Today, we’re really excited to be announcing the final list of the 2012 Top 50 Most Influential Marijuana Users! Over 3,000 of our supporters voted to help us develop the final list – which can be seen here – so thank you for your input!

The final list is a combination of MPP’s 13 automatic qualifiers (including President Obama and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, among 11 others) and the 37 individuals who received the most votes from our list of 150+ nominees. We borrowed the great definition used by Out Magazine for their “Power 50” list to rank these 50 individuals by their “power to influence cultural and social attitudes, political clout, individual wealth, and a person’s media profile.”

It was really interesting to see who made the final cut and who just missed out. Actors made up 40% of the final list with 20 people, and Morgan Freeman took the #1 spot in terms of total votes, appearing in over 33% of the survey responses. Politicians, with 11 finalists, and entertainers (with 7 finalists, including Jon Stewart, who comes in at #7 on our list), rounded out the second and third place categories.

There were a few people who I thought would make the final list who didn’t end up making the cut, including Lady Gaga (#52), Glenn Beck (#63), and Wiz Khalifa (#86). These are some pretty big names within their respective categories, but they ended up missing out. It was also interesting that only five musicians made the final list; I certainly was expecting a few more (including the two mentioned above)!

Since this will be an annual list, we’re looking forward to seeing how much changes over the next year. There are sure to be some significant names who drop off the list, as well as new additions who either just missed out this year or weren’t even eligible yet because we weren’t aware of their past (or current) marijuana use.

If you haven’t already, check out the final list, and leave a comment below with your thoughts! Who didn’t make the cut that should have? Who do you think is most likely to drop off over the next year? Was someone not even nominated who should have been? We want to hear from you, so be sure to let us know what you think! Again, thanks for voting!

After a long delay in New Jersey, many medical marijuana patients are still waiting for their medicine. Then-Gov. John Corzine first signed the New Jersey Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act in January 2010, but since then, implementation of the measure has been slow. Although the state originally planned to have the necessary alternative treatment centers open in July 2011, the state’s first licensee, Greenleaf Compassion Center, is not scheduled to open until September of this year. A total of only five other planned facilities have been approved, four of which still have no approved location. Assemblyman Reed Gusciora (D-Mercer) has even called for a hearing into the cause of the delays, protesting that there is “no adequate explanation” for the current situation. Difficulties with organization, vetting the necessary officials, and objections by local authorities have all been cited by the Star-Ledger as causes.

Dr. Walter Husar, a neurologist from Rockaway, complains that along with disorganized lists of participating physicians, strict regulations are another barrier to safe access to the drug. Under the current system, patients must have an existing “bona fide” relationship with one of the limited number of participating physicians, as defined here.  The physicians must then submit an official statement recommending the patient. The doctor must then transfer a unique reference code to the patient, who can then use it to register him- or herself. The registration of a patient is only valid for 90 days, after which the doctor and the patient must repeat the process. According to Chris Goldstein with the Coalition for Medical Marijuana of New Jersey, this is the only state where only the doctors on an official list can prescribe marijuana. Sixteen other states, plus the District of Columbia, have medicinal marijuana programs. Access to marijuana in New Jersey is also limited to patients with one of a set list of serious medical conditions such as cancer, AIDS, and multiple sclerosis, with use for some conditions only permitted when other treatments have failed or particular complications are present.

Husar and other doctors report themselves flooded with calls from potential patients. However, in a stark demonstration of the difficulty of joining the program, more physicians than patients have been registered. Approximately 50 patients have been recognized as eligible for medical marijuana, while only around 150 physicians are participating, out of over 30,000 in the state.

Husar agrees that marijuana can be helpful for multiple sclerosis sufferers in particular, citing his 25 years of experience with such patients, some of whom obtained the drug illegally. He is, however, concerned that since there is still no legal source of medical marijuana, even the patients who are already registered with the program may be subject to legal penalties if they are caught with their medicine. Under New Jersey’s current laws, this is a serious risk. Possession of even the smallest amount is punishable by up to six months in prison and a $1,000 fine, while those caught growing even a single plant could be subject to a felony conviction, a fine of up to $25,000, and a prison sentence of up to five years.

The Los Angeles City Council has lost it.

In a slap in the face to voters and patients, the City Council voted yesterday to direct the LAPD to coordinate with the DEA and the district attorney to enforce its recent ban on medical marijuana dispensaries, which is scheduled to go into effect on September 6.

The ban seems unlikely to stick: It is subject to both a legal challenge and a referendum petition. If advocates collect enough signatures, the odds strongly favor voters rejecting the ban. A 2009 MPP-commissioned poll found that 77% of L.A. County voters preferred regulation and licensing to a ban. Only 14% favored a complete ban on dispensaries. It is hard to overstate how out of touch this action is with voters. Los Angeles voters not only support medical marijuana; in 2010, 54% voted for Prop. 19, which would have allowed for marijuana to be sold for adults' use. Meanwhile, some courts have found that cities canʼt ban dispensaries and that doing so is preempted by state law. The California Supreme Court is taking up the issue.

But even if the ban is overturned by voters or in court, the damage done by calling in the feds could be extreme and irreversible for some. Letters from federal prosecutors threatening property forfeiture have resulted in hundreds of dispensaries closing statewide. Under California law, the penalties for violating the ban (if it wasnʼt overturned in courts) would be civil fines or misdemeanors. But in federal court — where perfect compliance with state law is no defense — harsh felony penalties could be imposed.

How many patients will have to go to the streets and risk muggings and contaminated marijuana if the LAPD and feds shut down their access? How many properties will become vacant? How many compassionate retailers will lose their livelihood or perhaps even their freedom? City law required dispensaries to employ security guards. How many crimes will result from the security guards being gone, as well as from this large market moving underground and due to the diverted law enforcement time?

In March 2013, I expect that Los Angeles voters will repeal the ban. As they do so, theyʼll also have a chance to elect new council members for more than half of the seats. It’s about time politicians realize that if they wage a war on medical marijuana, their political futures may become collateral damage.

For more information on the outrageous ban, you can listen to an archive of MPP’s Sarah Lovering on KPFK. Sarah’s segment aired on Uprising! this morning, Thursday, August 23. It begins about 20 minutes in, or one-third of the way.

Today, after a delay of more than two years, patients eligible for New Jersey’s medical marijuana program were finally allowed to apply for the licenses that would protect them from arrest. Seriously ill individuals who could qualify for the program have been waiting diligently while the state government dragged its feet with implementation since the law took effect in mid-2010.

Unfortunately, it could be some time before licensed patients will be able to legally acquire their medicine. New Jersey’s law does not allow for home cultivation, and all medicine must be purchased at state-licensed nonprofit dispensaries. Licensing of these dispensaries has been consistently delayed as well. To date, only six have been granted preliminary approval, and only one is preparing to serve patients.

This is great news for the seriously ill of the Garden State and their families. If there are no further delays, patients should be able to access their medicine by the end of the year. How easily they will be able to get it will be another story, but at least licensed patients will no longer have to fear being treated like criminals for using the medicine that works best for them.

The first-ever ballot initiative dealing with medical marijuana in North Dakota has taken a step forward. On Monday, more than 20,000 signatures were delivered to North Dakota Secretary of State Al Jaeger by North Dakotans for Compassionate Care -- well above the 13,500 required to qualify the initiative for November’s ballot. Jaeger will have approximately one month to review the signatures and certify the initiative for the ballot.

The proposed law would allow patients to grow and possess limited amounts of marijuana. Qualifying medical conditions would include cancer, glaucoma, post-traumatic stress disorder, and other serious illnesses. Marijuana dispensaries would also be licensed and subject to regulation by the North Dakota Health Department.

While neighboring Montana currently allows medicinal marijuana under the 2009 Medical Marijuana Act, South Dakota voters rejected similar ballot initiatives in recent years, with 52 percent opposed in 2006 and 63 percent voting against it in 2010.

Dave Schwartz, campaign director for the advocacy group, commented however that attitudes have shifted recently in favor of medical marijuana as many people have had personal contact with someone who has or could have benefited from marijuana’s pain-relieving and anti-nausea effects. “[One] of the myths that we often hear is that this is only for people to just go ahead and get high, and that’s not the case,” Schwartz said. “This is about medical patients who would benefit greatly from it.”

Nicholas Delpopolo, a Yugoslav-born American judo competitor in the London Olympics, has been disqualified on account of a positive drug test. This is the fifth positive drug test reported by the IOC for this year’s testing program but the first to turn up positive during the competition itself. The 23-year-old tested positive for marijuana metabolites, substances that would appear in the blood for several weeks after consuming marijuana. By way of explanation, he stated that he had recently consumed food that, unbeknownst to him, contained cannabis.

Delpopolo is not the first athlete this year to be disqualified for cannabis, as Scott Morgan explains in his post here. Information from the World Anti-Doping Agency suggests that anti-doping policies in sports are simply concerned with performance-enhancing substances which might give the user an unfair advantage, including stimulants and anabolic steroids. However, caffeine, a stimulant, is not on the list of prohibited substances, while marijuana metabolites are. The justification for this is not clear. Enhancement of athletic performance has not been proven, and there is no evidence that past marijuana use would endanger competitors. No explanation of the inclusion of marijuana on the list is given anywhere on the site. Has the WADA included cannabinoids on its list of prohibited substances out of legitimate concern for fairness in competition, or is this simply a concession to the prohibitionist attitudes of authorities who wish to police athletes’ personal lives?

Michael Phelps just swam his way into the history books by winning more Olympic medals than anyone, ever.

Pretty impressive, considering that the same guy was publicly shamed and persecuted just a couple short years ago for choosing to relax with a substance that is demonstrably safer than alcohol.

But should we really be surprised? We’ve all seen the negative effects that alcohol can have on athletic training and performance. And after all, a recent study showed that marijuana has no long-term negative effects on breathing or lung function.

More and more athletes are coming forward about their marijuana use, from a wide variety of sports, citing both medical benefits for treating injuries and the much lesser impact of recreational use compared to alcohol. Unfortunately, many continue to be punished for it.

UFC fighter Nick Diaz was suspended and fined for testing positive for THC metabolites after a February bout in Los Vegas, even though he was not under the influence at the time. Diaz is a licensed medical marijuana patient in his home state of California, and medical marijuana is also legal in Nevada.

More recently, Phelps’ fellow Olympic contender Stephany Lee was kicked off the U.S. wrestling team for a positive marijuana test.

It is time we stop punishing the nation’s greatest athletes for using marijuana. These individuals have the ability and opportunity to smash the negative stereotypes that marijuana users have had to live with for so long but are being cheated out of their shots at personal and national glory by close-minded officials and archaic policies.

The Los Angeles City Council voted 14 to 0 last Tuesday in favor of a new ban on medical marijuana dispensaries. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa supports the measure and is expected to sign it. Los Angeles is not only the state’s largest city, it is also a major hub of medical marijuana. There are over 760 registered dispensaries in the city, along with an estimated 200 without proper registration. By comparison, the Bay Area is home to about 12 dispensaries. Under Los Angeles’ new policy, all of the dispensaries, regardless of registration status, will be contacted and ordered to shut down immediately.

The measure is partly a response to public complaints about medical marijuana use around the storefronts, although specifically restricting the smoking of marijuana in public does not appear to have been considered. Others claim that recreational users, not just legitimate patients, obtain their marijuana there. While there is scant evidence to support these claims, it is unclear what harm this would cause in communities. Any increase in market share by legitimate marijuana distributors would cut into the profits of illicit market sources, and law enforcement would hopefully be interested in taking funds away from gangsters. Police Chief Charlie Beck, however, has stated his support for the measure, referring to marijuana as “high-level narcotics,” a comment demonstrating his questionable understanding of the drug.

The ban, which some refer to as a “gentle ban,” allows medical marijuana patients and their caregivers to cultivate and share marijuana -- but only in groups of three or fewer people. The LA council also voted to instruct the city to develop a plan to allow 170 specific dispensaries to remain open. However, Councilman Paul Koretz, who initially voted against the ban, admitted that the council has now “shut off almost every way that a normal person can get access to marijuana. It will be a ban until otherwise noted.”  Upon passage, Councilman Jose Huizar, author of the ban and opponent of any measure that would allow dispensaries to remain open, remarked in a bit of unintentional irony, “Relief is on its way.” With the apparently imminent disappearance of so many marijuana dispensaries, relief for thousands of patients is apparently on its way out.

Medical marijuana activists interviewed questioned the feasibility of essentially expecting one of every three patients or caregivers to grow their own marijuana, citing significant expenses and time commitments involved in cultivation. Some doctors understandably expressed concern over patients having their access to medical marijuana seriously restricted. Unfortunately, the city doesn’t seem concerned that the ban will further enrich illicit suppliers, to whom many patients will now presumably turn to in order to obtain their medicine. Advocates plan to appeal the ban, and its legal status is already under question, as Jacob Sullum at Reason explains in detail. Pending court cases may invalidate both the L.A. city ban and the recent L.A. county ban as well.

He’s played God and the President of the United States. He’s starred in dozens of blockbusters, narrated countless other films and documentaries. And last week, in an interview with Newsweek (released the day before The Dark Knight Rises hit theaters), Morgan Freeman reiterated his support for ending marijuana prohibition.

The whole interview is available here, but the highlight of the interview is his no-nonsense approach to marijuana policy:

You’ve also been a big proponent of the legalization of marijuana.

Marijuana! Heavens, oh yeah. It’s just the stupidest law possible, given history. You don’t stop people from doing what they want to do, so forget about making it unlawful. You’re just making criminals out of people who aren’t engaged in criminal activity. And we’re spending zillions of dollars trying to fight a war we can’t win! We could make zillions, just legalize it and tax it like we do liquor. It’s stupid.

Next week, we’ll be opening voting for the Top 50 Most Influential Marijuana Users, and Morgan Freeman is already on the list of nominees. Do you think the “former president” will join Presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton on the list?

Also, the great folks working on the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol in Colorado put out this great graphic on Facebook last week, which is spreading like wildfire. Be sure to check it out and share it with your friends and family!

Meet the fisher:

Cute, huh?

Fishers are native forest carnivores that populate, among other areas, parts of California, Oregon, and Washington State. Unfortunately, the fisher has been listed as a candidate species for the endangered species program. Even more unfortunate is the fact that our country’s marijuana prohibition is killing these little guys off in new and unforeseen ways.

According to researchers led by veterinary scientists from the University of California at Davis, illicit marijuana grows are inadvertently killing off large numbers of these rare animals. The theory goes that in order to protect their irrigation lines and crops from nibbling rats, growers sprinkle rodenticide directly on their lines and around their crops. The rodenticide – which can be lethal after a single ingestion – takes up to seven days before signs of ingestion occur. Within those seven days, the fishers eat the rats who have been poisoned, thus exposing themselves to the poison as well.

Researchers also theorize that the fishers may be eating the poison directly, attracted to the cheese, peanut butter, and bacon flavorizers added to the poison. Of the 58 fisher carcasses analyzed by the researchers, rodenticide was found in 79% of them. In addition, the deaths occurred between mid-April to mid-May, when immature marijuana plants would be most vulnerable to pests and thus most in need of a rodenticide to ensure against that threat. While the fisher is the focus of the study, the researchers made sure to point out that “martens, spotted owls, and Sierra Nevada red foxes may be at risk from the poison, as well.”

Consider for a moment one consequence of the marijuana prohibition and how it makes life difficult, or impossible, for the fisher. It is painfully clear that Americans like to use marijuana recreationally, and where there is demand, there is supply. Currently, most marijuana grows are illicit, and thus growers seek the deepest and darkest recesses of our natural habitat, frequently growing on public lands and in our state parks. Unregulated growers have no incentive to protect against the environmental damage that an agricultural operation causes, such as secondary deaths of protected animals due to rodenticides.

Now it’s time to consider the effect of a legal marijuana agricultural operation on the wildlife around it. Like other agricultural operations, marijuana grows would be regulated and, more importantly, inspected. Environmental regulations would limit when and what types of pesticides could be used. Additionally, grows would be moved out of the remote areas where they are currently cultivated and where wildlife thrives; we don’t see illicit vineyards crop up on remote public lands for a reason. Finally, financial penalties would be placed on growers who violate environmental regulations and inspections would make sure the regulations are being followed. A well-regulated and inspected system of marijuana cultivation would ensure that the industry is environmentally friendly (or at least not environmentally destructive).

It’s well past time we stop criminalizing otherwise law abiding marijuana users, stop wasting billions in tax payer money funding a prohibition that has never worked, stop foregoing billions of estimated tax revenue, and stop fostering a niche agricultural industry free from any environmental rules and regulations. It’s well past time we tax and regulate the marijuana industry.