MPP's Bruce Mirken and California Assemblyman Tom Ammiano discuss how taxation and regulation of California's marijuana industry could help alleviate the state's budget problems. Ammiano's bill, AB390, would treat marijuana like alcohol. 07/12/2009

A quick item from our Aggressive Stupidity files. Whom would you trust more on medical issues?

The California Narcotics Officers Association, from its official training materials: "Marijuana is not a medicine. ... There is no justification for using marijuana as a medicine." [emphasis in original]

Or...

The American College of Physicians, from its position statement on medical marijuana: "Preclinical and clinical research and anecdotal reports suggest numerous potential medical uses for marijuana. ... Given marijuana's proven efficacy at treating certain symptoms and its relatively low toxicity, reclassification [out of Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act] would reduce barriers to research and increase availability of cannabinoid drugs to patients who have failed to respond to other treatments."

While I was in the green room waiting to debate Calvina Fay on Fox Business News today (we're working on getting the video posted), former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales sat down next to me to wait for his interview on the sister Fox News Channel.

After exchanging some small talk, he asked me what I was going to be talking about on TV.  After telling him that MPP was the organization that ran those ads in California last week that touted how taxing marijuana could help some of the California government's budget crisis, he said, "Well, I can't say I'm supportive of that.  I have a 14-year-old and a 17-year-old to worry about."  I responded, "Well, I'm not surprised that you're not supportive."

But, continuing, I noted to him that teenage tobacco use has been decreasing for years because of public education about tobacco's harmful effects, as well as the "We Card" campaign that has gotten serious about carding people for age before they're permitted to buy cigarettes.  He added that another factor is that the price of cigarettes has also been rising, to which I agreed, noting that the price increase is because of a tax increase.

In any case, I continued, teenage marijuana use actually increased over the same period of years, and tobacco usage rates have been falling, so that now an equal number of teenagers are using marijuana and tobacco.  Maybe we could do better with marijuana by taxing and regulating it.

I also said, "You know, with your two kids, you might want to ask them whether it's easier for them to find marijuana or alcohol in or near their schools."  He laughed, I think because the idea of asking his kids about scoring drugs is probably outside his comfort zone.

Just then, a Fox staffer came in to get me for the interview.  "Good luck," Mr. Gonzales said.  "You can say on TV that I'm intrigued by your proposal."

An argument regularly raised by those who want to keep marijuana illegal is that because there is no equivalent of a breathalyzer test for marijuana intoxication, DUI laws would be impossible to enforce. The California Supreme Court just shot a very large hole in that argument.

It's an odd argument anyway, given that tens of millions of Americans regularly take drugs that can impair driving -- pain relievers, antihistamines, etc. -- for which there is no simple, roadside test. For most of these drugs, and for marijuana, the old-fashioned field sobriety test works quite well.

Still, people have tended to regard the alcohol breath test as the gold standard. Now, the California Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that defendants can challenge the accuracy of these tests. As the Los Angeles Times reported, "Even though experts say the standard ratio used to derive a blood-alcohol concentration from breath generally approximates or even underestimates the amount of alcohol the driver consumed, they also agree that Breathalyzer results may sometimes overestimate the amount of alcohol in the blood."

No one -- repeat, no one -- should ever drive while impaired by anything. But it's time to put aside the false notion that Breathalyzer tests are infallible, or that there's no way to enforce laws against driving under the influence of marijuana.

MPP Director of Government Relations Aaron Houston appeared on the Today Show to discuss the benefits of taxed and regulated marijuana sales, the failures of prohibition, and the comparitive safety of marijuana over other drugs. 07/09/2009

MPP spokesperson Dan Bernath speaks about the failure of marijuana prohibition on Fox & Friends. This segment was produced the day after MPP released an ad in California promoting the taxation and regulation of marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol. Several California TV stations refused to run the ad, drawing criticism from many sources. Also appearing on the segment is prohibitionist John Lovell of the California Peace Officers Association. 07/09/2009

Chairman George Miller (D-Calif.), one of the most powerful Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives, yesterday joined the list of cosponsors for Rep. Barney Frank’s bill to remove penalties for marijuana possession.

Rep. Miller is the chairman of the Committee on Education and Labor, a position that awards him a lot of sway on Capitol Hill. Miller joins Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Representatives Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.), Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), Ron Paul (R-Texas), Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), and Jared Polis (D-Colo.) in sponsoring this important legislation.

If you live in Chairman Miller’s district, please thank him. If you don't, you can help out by visiting mpp.org/federal-action and asking your members of Congress to support this legislation.

MPP Director of Communications Bruce Mirken talks about the benefits of taxing and regulating marijuana like alcohol as a way to help California's budget problems. He also criticizes the rejection of ads promoting this reform by several California TV stations in the wake of Governor Schwarzenegger's call for open debate on the subject. Debating him is Calvina Fay of the Drug Free America Foundation. 07/08/2009

Last night, voters, patients, and advocates in Washington, D.C. moved one step closer to implementing a medical marijuana law that’s been 10 years in the making.

Since 1999, Congress has used its unique authority over D.C. affairs to block a local medical marijuana initiative passed by 69% of D.C. voters. The legislation responsible for blocking the will of D.C. voters is known as the Barr amendment, and it lives in the annual D.C. appropriations bill.

Last week, the congressional subcommittee in charge of funding D.C. announced the removal of the Barr amendment and other social issue riders. While this was great news, we weren't surprised when medical marijuana opponents mounted an attack.

During a full committee hearing last night, Congresswoman JoAnn Emerson (R-Mo.) attempted to have the Barr amendment put back in the bill. Her efforts were defeated after passionate speeches from Congressman Dave Obey and Jose Serrano. Ultimately, the committee voted to protect the rights of D.C. voters and keep the Barr amendment out of the bill. The legislation must move through the remainder of the legislative process and be signed into law by President Obama before the changes will take effect.

Washington, D.C. is the only place where Congress intervenes so directly in local affairs, and the Barr amendment is the most offensive example of this behavior. Hopefully, this is the year that 69% of D.C. voters will see their votes finally hold the weight of law.

In the shadow of California's historic budget crisis, MPP is airing a TV ad calling for an end to marijuana prohibition in the state.

The 30-second spot features a marijuana consumer who - along with millions of others in in the state - wants to pay taxes to help bridge California's massive budget gap. Nadene Herndon, 58, declares that "instead of being treated like criminals for using a substance safer than alcohol, [marijuana consumers] want to pay our fair share."

The ad will be running on cable and network TV all over California beginning today:

There's a litany of reasons to end marijuana prohibition, but the financial benefits have recently amplified calls for reform in California. In February, State Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco) introduced a bill that would make marijuana legal for adults over 21, and tax and regulate it comparably to alcohol. The annual state tax revenue from legal marijuana sales is estimated at about $1.3 billion - enough to pay the salaries of 20,000 California schoolteachers.

Not everyone in California wants both sides of the debate aired. Some networks actually refused to run the ad based on the bizarre assertion that it somehow supports illegal drug use