There are now 15 states with medical marijuana laws, but at a Senate committee hearing yesterday to confirm the next head of the DEA, not a single person asked nominee Michele Leonhart how she would address this growing divide between state and federal marijuana policy. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R - AL) did, however, take the opportunity to make sure Leonhart will remain a loyal, unquestioning, die-hard drug warrior.

Mike Riggs has the story in today’s Daily Caller:

Perhaps due to the failure of Prop 19 in California (and despite the passage of medical marijuana in Arizona), Kohl, along with Democratic Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Al Franken of Minnesota, made no mention of medical marijuana. Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, however, made it his prime focus.

“I’m a big fan of the DEA,” said Sessions, before asking Leonhart point blank if she would fight medical marijuana legalization.

“I have seen what marijuana use has done to young people, I have seen the abuse, I have seen what it’s done to families. It’s bad,” Leonhart said. “If confirmed as administrator, we would continue to enforce the federal drug laws.”

“These legalization efforts sound good to people,” Sessions quipped. “They say, ‘We could just end the problem of drugs if we could just make it legal.’ But any country that’s tried that, Alaska and other places have tried it, have failed. It does not work,” Sessions said.

“We need people who are willing to say that. Are you willing to say that?” Sessions asked Leonhart.

“Yes, I’ve said that, senator. You’re absolutely correct [about] the social costs from drug abuse, especially from marijuana,” Leonhart said. “Legalizers say it will help the Mexican cartel situation; it won’t. It will allow states to balance budgets; it won’t. No one is looking [at] the social costs of legalizing drugs.”

Actually, Ms. Leonhart, there is a vast academic literature exploring the social cost of liberalizing drug laws, and the overwhelming conclusion most studies reach is that prohibition does far more harm than most of the substances themselves ever could, especially marijuana. Riggs cites just one example, a 2009 Cato Institute white paper released eight years after Portgual decriminalized illegal drugs, which concludes: “None of the nightmare scenarios touted by preenactment decriminalization opponents — from rampant increases in drug usage among the young to the transformation of Lisbon into a haven for ‘drug tourists’ — has occurred.” He could have also cited another Cato study from this year showing that the U.S. could improve its national budget by nearly $18 billion a year if marijuana were taxed and regulated like alcohol, a legal substance that has eight times the health care costs of marijuana, and is – according to one California study – responsible for 403 times more emergency room admissions than marijuana.

But in the twisted fantasyland where people like Sessions and Leonhart spend most of their time, things like “facts” and “studies” don’t seem to carry as much weight as the unshakeable notion that drugs are bad and so, in positions of authority, “we need people who are willing to say that,” as Sessions put it.

The disgraceful exchange between Leonhart and Sessions is just another example of how the American public is far ahead of politicians when it comes to marijuana policy reform issues, and why our movement will continue to look to individual states – and not the federal government – to drive change.

Read more

After serving two years as interim DEA administrator, where she oversaw continued raids on medical marijuana providers and personally rejected an application for FDA-level research on marijuana, Michele Leonhart is scheduled for a confirmation hearing tomorrow before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

While her nomination has been widely opposed by drug policy reform groups – including MPP – it appears all but certain that Leonhart will be confirmed by the Senate.

President Bush first nominated Leonhart for this position in 2007. The Obama administration re-nominated her in February, even though she has overseen actions that contradict Obama administration directives and made comments that clearly counter reality. The most egregious:

• Despite last year’s Justice Department directive to respect state medical marijuana laws, the DEA under Leonhart’s leadership has repeatedly raided medical marijuana patients and providers who operate under state law. In July, for example, the DEA blatantly ignored a Mendocino County (CA) ordinance to regulate medical marijuana cultivation by raiding the very first grower to register with the sheriff. Joy Greenfield, 68, had paid more than $1,000 for a permit to cultivate 99 plants in a collective garden that had been inspected and approved by the local sheriff. Informed that Ms. Greenfield had the support of the sheriff, the DEA agent in charge responded by saying, “I don’t care what the sheriff says.”
• In January 2009, Leonhart rejected an application from University of Massachusetts professor Lyle Craker to conduct FDA-level research on marijuana in the hopes of getting it rescheduled. In doing so, she opposed recommendations from both a DEA administrative law judge and the American Medical Association.
• Last year Leonhart heralded increased drug violence in Mexico – which has claimed about 30,000 lives in four years – as a sign of success: "Our view is that the violence we have been seeing is a signpost of the success our very courageous Mexican counterparts are having,” she said. “The cartels are acting out like caged animals, because they are caged animals.”

Sources say Leonhart’s confirmation is virtually guaranteed, so our best hope is to make sure senators on the Judiciary Committee ask her tough questions. If your senator sits on the Judiciary Committee, you can urge them to press Leonhart on her plans for the future by clicking here.

Read more

After a final tally of late provisional ballots, the Associated Press is reporting that Arizona voters have approved Proposition 203, a state ballot measure that will allow patients suffering from cancer, AIDS, and other life-threatening illnesses to use medical marijuana with a recommendation from their doctor. The measure passed by just 4,341 votes out of more than 1.67 million cast.

Arizona now joins the list of 14 other states, along with the District of Columbia, that have passed medical marijuana laws since 1996.

“Voters in Arizona have sided with science and compassion while dealing yet another blow to our nation’s cruel and irrational prohibition on marijuana,” said Rob Kampia, executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project, which provided significant funding and support to the Arizona Medical Marijuana Policy Project, the local group that ran the Proposition 203 campaign. “Arizona’s law now reflects the mainstream public opinion that seriously ill people should not be treated like criminals if marijuana can provide them relief, and that doctors should be able to recommend marijuana to patients if they believe it can help alleviate their suffering.”

Seventy percent of Americans favor making marijuana legally available for doctors to recommend in order to reduce pain and suffering, according to a recent Gallup poll.

“Sadly, patients in 35 states still have no legal protection if marijuana is the medicine that works best for them,” Kampia said. “We will continue working in the years ahead to ensure that others are awarded the respect and compassionate care that seriously ill patients in Arizona will now enjoy, thanks to this law.”

Proposition 203 allows for the establishment of about 120 tightly run, state-regulated clinics that will dispense marijuana to qualified patients in Arizona. Patients who live more than 25 miles from a clinic will be allowed to grow their own medicine.

Read more

Read more

Today a federal judge in Michigan will begin hearing arguments in a lawsuit filed on behalf of Joseph Casias, the legal medical marijuana patient who was wrongfully terminated by a Battle Creek Wal-Mart because he tested positive for marijuana during a drug screen.

Casias, 30, is a husband, father of two, and 2008 store Associate of the Year, who suffers from an inoperable brain tumor and sinus cancer that is now in remission. His outrageous firing last year for using a state-legal, doctor-approved medicine to ease his pain garnered widespread media coverage and led MPP and others to call for a national boycott of Wal-Mart.

Casias is being represented by attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union and its Michigan chapter. According to the Battle Creek Enquirer, today “Casias’ attorneys will ask the court to deny a motion filed by Wal-Mart seeking dismissal of the case and reject the company's attempts to have the case tried in federal court instead of state court.”

Casias’s firing violates the “Michigan Medical Marihuana Act,” which MPP helped pass in 2008 and reads in part that a qualifying patient shall not be “denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to … disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for the medical use of marihuana.” Under the law, the definition of “medical use” contains “internal possession”— having marijuana in one’s system. The law does not require employers to allow the “ingestion of marihuana in any workplace” or employees to work while under the influence, but there has been no allegation that Casias used marijuana at work or worked while impaired.

“Joseph is exactly the kind of patient Michigan voters had in mind when they passed the [Michigan Medical Marihuana Act],” read an ACLU statement when the lawsuit was first filed. “We’re asking the court to not allow Wal-Mart to punish Joseph for merely taking refuge from his pain, and using marijuana as allowed by state law. Corporations should never be allowed to force patients to choose between their health care and their job.”

We’ll be following the case closely, so stay tuned for details.

Read more

New Mexico’s Department of Health has announced the approval of six new nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries, bringing the state’s total number to 17. According to the New Mexico Independent, the department is also considering a number of proposed changes to its medical marijuana program, including:

*Implementing an annual fee for nonprofit producers based on how long the nonprofit has been operating (previously proposed 7 percent fee on gross annual revenue). The fees would be $5,000 for producers licensed less than one year, $10,000 for more than one year, $20,000 for more than two years and $30,000 for more than three years.

*Eliminating the proposed open and closed application periods

*Removing size requirements from definition of mature plant and size limits from definition of seedling

*Allowing nonprofit producers to get plants, seeds and useable cannabis from other licensed nonprofit producers

There are currently more than 2,800 registered medical marijuana patients in New Mexico, more than 1,200 of whom have individual permits to grow their own medicine.

Incoming New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez (R) has vowed to repeal the state’s medical marijuana law, widely considered one of the tightest regulated in the country. Thankfully, such an act would first have to pass through the state legislature, which has remained supportive of the program.

Read more

U.S. federal appeals court Judge Juan Torruella told an audience in Puerto Rico on Tuesday that “the only realistic alternative” to America’s failed war on drugs is to experiment with legalization, “beginning with marijuana.”

Torruella, 77, made his comments at the University of Puerto Rico’s law school, where he was a guest speaker for an audience of about 70 people, including the law school’s dean, Puerto Rico’s secretary of health, and many students. Here are some of his comments, courtesy of El Nuevo Dia (via Google Translate):

The judge said the U.S. goal was "a Drug-Free America by 1998", or "drug free America for 1998, prompting many laughs from the audience. […]

"The only realistic alternative to the policy (drug) is currently experimenting with the legalization of at least some of these substances, beginning with marijuana," Torruella said.

"I do not see how we can avoid the conclusion that the war on drugs does not only lost time but for some time that loss has had a high human and material costs," said the veteran judge who gave the example of the increase of deaths associated with drug trafficking in Mexico when the U.S. authorities allegedly managed to reduce the traffic routes in the Caribbean. […]

He said New Zealanders and Americans are the most who smoke marijuana (42%) in the world, by far, and noted that in Holland, where consumption is legal, only 20% use it. [..]

The United States remains "the source of insatiable appetite that drives this industry," said the judge.

Torruella sits on the Boston-based First Circuit Court of Appeals. He was first nominated to be a federal judge by President Ford, and was elevated to the appeals court by President Reagan in 1984, according to the Associated Press.

According to El Nuevo Dia, Torruella cited a recent study by the Cato Institute, as well as “British studies” showing marijuana is less harmful than alcohol “and therefore should be legalized.”

This is the second time in less than a week that commonsense marijuana policy has been endorsed outside of the 50 United States. On Thursday, a bill to legalize, tax, and regulate marijuana for medicinal and recreational purposes was approved by the House of Representatives for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, a U.S. territory. Unfortunately, the bill isn’t expected to pass through the Commonwealth’s Senate, where five out of nine senators plan to vote against it.

Read more

California voters may have rejected Proposition 19 last week, but a poll released after the election shows that a majority of California voters still believe marijuana should be legal in principle, and that our current laws do more harm than good.

The poll from Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research found that:

• 50 percent of California voters believe the use of marijuana should be made legal, regardless of their feelings on Prop. 19.
• 52 percent of voters believe our marijuana laws do more harm than good, agreeing that, “Like alcohol prohibition, laws against marijuana do more harm than good.” Only 37 percent disagreed with this statement.
• 31 percent of people who voted “no” on Prop. 19 believe marijuana should be legal, and agreed to the statement, “I believe marijuana should be legalized or penalties for marijuana should be reduced, but I opposed some of the specifics of Proposition 19.”
• 44 percent of voters believe legalization is inevitable, including 25 percent who voted against Prop. 19.

The survey’s most striking find is that if youth voters had turned out last week in the numbers they typically do during a presidential election year, Proposition 19 would have been statistically tied, with 49 percent voting yes to 51 voting no. That statistic and others reinforces our belief that a different measure to end marijuana prohibition would be well poised for victory in 2012 in a state like California or Colorado.

And if that isn’t enough to convince people that the movement to make marijuana legal is exponentially gaining strength, not losing it, consider this: In last week’s California election, Republican Meg Whitman spent an unprecedented $160 million on her campaign to become governor, and she lost, receiving only 3.1 million votes, or about 41 percent overall. The Proposition 19 campaign, on the other hand, spent only about $4 million, and Prop. 19 received 3.4 million votes (or 46 percent) – beating Whitman handily.

With solid funding, a healthy turnout by young voters, and a coalition of allies that is now larger and stronger because of the Prop. 19 campaign, there is every reason to believe we can be victorious in another two years. Don’t give up hope.

Read more

Medical marijuana still has a chance of passing in Arizona, where as many as 300,000 votes on Proposition 203, the MPP-backed medical marijuana measure, have not yet been counted. It could be many days until we receive final word, but either way it will be close.

The following is from an email MPP executive director Rob Kampia sent last night to our supporters:

Based on the ballots tabulated by election officials last night, the initiative was trailing slightly, with 49.75% in favor, with 50.25% opposed ... a difference of less than 7,000 votes out of more than 1.3 million cast.

For the next few days, Arizona government officials will be counting an estimated 200,000 to 300,000 votes that were cast by people whose mail-in ballots arrived at polling stations or elections offices in the final hours of the campaign. They may also need to examine thousands of "provisional" ballots that were cast by people whose residency was in dispute at the polls on election day.

In sum, if our initiative receives 52% of the votes that have yet to be tabulated, our initiative passes.

If the measure ends up winning, it will allow patients suffering from cancer, AIDS, and other life-threatening conditions to use marijuana with a recommendation from their doctor. It would also authorize the opening of about 120 dispensaries across the state.

To help ensure victory in Arizona, please consider donating here.

Read more

In the aftermath of at least three defeated statewide marijuana ballot measures on Election Day, people who aren't following the issue that closely might be inclined to think the pendulum is swinging against marijuana policy reform.

They'd be wrong.

In fact, a 46% vote in favor of California's Proposition 19 - accompanied by a collection of smaller, less-publicized marijuana-policy-reform victories across the country - is yet another sign of the growing strength of the movement to end marijuana prohibition.

Now, more than ever, I'm confident that we're heading toward eventual victory.

The defeat of Prop. 19 in California, while disappointing, was entirely predictable. The measure suffered from a strong turnout by conservative and elderly voters, coupled with a lackluster showing from California's younger voters, who overwhelmingly support legalization. Both trends are common in a midterm election, which is a major reason many people, including myself, believed it would have been better to place such a proposal on the November 2012 ballot.

But regardless of its defeat, Prop. 19 may well have done more for legalization efforts than anything that's come before it -- not only by generating unprecedented national debate about our marijuana laws, but also by bringing into our movement new allies like labor unions, the NAACP, and black and Latino police associations who understand the failure of our current system. The movement to end prohibition is now stronger than ever because of these new allies, who will stand by our side during future battles.

On its most basic level, Prop. 19 received more voter support than any other legalization measure to date. (Previously that record was held by the Nevada initiative that MPP backed in 2006, which received 44% of the vote.) And that growing support for change was reflected in other states, as well: The only two gubernatorial candidates in the entire country who were vocal advocates of decriminalization and medical marijuana - Vermont's Peter Shumlin and Connecticut's Dan Malloy - were both declared winners, despite running as Democrats in a year when voters overwhelmingly favored Republicans.

And while California voters didn't approve Prop. 19, vote tallies so far indicate they rejected attorney general candidate Steve Cooley (R), who is enemy number one of medical marijuana patients in California, having once said that virtually all medical marijuana dispensaries were operating illegally and should be shut down.

In local elections in many states, voters overwhelmingly backed saner marijuana laws by rejecting dispensary bans and endorsing proposals for further reform. In Massachusetts, for example, voters in 18 out of 18 legislative districts (comprising nearly 13% of the state's population) widely approved non-binding measures calling on state lawmakers to pass medical marijuana legislation or a bill to regulate marijuana like alcohol. That support will be crucial to future efforts to improve marijuana laws in Massachusetts - and it lets officials know such change is popularly supported.

So where do we go from here? For starters, I'm advocating for a pair of legalization initiatives in 2012 in California and Colorado - states where support for ending prohibition is highest. And -- keeping in mind that marijuana initiatives tend to do better in presidential election years -- MPP still hopes to place medical-marijuana initiatives on the statewide ballots of Arkansas, Idaho, Missouri, and North Dakota in 2012. (We also remain optimistic about our chances for passing medical marijuana bills in Delaware, Maryland, Illinois, and New York before then.)

In terms of Congress, we got the most important thing we wanted from the 2009-2010 Congress -- the lifting of the federal ban on the local medical marijuana law in the District of Columbia. The 2011-2012 Congress will be more hostile to marijuana, but it won't have any immediate impact, because we aren't planning to pass marijuana-related legislation anyway.

If you're still not convinced that the pendulum isn't swinging back toward prohibition, please take note of this: At the same time that Californians were casting early ballots against Prop. 19, the national polling in favor of making the use of marijuana legal rose to an all-time high of 46%, according to Gallup.

At the rate this national poll number has been rising since 1995, a majority of American adults could support making the use of marijuana legal as soon as 2013.

Marijuana prohibition's days are numbered.

Read more