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.

Yesterday, Bruce pointed out that the latest government data indicate that over the past 15 years teen cigarette use has declined and marijuana use increased to the point where teens use them pretty much equally now.

At his press conference announcing the annual report, Monitoring the Future, I asked White House drug czar John Walters to explain his insistence that marijuana must be prohibited for adults in order to protect children when the data suggest the exact opposite.

I don't have a transcript yet, so what follows is my recollection of the exchange. However, if Walters or anybody from his Office of National Drug Control Policy public affairs department wants to dispute any of it and give me a transcript or video, I'd be grateful.

Anyway, the substance of his response was pretty much his standard circular logic: Marijuana is the most widely used illicit drug for teens and therefore must remain illegal. Or something. Again, help me out here, ONDCP public affairs.

He could have stopped there, and I kind of wish he had, because frankly I'm tired of making fun of this guy. But he couldn't resist adding that he believes the real reason marijuana prohibition has been so impotent is that organizations like MPP devote so much time and energy to recruiting the next generation of potheads.

That's right – I've just pointed out to him that youth use rates of a taxed and regulated substance, tobacco, have plummeted, and he accused MPP of wanting to adopt the same model to control marijuana because we secretly want to encourage teen use.

Of course, he knows this is nonsense, so I said, "Ok, Director Walters, you know that's not true." He muttered something feeble about how maybe MPP has been more effective reaching kids than he was. Which is funny, since ONDCP has spent billions on misleading, ineffective ads that condescend to kids, while MPP spends nothing. And why should we? We're a policy organization. Policy is for grownups.

A lot of my colleagues feel understandably offended by the ridiculous accusation that any of us would favor encouraging children to engage in risky or dangerous behaviors. But Walters has resorted to that particular tantrum many times, and I find it more pathetic than offensive.

You know what bothers me? Where was the press? The biggest successes in reducing teen drug use, according to Monitoring the Future data, involve substances that are responsibly taxed and regulated – alcohol and tobacco. Meanwhile, we flounder with teen marijuana use rates. That's news, folks.

But it wasn't spelled out in the official press release, so nobody thought to ask about it. Except me. But then again, I work for an organization that, for some reason, wants to corrupt children.

With over 600,000 votes cast and thousands of questions posted, Barack Obama’s “Open for Questions” tool has closed its first round of questioning.  Topping the list is the following:

"Will you consider legalizing marijuana so that the government can regulate it, tax it, put age limits on it, and create millions of new jobs and create a billion dollar industry right here in the U.S.?" (link)

This is a clear indication that visitors to Obama’s transition Web site want to see a change in America’s marijuana policy.  After decades of failed prohibition, rising marijuana use, and the recent surge in drug trade violence along the Mexican border, it makes sense that Americans are ready for a new approach.

The Web site’s blog will post responses to this and other questions over the next few days.

U.S. House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) penned a letter to the DEA requesting answers about the agency's raids of and threats to California’s state-legal medical marijuana facilities. The letter, sent in April at the request of several concerned public officials in California, asked the DEA pointed questions regarding the cost of these raids and whether attacking medical marijuana providers was a sensible use of scarce resources.

The DEA has finally replied. And, as expected, the 17-page response is so full of outright lies and hyperbole that I could go on forever picking it apart. I don’t have time to criticize all of what deserves criticizing but I thought I’d share one of my favorite highlights.

In response to the question of whether or not conducting raids on medical marijuana providers is a good use of a federal agency’s time and money, the DEA argues that all marijuana use is illegal under the federal laws that it is obligated to enforce -- as if it has no room for discretion. If this were really the case, the DEA would be working around the clock cracking down on each and every petty drug user in the country.

An even more absurd justification for the DEA's despicable activities is that it's merely responding to community concerns about these facilities. The top three items on the list of complaints it has allegedly received are “people smoking marijuana outside,” “pedestrian and automobile traffic congesting the streets,” and “illegal parking.”

That’s right. The Department of Justice lists illegal parking and traffic among one of its highest public safety priorities! And all this under the direction of an administration that supposedly believes in states' rights and smaller government.

Another irony in all of this is that a recent report from the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure charges DEA agents with brazenly ignoring municipal parking ordinances and failing to pay the associated fines. (Thanks to my colleague and namesake, Aaron Houston, in D.C. for that little tidbit.)

The Obama transition team unveiled a new feature on its Web site yesterday that allows visitors to submit and vote on questions for the president-elect.  Called “Open for Questions,” the new tool presents a good opportunity to ask Obama if he will support marijuana policy reforms.

If you have a moment, head over to change.gov and ask a question or vote on one of the many marijuana policy questions that have already been posted.

That's the astonishing finding from the latest Monitoring the Future survey, but strangely, it wasn't mentioned by White House drug czar John Walters or in the initial news reports. 13.8 percent of 10^th graders reported smoking marijuana in the past 30 days, while just 12.3 percent smoked cigarettes. For 8^th and 12^th grades, cigarette use still narrowly exceeded marijuana, but the gap narrowed to insignificance.

The Associated Press reported, "[T]he White House says the sustained trendline is the key." Makes sense to me.  According to the new survey, current (i.e. past 30 days) marijuana use has nearly doubled among  8^th graders since 1991, from 3.2 percent to 5.8 percent, with big increases among 10^th and 12^th graders,  too. During that same period, cigarette use dropped like a rock, with current cigarette smoking dropping from 14.3 percent to 6.8 percent among 8^th graders, and dramatic drops in the older grades as well.

Amazingly, Walters touts the new results as proof that his policies are working, saying, "What we see here is a very good trend for the youth of the country." In fact, what the data show is that prohibition for adults is neither necessary nor effective at reducing use among kids. Last year over 775,000 Americans were arrested for possession of marijuana while zero were arrested for possession of cigarettes.

Legal cigarette vendors are regulated. They can and do face fines or even loss of their license to operate if they sell to kids. Prohibition guarantees we have no such control over marijuana.

Addicts commonly rationalize and excuse destructive behavior rather than recognize that their addiction has gotten out of control. By that standard, John Walters is an addict and his drug is prohibition.

Okay, I'm a bit behind in my reading, but a study published last month in the journal Addiction casts an interesting light on the so-called "gateway effect" -- the idea that use of one drug, usually marijuana, somehow leads to use of others.

Gateway associations have regularly been found between tobacco and marijuana: Young people who use one are pretty consistently more likely to use the other as well. But does tobacco cause kids to smoke marijuana, marijuana cause kids to use tobacco, or are both tendencies the result of other factors entirely?

The new study, by researchers in Queensland, Australia, and St. Louis, suggests that genetics, not the effects of any particular drug, are at the heart of these associations. The researchers studied over 500 pairs of twins, some identical and some fraternal, and did a lot of advanced number crunching to tease out connections between "early cannabis use" (use before age 17), later nicotine dependence, and the factors that may contribute to these outcomes.

Teens who had used marijuana early were indeed more likely to later become dependent on nicotine than those who did not. But, the researchers wrote, that increased risk "can be attributed largely to the effects of common genetic factors. ... [T]here remains no compelling evidence for causal processes linking EC [early cannabis use] to ND [nicotine dependence]."

This study only examined the relationships between marijuana and tobacco, not other drugs, but it's clearly another hit to claims that marijuana use somehow causes people to use other substances.