Trump and Sessions are ignoring voters' overwhelming support for medical marijuana

Editorial
Trump and Sessions are ignoring voters' overwhelming support for medical marijuana. Will Congress listen?

The Times Editorial Board

Never mind what President Trump said on the campaign trail. His administration and GOP leaders appear determined to eliminate protections for medical marijuana growers, sellers and users.

Every year since 2014, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Costa Mesa) has inserted an amendment into a federal spending bill to prevent the Justice Department from prosecuting medical marijuana businesses that comply with their state’s laws. It’s been a temporary but necessary fix to address a fundamental contradiction: that even though 26 states have legalized medical marijuana, the drug is still prohibited under federal law.

The amendment, most recently co-sponsored by Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), has provided some measure of security and stability to responsible medical marijuana suppliers by assuring that they won’t be raided, arrested or prosecuted by federal authorities.

But last week, the House Rules Committee killed the amendment at the urging of Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions, a hard-line marijuana prohibitionist.

Decades of experience have shown that the U.S. can’t win a war on marijuana.

Sessions sent a letter to members of Congress in May citing “an historic drug epidemic and potentially long-term uptick in violent crime” and urging them to reject the amendment. He wrote that the Justice Department needs to have free rein to use “all laws available” to enforce the Controlled Substances Act, a woefully out-of-date law that says marijuana is as addictive as heroin and has no medical value.

Of course, that’s baloney. In fact, 46 states have authorized the use of cannabis or cannabis compounds for medical use, including controlling seizures in children. Even Trump, prior to his election, recognized the value of medical marijuana, telling a rally in Nevada, “I know people that are very, very sick and for whatever reason the marijuana really helps them.” Nevertheless, the federal government continues to insist that marijuana products should be illegal even for medicinal use, putting its producers and users at risk of criminal enforcement.

Frankly, the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer amendment should be noncontroversial given the overwhelming public support — in excess of 80%, according to several polls — for medical use.

The Senate approved a comparable amendment in July. But if the two houses can’t agree and the language doesn’t make it into the final bill, the protections for medical marijuana will expire in early December.


This would be a huge step backwards in the movement to liberalize marijuana laws. For years states have taken the lead. Many now allow medical marijuana for patients and some even permit recreational marijuana for adults. One argument is that since marijuana is already so widely used, it would be better for public health and public safety to create a legal, regulated and controlled market. That is why the Times supported Proposition 64 last November, which legalized adult recreational use in California. But even as marijuana laws have changed at the state level, the drug has always remained illegal under federal law, sending a mixed message and causing uncertainty.

Rohrabacher, a conservative Republican who is among the most outspoken advocates for liberalizing drug laws, wants to eliminate at least some of that uncertainty. In addition to his annual amendment, he also introduced the Respect State Marijuana Laws Act of 2017, which would protect individuals from federal prosecution if they are adhering to state cannabis laws, whether for medicinal or recreational use. The bill has a couple of dozen co-sponsors, mostly from the newly formed Cannabis Caucus, a bipartisan group that wants to work on legalization and regulation issues. But the bill still faces a steep climb in Congress.

Congressional leaders cannot continue to bury their heads in the sand. Decades of experience have shown that the U.S. can’t win a war on marijuana. Moreover, waging such a war now would hurt the millions of people who rely on medical cannabis for relief and would overrule the many, many voters who have supported medical and recreational use of marijuana.

It seems inevitable that the federal government will follow the states’ lead sooner or later. Despite Trump’s campaign comments, his administration shows no sign of adopting a more pragmatic approach to marijuana policy. It’s up to Congress to show leadership.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/edito...909-story.html

I support ending the war on drugs, especially on marijuana. I would like to see the feds completely out of the marijuana issue. Would like to see legal US grown marijuana, no foreign imports of marijuana, just home-grown USA made marijuana in states that don't object to it. States could still ban it if they want. Feds would be completely out of it except for stopping foreign marijuana at the borders and ports.

I support Jeff Sessions on this.

I don't know about this. I mean...alcohol is legal...but nobody is drinking a Fifth of vodka for breakfast and going to work. Or doing it at lunch time.

So we legalize pot...the stoners gonna smoke when they wake up...have some at lunch. Who wants stoned pot heads showing up at work?

How do you regulate this? Pee test...it stays in your system.

You give an inch on this then what next? I need some Valium to figure all this out :D

Employers are free to regulate their employees however they want. If they don't want stoned workers in their business, they can give them a warning, fire them or or do whatever they do with the coke heads who own and run the companies.

People do show up at work inebriated, drink at lunch, etc.

There are also many, many 'functioning addicts' of prescription drugs, just as dangerous.

Many show up now stoned on marijuana and sniff coke in the morning and at lunch.

I don't see how making it a legal substance would change anything - except get the government and criminals out of the business.

As for medical marijuana - it is a crime people do not have access to this affordable alternative to expensive medicine.

The lack of support by the government has little to do with it being a drug, and everything to do with the fact it would cut into the huge profits of pharmaecutical companies, who have hundreds, if not thousands of lobbyists in Washington.

Also, imagine how much they could cut the DEA budget if marijuana was not illegal.

Imagine the empty cells in prisons.

Marijuana is too big a cash cow right now.

nntrixie wrote (excerpt):

Quote:

---

The lack of support by the government has little to do with it being a drug, and everything to do with the fact it would cut into the huge profits of pharmaecutical companies, who have hundreds, if not thousands of lobbyists in Washington.

---

I don't believe pharmaecutical company profits have anything to do with AG Jeff Sessions position on this.

Yeah...sorry, but people do not show up drunk at work, and if they do it would be 1 in 500+. They are not stopping at Starbucks and having a cup of Vodka Cappuccino for breakfast...probably more like hangover from night before.

Legalize pot...yeah...that increases 40% or more because they can get away with it now and smoke on the way...you just empowered them to do it in the open.

Yeah, employers can regulate...they do pot test, they all have it in their system and stays there...sure, you can fire them all there would be no workers!

Believe me employers are having a hell of a time just getting people to show up.

Thank you entitlement society of no responsibility, no morals, no communication skills and do not give a shit society and everybody owes me.

I think we need to start recruiting more seniors and veteran's and stop penalizing them and their SS funds if they work and make more money!

Has everybody really been living under a rock to think this is not a massive problem in the workforce?

And to think these corrupt politicians think they are going to make a bazillion dollars off pot tax...to spend on their pet slush funds and then stick it to the tax payers to pay for the unintended consequences of homeless, crime, defecation, theft, violence, police, jail, ER and drug addicts costs is a scum bag. Ask Colorado how that is working out...not so much.

If they get any pot tax then 80% should automatically go into Drug Rehab, ER, Narcon, jails and crime caused by this.

Bada bing...bada bang!

An estimated 2.6 million people are hooked on prescription opioid painkillers like oxycodone and hydrocodone, or on heroin and fentanyl, an extremely potent synthetic opioid.


America’s drug problem now 10 times worse than in 1971 — the year it declared a war on drugs

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/hea...17b0a6fbc0dd37

The War on Drugs is a complete failure. It needs to end starting with ending it on weed. That's 70% of the illegal foreign controlled drub business. End that, let Americans take over their own pot business, run it safe and right with some reasonable regulations, and stop worrying about it.

So many drug cartels were growing marijuana in our national forests in California that now scientists are finding that our water sources are contaminated by the illegal fertilizer and insecticide used by the cartels.
As the legal growers are popping up everywhere the crime is following.
I talked to a nephew whose acreage is surrounded by pot farms. He is upset by the restrictions on commercial farming not applying to the pot farms.
I know for a fact that there has been medical studies on marijuana that has not been released to the public. That concerns me. I know this because I was a subject of one such study. The affects and possible benefits of marijuana are not the same for women and men.
Until scientist and our government comes clean with the public with the scientific pros and cons of marijuana I will remain for medical marijuana and leary of recreational use.

That is so sad what these criminals have done in our forests and to our rivers and streams. These illegal aliens and their drug cartels just make me sick.

Sadly, people do show up for work drunk, they drink on the job. It really happens.

People snort coke, morning, noon and night - while on the job.

I believe even more show up for work under the influence of legal drugs. The country is full of 'legal junkies'. We just accept it because a doctor prescribes it. It is no less dangerous.

There is no way the drug companies are not resisting the legalization of medical marijuana. Think about it. Imagine if a doctor could prescribe - or better yet a person could make a decision for themselves (God forbid, we aren't really allowed to do that are we) they would rather use marijuana than live on anti-depressants, upper's, downers, sleeping pills, etc. They would rather smoke some marijuana, rather than take, and become addicted to, OxyContin, and others drugs of that nature, for chronic pain.

What if a patient decided to smoke marijuana, maybe grow their own, while taking chemo, rather than paying for the drugs from the drug companies to combat nausea, or elected to use marijuana rather than the other drugs for the pain at end of life.

Just those scenarios would have a huge effect on drug company profits. What in the world would anyone think they would not be resisting it with all their considerable might?

I don't see medical marijuana being more of a threat to society as the 'legal' drugs that are being prescribed in record numbers.

As to recreational drugs - I don't want anyone using marijuana purely for recreational reasons. That doesn't mean I don't think they should have the right.

I don't want people to drink, smoke cigarettes, eat bad food, etc., purely for recreational reasons. They should have that right.

All politicians, top to bottom, are fully aware of drug companies' considerable money and power.

It would not surprise me to learn drug companies will be all for marijuana when they find a way to monopolize the selling of it. I think they will then become a champion of marijuana.

Prescription or nonprescription drugs, addiction all depends on the addictive nature of the person taking the drugs.

At least with prescription drugs you are warned of side effects. How many know that there are female and male hormones in marijuana? How far has research gone? Does it only affect the person using uncontroled amounts of marijuana or does it affect their offspring? Is this the reason for the increase in transgender? Just food for thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nntrixie

Sadly, people do show up for work drunk, they drink on the job. It really happens.

People snort coke, morning, noon and night - while on the job.

I believe even more show up for work under the influence of legal drugs. The country is full of 'legal junkies'. We just accept it because a doctor prescribes it. It is no less dangerous.

There is no way the drug companies are not resisting the legalization of medical marijuana. Think about it. Imagine if a doctor could prescribe - or better yet a person could make a decision for themselves (God forbid, we aren't really allowed to do that are we) they would rather use marijuana than live on anti-depressants, upper's, downers, sleeping pills, etc. They would rather smoke some marijuana, rather than take, and become addicted to, OxyContin, and others drugs of that nature, for chronic pain.

What if a patient decided to smoke marijuana, maybe grow their own, while taking chemo, rather than paying for the drugs from the drug companies to combat nausea, or elected to use marijuana rather than the other drugs for the pain at end of life.

Just those scenarios would have a huge effect on drug company profits. What in the world would anyone think they would not be resisting it with all their considerable might?

I don't see medical marijuana being more of a threat to society as the 'legal' drugs that are being prescribed in record numbers.

As to recreational drugs - I don't want anyone using marijuana purely for recreational reasons. That doesn't mean I don't think they should have the right.

I don't want people to drink, smoke cigarettes, eat bad food, etc., purely for recreational reasons. They should have that right.

All politicians, top to bottom, are fully aware of drug companies' considerable money and power.

It would not surprise me to learn drug companies will be all for marijuana when they find a way to monopolize the selling of it. I think they will then become a champion of marijuana.

---

But that's up to the employers to deal with. We should stay out of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MontereySherry

Prescription or nonprescription drugs, addiction all depends on the addictive nature of the person taking the drugs.

At least with prescription drugs you are warned of side effects. How many know that there are female and male hormones in marijuana? How far has research gone? Does it only affect the person using uncontroled amounts of marijuana or does it affect their offspring? Is this the reason for the increase in transgender? Just food for thought.

---

Good questions.

Also, what restrictions are on commercial farming that isn't on pot farming. Serious question. I don't know anything about pot farming, and probably not a lot about today's modern farming.

Evidently, we must have a huge number of people who have addictive natures.

If that means, some bodies are disposed to become addicted to one thing or another, I agree. Different bodies react differently. Some people are allergic to something and many others are not. It could have something to do with the physical bodies.

As to warnings, if everyone read the warnings and took them seriously, I suspect a lot less prescription drugs would be taken. They are numerous warnings and some very dire. Also, does the warning absolve the drug companies of any liability. People die every year, from taking legal medications. So if it warns you may develop a certain condition, might some of those conditions develop before any symptoms are evident. Could you be physically addicted before you realize?

There was a drug in the 50's, maybe 60's or 70's, that was given to women for morning sickness. The effect didn't show up until the female children of those mothers became pregnant and they developed uterine cancer.

As far as the supposed rash of gender confusion we have today, it could be any number of things. Marijuana could be ruled out or in pretty quickly, couldn't it? Everyone might not own up to marijuana use, but I would think enough would to get a clue.

My supposition is this comes from our food supply. We eat an enormous amount of hormones, antibiotics, pesticides, herbicides, etc., etc., in our foods. Those are things we are aware of, how much more is being added to our foods, we don't even know might have some effect on our bodies.

Some are now saying the GMO foods may be what is causing this. Of course, that will be shot down immediately - without any evidence one way or the other.

Yes, I would like to see more research on marijuana - but I would more like to see the same in-depth research done into the short and long term effects of prescription drugs.

Also, marijuana is a natural plant. It has been around for many, many years, with people using it. My Grandmother said people grew it in their flower beds for medical use years ago.

That would lead me to hope, believe there would be a chance it might be less dangerous than all those synthetic chemicals in prescription drugs.

Texas Just Issued Its First Medical Marijuana License