MPP director of state policies Karen O'Keefe spoke this morning at a hearing convened by the Michigan Department of Community Health to consider draft regulations implementing the state's new medical marijuana law.

The very well attended hearing took the whole morning, Karen reports, with large numbers of patients presenting constructive criticisms of rules that in some cases go beyond the authority given the department by the voter-approved initiative. Of particular concern are rules that require participants in the program to submit a written inventory of medical marijuana plants grown, and defining "use in public" (prohibited by the law) so broadly that it would ban patients from medicating in their own living room with the curtains open.

Karen's full written comments are here.

As is probably inevitable at such an open, public forum, a few speakers veered off-topic, but very few were hostile to the law. Even the Michigan State Police gave generally constructive testimony, though one police comment having to do with a law enforcement database raises concerns about patient privacy that will require MPP to follow up.

There's already been extensive media coverage, including early-morning radio news stories, and articles in the Detroit Free Press and Michigan Messenger. Half a dozen TV cameras were present, so we expect lots of coverage on the evening news.

Massachusetts voters didn't like the old marijuana law, so they changed it. Some Massachusetts officials don't like the new law, so they're, well, pouting.

Today is the first day Massachusetts adults will no longer have to fear arrest for possessing an ounce or less of marijuana. Under the new system, approved by 65% of commonwealth voters on Election Day, violators will now be subject to a $100 civil citation and nothing more.

The question now is whether those law enforcement officials who campaigned against the decriminalization initiative will respect the will of the voters and make a good-faith effort to implement this modest reform. So far, there hasn't been much evidence this will be the case. In fact, in the months following the election, many of these officials have behaved as though the matter were still up for debate.

Also potentially troubling is a recommendation made by the commonwealth's office of public safety for cities and towns to consider passing local ordinances enhancing penalties for public marijuana use. Although it's too early to tell exactly what the implications might be, the effect could be an end-run around the will of the voters. We'll keep an eye on that.

Meanwhile, officials have relied on two main arguments as they seek to prolong a debate that should have ended on Election Day: 1) that they lack the competence to sort out the details of the law, and 2) that the voters were naïve dupes who allowed themselves to get suckered by "legalizers" intent on creating chaos with an unenforceable law.

So far, demeaning the voters and calling attention to their own incompetence hasn't won very many people over, despite the wide coverage their tantrums have received in the press. The more paternalistic and condescending they sound, the more it looks like these opponents are actually hoping for the lawless chaos they've been clamoring about for months.

If so, they're sure to be disappointed. Voters understood exactly what they were doing and simply want the penalties for small marijuana violations to match the severity of the violation. And they have confidence in the ability of Massachusetts cops to write a $100 ticket and move on, even if their superiors don't.

David Murray, the alleged "chief scientist" at the White House drug czar's office, seems determined to end his tenure in a blaze of dishonesty. In a just-published article in New Scientist that examines the excellent Beckley Foundation Global Cannabis Commission report, Murray touts recent declines in U.S. teen marijuana use and claims, "In the absence of prohibition, it would have been difficult to achieve that."

That's nonsense, as we've already pointed out. As many U.S. teens currently smoke marijuana as smoke cigarettes, which are legal for adults. Since 1991, teen marijuana use has increased while teen cigarette smoking has dropped by nearly half.A good case can be made that a major reason for this has been a concerted campaign to curtail tobacco sales to persons under 18 -- a campaign that has only been possible because tobacco is legal, allowing producers and sellers to be regulated -- but at the very least, it demonstrates that prohibition for adults is not necessary to curb misuse of a substance by children.

A few months ago, a World Health Organization survey published in PLoS Medicine found that the U.S. and New Zealand to have the world's highest rates of marijuana use, despite having some of the world's strictest laws. Both the overall rate of use and use by age 15 in the U.S. were far higher than in the Netherlands, with its famously tolerant marijuana policies.

We still don't know who president-elect Barack  Obama will appoint to replace drug czar John Walters and his gang of hacks like Murray, but it's hard to imagine how he could do worse.

As we say goodbye to the Bush Administration, we'd like to take this opportunity to give the outgoing president and his drug czar their final grades. Don't forget to subscribe!

With that time of year approaching, we humbly offer a few New Year's resolutions for some of the individuals and institutions sure to be affecting all of our lives in 2009:

President-elect Barack Obama: To move quickly to keep your campaign promise to end the DEA's medical marijuana raids. And to appoint a drug czar who treats science as a guide for policy, not something to be spun in the service of ideology.

The news media: To treat announcements from the drug czar's office, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and other government drug war agencies with the same skepticism that normally greets other political statements -- and to seek out the perspectives of drug policy critics and reformers without us having to throw ourselves at you.

Massachusetts state and local officials: To move swiftly to implement the marijuana decriminalization law passed by voters in November, and to stop claiming that somehow it's harder to not arrest people and fine them  $100 than it is to arrest them, fine them a higher amount, and possibly jail them.

The Drug Enforcement Administration: To stop stalling and approve Prof. Lyle Craker's application for a facility at the University of Massachusetts Amherst to grow and test different strains of marijuana for medical purposes.

The California Narcotics Officers Association: To finally stop fighting Prop. 215 a dozen years after its enactment, and to drop your absurd policy statement claiming, "There is no justification for using marijuana as a medicine."

Politicians of all stripes and their consultants: To recognize that the "just say no" era is over, that voters are ready to consider reasonable reforms of marijuana laws, and that medical marijuana in particular is so overwhelmingly popular that there is literally no downside to supporting it.

Okay, that's a start. Readers, feel free to chip in with your own proposed New Year's resolutions.

Apparently the adage “if you don’t like the law, change it” isn't that simple – not in California, anyway.

Despite a tough opposition campaign by the law enforcement lobby, California voters approved Proposition 215, enacting the nation’s first effective state-level medical marijuana law, in November 1996. But that didn’t stop some law enforcement officials from trying to circumvent the very law they campaigned against, 12 years after its passage.

Frustrated with the fact that medical marijuana is legal in their state, the California Police Chiefs Association asked the DEA to use federal law to arrest and prosecute medical marijuana providers.

Read more on the topic from our friend Jacob Sullum over at Reason Magazine’s blog.

Medical marijuana patients living in California’s capital will finally be able to realize the full benefit of the state’s medical marijuana law.

This week, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors approved a resolution making the state-mandated medical marijuana ID card program available to county residents. The cards keep patients who are already allowed to possess marijuana under the state’s 12-year-old Compassionate Use Act from being wrongfully arrested by state and local law enforcement.

You might think that implementing a state mandate in the capital county of that state wouldn't be controversial. However, it wasn’t so simple. The issue was brought to the board back in March but supervisors voted 3-2 against issuing the cards, based mainly on the untruthful testimony of Sheriff John McGinness, who seems to get all of his information about marijuana from Reefer Madness-era propaganda.

After the state Supreme Court unanimously upheld the law requiring counties to issue the cards and the item was back on the board's agenda, Sacramento County’s top attorney warned the board that if they refuse to implement the ID card program, the county could not win any lawsuit stemming from that decision. Even Sheriff McGinness eventually conceded that the county should follow state law.

So, the debate’s finally over and we can all go home ... right? Not quite. 

Sacramento supervisor and reactionary ideologue Roberta MacGlashan, who responded to testimony from the elderly and ill with a scowl, voted against implementation and said she would never support the program until a court forced her to. So while legislators in the state capitol were dealing with what may well be the worst budget crisis in the California history just a few blocks away, a local politician advocated using public funds in an unwinable lawsuit so that police could continue arresting law-abiding citizens for just a little bit longer. This would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that people's health and safety is on the line.

Since this is the season for year-end reviews, "best of" lists and the like, it seems like a good time  to take note of why 2008 was one of the most successful years ever for marijuana policy reform. 2008 saw major progress on legal reforms plus a raft of new data that validated reformers' critiques of current marijuana laws. Some highlights:

     MARIJUANA DECRIMINALIZED IN MASSACHUSETTS: A measure to replace criminal penalties for possession of up to an ounce of marijuana with a $100 fine similar to a traffic ticket passed with a whopping 65 percent majority in the Bay State.

     MICHIGAN BECOMES 13TH MEDICAL MARIJUANA STATE: The 63 percent majority racked up by Proposal 1 was the largest ever for a medical marijuana initiative and exceeded Barack Obama's vote total in the state by six points.

     A NEW PRESIDENT PLEDGES TO END FEDERAL RAIDS IN MEDICAL MARIJUANA STATES: During the campaign, president-elect Barack Obama repeatedly promised to end federal attacks on individuals obeying state medical marijuana laws. Strikingly, of the 13 medical marijuana states (including Michigan), Obama carried 11 -- including such traditionally red states as Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico.

     NEW RESEARCH VERIFIES MARIJUANA PAIN RELIEF: For the third time in less than two years, a published, peer-reviewed clinical trial demonstrated that marijuana safely and effectively relieves neuropathic pain, a notoriously hard to treat type of pain related to nerve damage, and often seen in illnesses such as multiple sclerosis, HIV/AIDS and diabetes. The new study, from the University of California, was published online by the Journal of Pain in mid-April.

     FEDERAL REPORTS DOCUMENT FAILURE OF CURRENT POLICIES: The Monitoring the Future survey, released Dec. 11, found that more 10th-graders now smoke marijuana than cigarettes, with teen marijuana use rising while teen use of cigarettes (which are legally regulated for adults) has dropped. The National Drug Threat Assessment, released Dec. 15, reported that despite record seizures, "marijuana availability is high throughout the United States."

Join Nydia as she answers this week's question: "How much does marijuana cost?"

Do you have questions about marijuana? Its history? The laws? The science? E-mail them to SocialNetwork@mpp.org with the subject line: Ask Nydia!

Please be sure to check out our other videos, and don't forget to subscribe: www.mpp.org/subscribe

Well, the federal government's National Drug Threat Assessment for 2009 is out, and -- who'dda thunk it? -- "Marijuana availability is high throughout the United States." This is despite record seizures of marijuana plants in 2007, as well as an all-time record number of marijuana arrests, over 872,000. Indoor cultivation -- often in converted homes and other dubious locations -- has increased "because of high profit margins and seemingly reduced risk of law enforcement detection."

This year's Monitoring the Future survey confirmed marijuana remains widely available, with 83.9% of high school seniors saying that marijuana is "easy to get" -- a figure that remains virtually unchanged since the survey began in 1975.

The western U.S. remains a hotbed of domestic marijuana cultivation, yet the Drug Threat Assessment reports that only 2% of law enforcement in the Southwest  region(stretching from Southern California  to Texas and Oklahoma) report marijuana as being the greatest drug threat in their area, while in the Pacific region (Northern and Central California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Nevada) only 1.1% see marijuana as the greatest threat.