforcement Administration cites a 1989 repeal effort began and voters re-criminalized marijuana in 1990. Lesson learned? Not yet. Proponents would venture to several other states in search of the feeble minded who would believe that voting for something in conflict with federal law would be a good idea. Yet in the end when the votes came in and the people spoke they denied legalization for recreational use every time. Voting “NO” on this kind of thing does seem like a bit of a no-brainer. No pun intended.

Since the 2010 defeat of California Proposition 19, marijuana advocates have been making all sorts of noise about how they were cheated out of a victory and how they were coming back in 2012 with a more aggressive approach. Oh really? The Obama Administration got the memo and as promised by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in 2010, the feds have seriously stepped in to vigorously enforce the Controlled Substances Act. Kevin Sabet, a former adviser to the president's drug czar and a fellow at the University of Pennsylvania's Center for Substance Abuse Solutions told MSNBC; "This really shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. The administration is simply making good on multiple threats issued since President Obama took office." The fact that marijuana is a Schedule I drug creates all kinds of problems for those who want to meddle with the stuff. For starters, anyone who has a medical marijuana card and possesses marijuana will not be able to carry a gun. Landlords in California have been placed on notice by U.S. Attorneys and some have been sent letters from the feds ordering them to get rid of their drug dealer tenants, otherwise all the rent they collected from the pot shop owners would be confiscated. The Harborside Health Center, one of California’s largest dispensaries received a letter from the IRS asking for $2.5 million in owed taxes because they were not able to write off certain expenses like payroll (for drug dealing).

In the mean time one area I personally would like to explore is doctors. What kind of doctor would recommend marijuana in violation of federal law? In 2010, Steve Lopez, columnist for the Los Angeles Times asked this very question. Mr. Lopez went to a medical marijuana doctor and later wrote a column of his findings. In short, when his medical marijuana doctor was not selling pot recommendations, he was in fact an OBGYN and Mr. Lopez didn’t even have to get up from his seat for an examination. Nice, right? So, we should really ask, who these doctors are and when will we be able to learn a little more about them? Because without the doctors there is no way Proposition 215 can continue doing harm. It's the doctor who must recommend marijuana first, before the wheel is set in motion. Most people also do not realize that kids as young as 14 are able to obtain marijuana with parental consent. Pretty evil stuff if you ask me and far out of reach from the ethics of the Hippocratic Oath.

Last but not least, wouldn’t it be nice if we were able to just start living our lives without sending the message that drug abuse is part of life? Why? The world is a pretty cool place without drugs. Take it from me, drugs lead to a steady deterioration in the quality of health and life. I’m sober now for more than 12 years. I started with marijuana and 13 years later ended up on meth. Don’t believe in gateway? It might not be the case for everyone, but I’m living proof of it. Drug use is not worth it because you can’t turn things around quickly once you’re addicted. If you make it back to a normal life things get pretty exciting if you’re honest with yourself and you do everything right. You can become a productive citizen again with the help of others and you will be able to help others as well. The one thing you can never get back is the time. I could have done a lot with my life in those 13 years I spent being addicted. They should have been the best years of my life. I could have gone more places, learned how to do more things right, had more friends and could have been closer to my family. But that time is gone forever. Don’t make the mistakes I made. Don’t do drugs. Trust me, life is much more beautiful without drugs.

Alexandra Datig