Reform of Marijuana Laws Again Dominates President's Online Forum

[RainDog]

http://justsaynow.firedoglake.com/2012/01/30/marijuana-again-dominates-president-obamas-online-forum/

According to the Whitehouse Youtube page, with voting currently closed, 18 of the top 20 most popular question are about marijuana/drug policy. Seven of the top 20 question are directly related to questions created by NORML and its unusual removal from the page. NORML’s original question was:

“With over 850,000 Americans arrested in 2010, on marijuana charges alone, and tens of billions of tax dollars being spent locking up marijuana users, isn’t it time to regulate and tax marijuana?”

The second most popular question on the page is from LEAP’s Stephen Downing, a former LAPD deputy police chief. His question is:

So far every attempt by Obama to directly reach out to young voters through some form of online question and answer system has resulted in young adults overwhelming voting to confront the President with questions about our government’s marijuana policies. It happened with his transitional website Change.gov, his first Youtube townhall and with the White House’s new “we the people” petition site.

[SammyWinstonJack]

1. No bankster arrested but 850,000 Americans arrested in 2010 on marijuana charges?

Tens of billions of tax dollars wasted on locking up marijuana users .



GOBAMA.

[RainDog]

4. the "war on drugs" is really a war on Americans who use marijuana

[RainDog]

76. Arrests for the last decades

waste of money - destroying lives - this is not how a democracy treats its citizens.

[Warren DeMontague]

2. Quick- treat it like a giant joke!

Then equivocate, ignore, invoke the children, cluck disapprovingly, drag out the red herring, warn of the slippery slope... rinse, repeat.

[Rex]

3. LOL!

What more needs to be said!?

[RainDog]

55. this time - he just ignored it, instead. n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

56. It's not a serious question worthy of serious time by serious people harrumph harrrumph

harrumph harrumph cough cough fart

[RainDog]

57. honestly - serious people don't care about racist policies

that were founded on lies and perpetuated by lying liars.

there are more serious issues - that all relate to this one, actually, but DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO THAT

because the helmet heads in this nation must be allowed to remain comfortable in their stereotypes!

[marlakay]

5. If the youth voted more than the older folks who are against pot being legal

then he would go along with it. He has smoked pot before, he knows its not bad. Its all about getting reelected and knowing the percentage of youth that votes is low compared to older folks.

Same with the rest of the senate and congress, most of them know it should be either made legal or at bare minimum something with no penalties for an ounce or less or to be used medically.

Its all about the power of big pharma and fear of not being reelected if they stand up for what they know is right.

I just heard that legalizing it will be on our ballot here in WA state this november. It can pass if the youth actually come out to vote. To me that will be a test.

It's easy to gather together online to ask questions of the pres but how easy is it to get out the vote for the young?

I think all the youth for the whole country should ban together to help pass it here, because once it passes in one state others will follow and so will the feds.

[RainDog]

8. well, all voters from 18-49 strongly favor legalization

49% from 50-64 - so, honestly, support is across all ages, except for the oldest voter - a minority. the ONLY strongly opposed to this are elderly conservatives. the strom thurmond voter (rip).

no other combination of groups comes close to opposition - the majority of liberals, democrats, etc. are in favor

[FrodosPet]

17. Only 46% of women support legalization?

Liberals/progressives support legalization. Women are proportionally more progressive than men. Yet only 46% of women support legalization?

Some things just make you dizzy when you try to wrap your head around them.

[RainDog]

20. it doesn't make sense - until you realize they are chief targets of propaganda

and they are the traditional caregivers of children.

Women need to know that legalizing and regulating cannabis will help to keep it away from kids. As Judge Gray says - keeping marijuana illegal creates child criminals and child drug users.

Listen to this - at 3:45 he talks about this very issue.

[Uncle Joe]

25. That was an excellent testimony by the judge which I believe most astutely answers those concerns.

[ProfessorGAC]

27. This 55 Year Old Supports It Too

And i have since i voted the first time in the 1974 off year election. And here's the kicker: When i voted in 1974 and 1976, i have never ever smoked it! Still thought it was stupid to make a PLANT illegal.

GAC

[marlakay]

37. I am 55 also

just think more youth needs to be out voting this time. In WA they will rally the older folks to vote, many of them religious and conservative.

I live in the middle of the state and while we have some democrats that have retired here, its mostly republican area.

Normally during election times I see many signs all over especially in the next larger town. I haven't been seeing any.

Its a very religious area and I don't think they like either so it will be interesting to see what happens.

[RainDog]

40. maybe you could canvas your area

and emphasize the tax savings - the comparisons to alcohol prohibition, the reality that cannabis is safer than alcohol, talk about limiting access to those who are underage -

I think it's important for people to see support from others in the community, not just the youth voter and not just those who currently use cannabis.

Approximately 40 million Americans have used cannabis at some time in their lives. There's no way those 40 million deserve to be considered criminals - and surely your neighbors would recognize this.

It's probably too much cognitive dissonance for a lot of religious folks, but some ppl think that cannabis was part of the anointing oil used by the priestly caste - kanne bosum - which King James translated as another herb.

there are also "Christians against prohibition" online.

[marlakay]

48. I live in a very small town

where everyone knows everyone and church on every corner. Pretty conservative area, even most the dems go to liberal churches. We are part of the small minority that doesn't.

At this point just having Obama sign out made our near neighbors stop speaking to us more than hello.

When I go door to door I tend to do it in next larger town over, you feel like a fish in a small bowl here!

But i will be working on the issue…my husband has medical card, but in past year the feds have made it almost impossible even with the card to purchase.

[RainDog]

54. I understand

but it's good for people to know their good neighbors are targets in the WoD - your husband for example.

[tridim]

6. A perfect storm is a brewin'

It's time.

[RainDog]

9. with the issue of Sativex now at hand

I don't think the feds can pull a two-tiered version of legal (i.e. legal if big pharma sells it, but not a Cali grower) - there is too much information available now to let them get away with that without BIG repercussions.

Sativex won't be approved until after the election, imo, but Obama will risk losing voters for all Democrats in the mid-term if they try to make one legal while keeping the other illegal.

A lot of people will choose to use Sativex, so it's not like they won't make money as a cancer pain med and with doc's prescribing it off-label for other things.

I really don't want our govt's "make work" policies to be centered on prisons. What DECENT nation creates jobs by imprisoning people who possess something less harmful than alcohol? None.

[Uncle Joe]

7. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, RainDog.

[RainDog]

11. I'm putting Jesus on the mainline

to tell him what I want - which is for our nation to stop putting people in prison for victimless crimes.

(really I just wanted an excuse to share this kickass gospel song with you.

I can't listen to this without dancing.

[Uncle Joe]

18. Well that is some kickass gospel.

[FrodosPet]

10. We need safe, pure legal marijuana NOW!

Quit putting people in jail for pot - put them in jail for selling BAD, DANGEROUS, INFECTED pot.

We need the gov't to step in and provide people with MJ that is

A) Consistent in THC and cannabinoid composition,
B) Free from pesticides, fungus, mold, and microbial infection, and
C) Lightly taxed, or untaxed, so it is cheap enough that there won't still be a black market like there is with cigarettes and liquor.

It's got to be taken away from the drug gangs, but NOT given to the 1% to make even MORE money from it. It MUST be POSITIVELY provided and controlled by the federal government, with no corruption or short cutting from profit seeking private individuals and companies.

[tridim]

12. Pure Cannabis, from the government?

Yikes.

Pure Cannabis comes from the Earth, guided by the hand of people who love growing it. As soon as RJR starts growing it, that's when I would worry about pesticides and genetic manipulation. LOTS of people already know how to grow cannabis better than any corporation or government can.

I don't want legalization with stipulations that you can only grow strains that are government approved. That would be a nightmare. There is already huge variety in the genetic pool, again created over thousands of years by people who know what they're doing. It would be a shame if that wasn't allowed to continue.

[FrodosPet]

14. Any other medicine is SUPPOSED to have strict controls

Not that there have not been issues with the FDA, but we expect the federal government to protect us from dangerous and ineffective drugs. We demand consistency in purity along with double blind studies that the drug does what it is supposed to do while causing minimal side effects.

So why does marijuana get a pass? If you are buying a q oz for your backache, wouldn't it be nice to know that this strain actually provides pain relief as opposed to giving you a nasty stoner's headache as well? If you are looking for anxiety relief, don't you want the ability to KNOW it is a relaxing sleepy time body buzz indica strain as opposed to a "mind racing Chatty Cathy" sativa strain?

The wide variety of different effects and flavors from different strains is, in a way, cool, but at the same time it makes its use as medicine a challenge.

[tridim]

16. It gets a pass because it is proven to be self-titrating in studies.

And because it is non-toxic.

[FrodosPet]

21. THC and cannabinoids are non toxic

But pesticides are not. Mold is not.

Say yes to clean, organic marijuana and NO! to people who cheat and poison the pot.

[RainDog]

23. what the govt can do is test for molds and pesticides

and have regulations that limit this.

but, again, these sorts of issues are why the plant will not be legal as medicine while a tincture will.

however, just because it's not going to pass muster as medicine according to our current standards - that's no reason to keep it illegal b/c we allow people to grow their own tomatoes, make their own wine, as long as they don't try to sell it w/o a license, and allow groceries to sell organic produce, with a certificate/inspection - we could do the same thing for cannabis growers.

[tridim]

47. Problem is the government ALLOWS food crops to be sprayed with pesticides.

They would allow the same for RJR marijuana. They would probably also allow chemical additives as they do with cigarettes. No thanks.

Tridim brand cannabis would be 100% organic, pesticide-free, 100% pure American grown cannabis with the unmistakable taste and smell of lemon drop candy.

[RainDog]

19. marijuana simply will not be approved as a medicine here

unless it's done via a pharma company - which is what's happening now with GW Pharma/Bayer.

I'm talking about legalization for recreational use, and for those who cannot afford big pharma prices - b/c it will be much more expensive than the simple plant, even tho Sativex is whole-plant cannabis, not a synthetic. The pharma cos have to go through processes to get approval for medicines that are so stringent now that ASPIRIN would not get approval b/c it's no longer possible to copyright it.

read this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/101432442#post6

from this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/101432442

[RainDog]

15. agreed. currently the govt grows inferior pot in Mississippi

for those who get legal marijuana from the govt. before Bush Sr. shut down the program.

we can benefit from regulations on things grown and sold for adults - information about THC/CBD content, a regulation to wash fertilizers out of the soil, etc.

but allowing the govt to grow cannabis for people would be a really bad idea, imo. They should have health regulations - that would get rid of brick weed etc. and let people make informed purchases.

[_ed_]

13. Hey, it's not like Barack Obama admitted to smoking weed

in his youth. That would make him a gigantic hypocrite on this issue.

[RainDog]

22. the last three presidents all experimented with cannabis

and all survived - as do the majority of people who have ever tried cannabis.

Mitch Daniels, the current Gov. in IN, sold drugs while he was at Princeton - and not just pot. But, because he was connected, he wasn't punished. The hypocrisy is stunning. We should not continue laws that are used to target minorities - which is what this law has done since its inception.

I had fun digging up this collection of quotes - http://www.democraticunderground.com/1170117

[_ed_]

26. Then they get in office and continue the drug war

Newt is probably the best example, though. Admitted to getting high in college, now he wants to execute drug importers.

[RainDog]

34. Newt is, honestly, such a repulsive little toady

support for his candidacy among the religious right-wing hypocrites just indicates how relative their values truly are. as long as someone hates the proper people - they wouldn't care if someone robbed them blind or screwed their underage daughters.

...which, come to think of it, is sort of the current republican platform.

[Uncle Joe]

28. Not to mention Bush the Least as well and

the last two American Nobel Peace Prize Winners; Gore and Obama smoked cannabis.

[RainDog]

35. Carl Sagan is my favorite toker - he smoked cannabis all his life

beginning at age 35, and contributed more to the world than most politicians or any prohibitionist.

his essay on the same is available here - http://forum.grasscity.com/general/219397-carl-sagans-essay-marijuana.html

The cannabis experience has greatly improved my appreciation for art, a subject which I had never much appreciated before. The understanding of the intent of the artist which I can achieve when high sometimes carries over to when I'm down. This is one of many human frontiers which cannabis has helped me traverse. There also have been some art-related insights - I don't know whether they are true or false, but they were fun to formulate. For example, I have spent some time high looking at the work of the Belgian surrealist Yves Tanguey. Some years later, I emerged from a long swim in the Caribbean and sank exhausted onto a beach formed from the erosion of a nearby coral reef. In idly examining the arcuate pastel-colored coral fragments which made up the beach, I saw before me a vast Tanguey painting. Perhaps Tanguey visited such a beach in his childhood.

A very similar improvement in my appreciation of music has occurred with cannabis. For the first time I have been able to hear the separate parts of a three-part harmony and the richness of the counterpoint. I have since discovered that professional musicians can quite easily keep many separate parts going simultaneously in their heads, but this was the first time for me. Again, the learning experience when high has at least to some extent carried over when I'm down. The enjoyment of food is amplified; tastes and aromas emerge that for some reason we ordinarily seem to be too busy to notice. I am able to give my full attention to the sensation. A potato will have a texture, a body, and taste like that of other potatoes, but much more so. Cannabis also enhances the enjoyment of sex - on the one hand it gives an exquisite sensitivity, but on the other hand it postpones orgasm: in part by distracting me with the profusion of image passing before my eyes. The actual duration of orgasm seems to lengthen greatly, but this may be the usual experience of time expansion which comes with cannabis smoking.

I do not consider myself a religious person in the usual sense, but there is a religious aspect to some highs. The heightened sensitivity in all areas gives me a feeling of communion with my surroundings, both animate and inanimate. Sometimes a kind of existential perception of the absurd comes over me and I see with awful certainty the hypocrisies and posturing of myself and my fellow men. And at other times, there is a different sense of the absurd, a playful and whimsical awareness. Both of these senses of the absurd can be communicated, and some of the most rewarding highs I've had have been in sharing talk and perceptions and humor. Cannabis brings us an awareness that we spend a lifetime being trained to overlook and forget and put out of our minds. A sense of what the world is really like can be maddening; cannabis has brought me some feelings for what it is like to be crazy, and how we use that word 'crazy' to avoid thinking about things that are too painful for us. In the Soviet Union political dissidents are routinely placed in insane asylums. The same kind of thing, a little more subtle perhaps, occurs here: 'did you hear what Lenny Bruce said yesterday? He must be crazy.' When high on cannabis I discovered that there's somebody inside in those people we call mad.

There is a very nice self-titering aspect to cannabis. Each puff is a very small dose; the time lag between inhaling a puff and sensing its effect is small; and there is no desire for more after the high is there. I think the ratio, R, of the time to sense the dose taken to the time required to take an excessive dose is an important quantity. R is very large for LSD (which I've never taken) and reasonably short for cannabis. Small values of R should be one measure of the safety of psychedelic drugs. When cannabis is legalized, I hope to see this ratio as one of he parameters printed on the pack. I hope that time isn't too distant; the illegality of cannabis is outrageous, an impediment to full utilization of a drug which helps produce the serenity and insight, sensitivity and fellowship so desperately needed in this increasingly mad and dangerous world.

[tridim]

36. Mine is Rick Steves

He's even more of a non-typical square than Sagan, and he's alive, which is important. I would vote for him to be the legalization czar if there were such a thing. Maybe there should be.

[RainDog]

38. If cannabis were legal

I bet we'd find out about a lot of people who simply don't say anything b/c of they're unwilling to put themselves in danger of losing their jobs, etc.

and, while I appreciate Steves' advocacy, he can't beat Sagan, for me - even tho Mr. Cosmos has rejoined the stars.

although, I do have to give a shout-out to Pops.

http://www.shellac.org/wams/wgage.html

[Uncle Joe]

39. I like Willie Nelson and I can't think of the title but there's an excellent country song

about not riding with Willie Nelson anymore.

Somebody needs to start a thread of favorite tokers.

[RainDog]

49. I think it must be this one

[Uncle Joe]

58. That's it, thanks for finding it, Raindog.

[Loge23]

70. Great tune!

Reminds me of my first trip to Amsterdam!
You haven't lived until you have been helped out of the Bulldog!

[themaguffin]

24. these questions will negate the value of having a forum. Yes there are legitimate concerns but

the forum MUST be a way to highlight urgent needs that the GOP is obstructing.

Anything else, works against that narrative. And don't think for one second, that this is forum is for any other purpose.

If they take pot questions, they are idiots.

[RainDog]

29. Lamar Smith (R-TX) is currently obstructing a decriminalization bill

Barney Frank and Ron Paul introduced a bill in June 2011 that Smith said will never leave his office. He's obstructing a hearing on this bill. The bill was co-sponsored by Democratic Reps. John Conyers (MI), Steve Cohen (TN), Jared Polis (CO) and Barbara Lee (CA).

H.R. 2306 amends the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) so that marijuana is no longer a scheduled drug. Here's part of it:

This Act (the CSA) shall not apply to marihuana, except that it shall be unlawful only to ship or transport, in any manner or by any means whatsoever, marihuana, from one State, Territory, or District of the United States, or place noncontiguous to but subject to the jurisdiction thereof, into any other State, Territory, or District of the United States, or place noncontiguous to but subject to the jurisdiction thereof, or from any foreign country into any State, Territory, or District of the United States, or place noncontiguous to but subject to the jurisdiction thereof, when such marihuana is intended, by any person interested therein, to be received, possessed, sold, or in any manner used, either in the original package or otherwise, in violation of any law of such State, Territory, or District of the United States, or place noncontiguous to but subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

Three governors (from Washington state, Colorado and Rhode Island) have currently requested that the DEA reschedule cannabis to make it possible for them to enact their state mmj laws without raids from Federal law enforcement. Legislators in Washington State requested rescheduling as well on Wednesday, Jan. 28th.

So, Obama told people to force him to do things - well, we the people are telling him to stop the war on marijuana.

[T S Justly]

30. The right forum for getting Obama's ear ...

And, if you want him to listen, you might bring your checkbooks along.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/reliable-source/post/president-obama-attends-elite-alfalfa-club-dinner/2012/01/28/gIQATk33YQ_blog.html

President and his fellow attendees:

?uuid=um2qLErYEeGij9OsRwY3-w

[RainDog]

31. That's why it's important to support state and local pols who work for change

They may not have the money, but they can represent the will of the people and let federal-level pols know no one is fooled by the current preference for a prison economy or the alcohol and pharma industries.

History was made on Wednesday as 42 members of the Washington Legislature petitioned the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration to reschedule marijuana from its current Schedule I status to a less restrictive classification to allow for its medical use.

Among the lawmakers signing the letter to DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart was Rep. Timm Ormsby, brother of federal prosecutor Michael Ormsby, U.S. Attorney for Eastern Washington. Ormsby, along with Western Washington U.S. Attorney Jenny Durkan, last year oversaw a federal crackdown on medical marijuana dispensaries in the state.

...it is clear that the long-standing classification of medical use of cannabis in the United States as an illegal Schedule I substance is fundamentally flawed and should be changed," the lawmakers wrote. "The federal government could quickly solve the issue if it were to reclassify cannabis for medical use from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule II drug so that it can be prescribed, which we believe the petition provides substantiated peer-reviewed scientific evidence to support.

​"The solution lies ultimately with the federal government," the letter reads. "We urge the DEA to initiate rulemaking proceedings to reclassify medical cannabis as a Schedule II drug so qualifying patients that follow state law may obtain the medication they need through the traditional and safe method of physician prescribing and pharmacy dispensing."

[T S Justly]

33. Indeed, thank-you.

[RainDog]

32. there are QUITE A LOT of bigwigs who want to end the WoD.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117052

[Spike89]

41. Simple enough--it is not a single issue voter issue

I know that is difficult sentence to parse, but in a nutshell, even when the majority may be for a policy, that does not mean that the majority will support the politician behind the law.
Take Obama for example, he already gets most of the youth vote, and most likely most of the "pro legalization" vote without doing anything. So, if he takes a stand and says "legalize it" he doesn't pick up many votes if any, but he can lose lots of votes from the people against legal pot (nearly 50%). More importantly, in the current political environment, he'd be tarred with the silly, but politically damaging image as the "stoner president".
Sad, unfair, and frustrating as it may be, people may favor legalized pot, but they still view pro-pot advocates as somewhat flaky. No candidate for president can afford to be seen as less than serious and sober. Don't look for any president to be out in front on this. Progress needs to be made er, from the grass roots so to speak.

[RainDog]

43. prohibition of cannabis violates every conservative principle

concerning govt.

big govt telling people what to do with their bodies in the privacy of their homes. a huge waste of federal tax dollars from the WoD - an entire bureaucracy dedicated to propaganda (Office of National Drug Policy) that is so ineffective it cannot justify its existence when ppl look at the results of its work - not to mention the Drug Czar has to lie as part of the job description.

Jeff Miron has done excellent work regarding the fiscal irresponsibility of the WoD.

Obviously the president has not been out in front on this. at all. he's racked up more arrests for cannabis than Bush Jr. - the reality is that democrats kick the dog with this issue - they use the WoD to make them look "tough on crime" and the result of this is that they arrest MORE MINORITIES because of those actions.

Great progress has been made at the grassroots and, imo, the smart federal polls know they are on the wrong side of history with this issue. With the DEA request from GW Pharma/Bayer to allow cannabis to be sold as a medicine, however, what is going on now cannot stand.

What Obama could do is accept Michele Leonhardt's resignation as the head of the DEA and put someone in there like Gary Johnson - someone who will remove cannabis from the drug schedule - someone who is also a Republican.

Because, at this point, the FEDERAL GOVT IS THE PROBLEM.

They are far, far behind the American people on this issue - as they are, again and again, on the majority of issues because they are paid well to maintain the status quo, even when it is so entirely worthless.

[Spike89]

46. Couldn't agree more, except

I don't think Obama can lead on this one. Obviously that can change after the election, but I'd be surprised. For the same reasons Nixon could go to China, it is going to take a president who is immune to the stoner label to get in front. Romney could do it if he wanted, but the first black president can't--the issue has too long and too strong a tie to racial stereotypes.

The tide has turned, most people want saner mj laws, but that isn't the same as being to the point where we're going to get them. Just like other shifts in public perception, laws lag about a generation behind. The biggest hurdle I think legalization faces is moving from a bare majority with a high level of soft support--lots of people are for it, but not that many demand it. You can change laws with a huge majority or a highly active significant minority that isn't already "captive". Legalization doesn't have either yet. It has a soft slight majority and few supporters are willing to vote for a candidate only because of this issue (or Ron Paul would have better numbers).

[RainDog]

50. Yes, I understand what you're saying

racists are the problem for President Obama - but they are the problem no matter what he does. They are going to attack him no matter what he does. That is why I said that the DEA needs to be the one to deal with this issue - Obama doesn't have to do anything other than get rid of the current head of the DEA and replace her with a drug policy-sane Republican.

And, honestly, if any Republicans want to start in on this issue, then let's ask why Republican Drug Czar appointees are now lobbying to get Sativex approved for medical use in the U.S. - two of Bush's appointees are doing just this - considering that they lied their asses off while in govt. about the harm of cannabis - actually, they're lying their asses off now pretending that Sativex is something other than whole-plant cannabis tincture - the SAME medicine, basically, except that the plant medicine is extracted via CO2, as was legally available here until the prohibition of cannabis in 1937, and the tangle of laws since then.

But, you know, that "overwhelming majority?" Where does that kick in? Cause these are polls from two decades.

72 percent of respondents agreed with the statement, "Adults should be allowed to legally use marijuana for medical purposes if a physician recommends it."
POLL: AARP
DATE: November 2004
Sample Size: 1,706

80 percent of respondents supported allowing adults to "legally use marijuana for medical purposes."
POLL: Time Magazine/CNN Poll
DATE: October 2002
Sample Size: 1,007

70 percent of respondents answered affirmatively to the question, "Should the use of medical marijuana be allowed?"
POLL: Center for Substance Abuse Research
DATE: January 2002
Sample Size: N/A

73 percent of respondents supported allowing doctors "to prescribe marijuana."
POLL: Pew Research Center Poll
DATE: March 2001
Sample Size: 1,513

73 percent of respondents said they "would vote for making marijuana legally available for doctors to prescribe."
POLL: Gallup
DATE: March 1999
Sample size: 1,018

60 percent of respondents supported allowing physicians to prescribe medical marijuana.
POLL: Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)
DATE: March 1998
Sample size: N/A

62 percent of respondents favored legalizing marijuana "strictly for medical use."
POLL: Luntz Research Poll
DATE: September 1997
Sample size: 1,444

66 percent of Independent voters said "doctors should be allowed to prescribe small amounts of marijuana for patients suffering serious illnesses."
64 percent of Democrat voters said "doctors should be allowed to prescribe small amounts of marijuana for patients suffering serious illnesses."
57 percent of Republican voters said "doctors should be allowed to prescribe small amounts of marijuana for patients suffering serious illnesses."
POLL: CBS News telephone poll
DATE: June 1997
Sample size: N/A

74 percent of respondents agreed "people who find that marijuana is effective for their medical condition should be able to use it legally."
POLL: Family Research Council
DATE: June 1997
Sample size: 1,000

69 percent of respondents favored "legalizing [the] medical use of marijuana."
POLL: ABC News/Discovery News Poll
DATE: May 1997
Sample size: 517

68 percent of respondents said the federal government should not punish doctors who prescribe marijuana. 60 percent of respondents said doctors should "be able to prescribe marijuana."
POLL: Lake Research Poll
DATE: February 1997
Sample size: 1,002

85 percent of respondents favored "making marijuana legally available for medical uses where it has been proven effective for treating a problem."
POLL: ACLU Topline Poll
DATE: November 1995
Sample size: 1,001

Here we see that FOR MORE THAN A DECADE, a VERY LARGE MAJORITY wants marijuana to be rescheduled, at the least, so that doctors can include it, again, after 70 years of prohibition, as part of their medicine available for patients.

The problem, it seems to me, is that politicians are simply out of the loop about how Americans think about this issue. Ryan Grim illustrated that very thing when he was a lobbyist for the MPP in his book, This Is Your Country On Drugs. Privately, legislators would admit that they KNOW marijuana is not a dangerous drug, but they assumed it was an issue they couldn't touch. Grim asked those legislators how many people in their states, did they think, would support legal mmj. The politicians routinely said something like 30%. At that time, the issue was polling at 70% approval of mmj.

It seems to me that 70%, over years and years, is as pretty much overwhelming for a majority as we're going to see in this nation, considering the 30% of Americans who continued to think Bush was great - and considering that 45% of Americans refuse to acknowledge that humans did not come into existence, as is, a few thousand years ago - when ALL scientific evidence is against this - in spite of the fact that, if they had to live their beliefs, they could no longer see a doctor and would simply need to pray for any medical problems.

Medical marijuana has had a hard majority for more than a decade - the way for the law to respond to this is to remove cannabis from its current scheduling - the smartest thing would be to remove it entirely, but, at the least, the medical value needs to be recognized.

So, I guess the issue of mmj meets all the parameters - long-standing overwhelming majority, a decade of lawmakers behind the curve, lots of support - from both left and right b/c a lot of people have had family members with cancer - and yet the Drug Czar continues to exist and tell lies and the DEA continues to refuse to address the issue.

But, if the issue is demand - surely the reasonable people who support reasonable laws should not feel they must withhold support for Democrats in order to get Democratic politicians to be reasonable too. I guess this issue illustrates that those who support harm reduction and civil rights across a majority of issues are simply not as repulsive as someone who doesn't care if people die, as Peter McWilliams did, or are refused student loans, or suffer unnecessarily, or are put in prison for an action less harmful than drinking a shot of whiskey. In other words, there is no reason to respect offices of govt. when you see how they treat people concerning this issue - when the only victims are the ones that the govt. creates.

[Uncle Joe]

59. You do good work, Raindog.

[RainDog]

69. thanks, Uncle J

Our political class is pretty clueless sometimes, it seems to me.

Or scared.

[RussBLib]

42. Just start with something simple....

....like legalizing HEMP cultivation.

[RainDog]

44. that is no simpler than total legalization

via wiki -

Hemp is not legal to grow in the U.S. under Federal law because of its relation to marijuana, and any imported hemp products must meet a zero tolerance level. It is considered a controlled substance under the Controlled Substances Act (P.L. 91-513; 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.). Some states have defied Federal law and made the cultivation of industrial hemp legal. These states — North Dakota, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Oregon, California, Montana, West Virginia and Vermont — have not yet begun to grow hemp because of resistance from the federal Drug Enforcement Administration.

The simple thing to do would be to remove cannabis from the drug schedule, which would include hemp and "marijuana."

This could be done by a hearing. No need for legislation - but legislation was proposed last year to do this very thing. Here's how: http://www.democraticunderground.com/117069

Personally, I don't think we even need hearings b/c Nixon's Schaffer Commission already recommended it be removed but Nixon didn't want to interfere with his ability to intimidate political opponents.

From the Commission's final comments:

The Commission feels that the criminalization of possession of marihuana for personal is socially self-defeating as a means of achieving this objective. We have attempted to balance individual freedom on one hand and the obligation of the state to consider the wider social good on the other. We believe our recommended scheme will permit society to exercise its control and influence in ways most useful and efficient, meanwhile reserving to the individual American his sense of privacy, his sense of individuality, and, within the context of ail interacting and interdependent society, his options to select his own life style, values, goals and opportunities.

The Commission sincerely hopes that the tone of cautious restraint sounded in this Report will be perpetuated in the debate which will follow it. For those who feel we have not proceeded far enough, we are reminded of Thomas Jefferson's advice to George Washington that "Delay is preferable to error." For those who argue we have gone too far, we note Roscoe Pound's statement, "The law must be stable, but it must not stand still."

We have carefully analyzed the interrelationship between marihuana the drug, marihuana use as a behavior, and marihuana as a social problem. Recognizing the extensive degree of misinformation about marihuana as a drug, we have tried to demythologize it. Viewing the use of marihuana in its wider social context, we have tried to desymbolize it.

Considering the range of social concerns in contemporary America, marihuana does not, in our considered judgment, rank very high. We would deemphasize marihuana as a problem. The existing social and legal policy is out of proportion to the individual and social harm engendered by the use of the drug. To replace it, we have attempted to design a suitable social policy, which we believe is fair, cautious and attuned to the social realities of our time.

Instead, we still have hemp and marijuana in the Controlled Substances Act: http://www.democraticunderground.com/117085

[Dreamer Tatum]

45. Legalize it. nt

[Uncle Joe]

60. To hear you say that leads me to believe it's getting chilly in Hell.

Welcome aboard, Dreamer Tatum.

[Dreamer Tatum]

64. I always wanted it legalized.

I just don't think it's a cure-all.

[RainDog]

51. ...and the question is ignored

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002244030

via babsbunny

[slay]

52. This happened the last time Obama did the forum thing on youtube - People want it legal!

and if you don't want it legal - grow up - nobody will make you smoke/eat it - it's for the rest of us. we need to tax and LEGALIZE IT - and Obama needs to at least address the question in a serious manner - not just DEA propaganda talking points. But it being an election year, I imagine he'll ignore it - would be his safest move. this is why i hate politics - we could easily do what's right, and what most of the people want, and many need - but we don't - we play with these issues that effect people's lives as if they are some political toy. Answer the questions Obama!

[RainDog]

53. I'm sick of the hypocrisy

let's make alcohol illegal.

[Renew Deal]

61. Obama will have to answer the questions of raging stoners sooner or later

If they are willing to show their faces at Obama events.

[NashvilleLefty]

62. To quote SNL Weekend Update: "Really?"

With all the issues going on right now both domestically and internationally, your number 1 question is "when can I get high?" Really?

Really?

Sure, the Marijuana laws need to be reformed - but they are way, way, WAY down the list of "shit that needs to be done".

But you are going to ignore all those important issues because you want to get high?

Really?

I understand, by getting high it makes all those other issues "not so important". Really. Let me get high so I can abdicate all responsibility, so I don't care how f*cked-up the country is - I can forget it because I can get high.

Really?

The RW already tries to paint the Left as a "bunch of stoners" - and you want to reinforce that? Really?

Really?

Oh, oops! The article came from FireDogLake. They can't be trusted. So I apologize for everything I said before.

[Uncle Joe]

63. Welcome to D.U. Nashville Lefty and "Really"

take a few steps back from the trees and maybe you can see the forest.

The cannabis prohibition forest is vast consisting of many types and sizes of trees; racism, disenfranchisement of the people from their government, war, chaos in Mexico, enrichment of organized crime, erosion of the Bill of Rights, corruption of goverment at all levels, a bulwark of an immoral for profit prison system, increased deaths from alcohol, the breaking up of families, poverty, wasteful government spending and general alienation of the people from the police and the government charged to represent their best interests.

The Smoky Mountains in all its' autumn splendor and glory can't come close to matching the shades, hues and colors of the so called "War on Drugs'" prohibition policies particulary that against cannabis and hemp.

Prohibition of cannabis is the gateway drug to all manner of ill.

[dreamnightwind]

67. +1

Excellent post, thanks.

[Enrique]

65. its a serious issue

Obama knows it is, Ive heard him talk seriously about it, in the past. He started playing stupid about it when he became a so-called serious politician. ironic, imo. In order to be considered serious you have to become an ignoramus about marijuana.

[RainDog]

68. our politicial system is geared toward uplifting stupidity

about a whole lot of issues - because we have a voting population that celebrates its ignorance, its hatred toward its fellow human being, and, of course, praise jesus for all that goodness in their hearts.

[RainDog]

66. I could've gotten the article from various sources

only someone who doesn't want to actually deal with this issue would make the comment you do.

but, next time you have a relative d'xd with cancer, just remember you're the one who said this was about people wanting to get high.

truth is, if I wanted to get high, I could.

what I don't want is a nation that uses drug laws to create more prisoners than the rest of the world combined - I have very little likelihood of being one of those, btw.

if you have issues that you have done some reading on and want to share them, feel free. I'm not going to dismiss you because that would be the response of someone whose opinion you would have no reason to respect.

[randome]

72. I didn't think this thread was about medical marijuana.

Which is available in many states.

[RainDog]

74. this thread is about ending prohibition of cannabis

which is, basically, the entire war on drugs, as arrest stats indicate. this encompasses a range of issues, as have been laid out before. that person wanted to reduce this to a stupid stereotype - which, honestly, says far more about that person than this issue.

yes, mmj is available in many states. hopefully those who need it live in those states.

you know, why did we bother with the civil rights movement anyway? not all African-Americans lived in segregated communities. this is the same sort of idiotic thinking.

[RainDog]

75. here. learn something

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=242798

[Romulox]

73. We have the largest prison population in the history of humanity. This ISN'T a problem?

Really? backatcha.

[Spirochete]

77. And of course

that is the only topic discussed in this forum. Why don't you post a list of the things you will alow us to discuss, so we'll have some guidelines to follow? Marijuana laws are not the only important issues, but they are important. Especially to people who need it for medical reasons. One needn't be a "stoner" to see what's wrong with all the unfair, repressive drug laws.

[Loge23]

71. The myth of "drug" testing

One of my primary objections to the prohibition of marijuana is the now wide-spread use of drug-testing in virtually all areas of employment in the U.S.
As many of us know, most drugs - hard ones - are flushed from the system relatively quickly as compared to marijuana. Marijuana stays in the system a long time. Thus, most drug tests are actually marijuana tests. So if you enjoy a good smoke from time to time, you are essentially an outcast from society. Thing is, so many people smoke pot - many after work or on their days off.
There is a severe disconnect on protecting people for safety reasons or productivity reasons by companies that discriminate against marijuana users while the companies cannot accurately detect more serious illegal drugs.
It's just an absurd point by now, in 2012, that we are even still debating this nonsense.
Legalize it NOW!

[RainDog]

78. former bureaucrats in the Reagan admin

who ramped up the WoD made a shitload of money via this drug testing. became millionaires.

Republicans are all about keeping track of our precious bodily fluids...