Nancy Pelosi and Medical Marijuana
On January 4, 2007, the representative of California’s 8th District, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, was elected Speaker of the United States House of Representatives. Mimicking Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “100 days” strategy to mark the beginning of the paradigm shift that was the New Deal, Pelosi has undertaken the first “100 hours” of the 110th Congress to, in her words, “[P]ass the elements of our ‘Six for ‘06’ agenda to meet the everyday needs of all Americans.” Medical marijuana does not make the list expressly, which is reserved for the 9/11 Commission Recommendations, minimum wage, stem-cell research, prescription drugs, student loans, and “Big Oil,” respectively.
Those willing to search Pelosi’s website will find that she has issued nine separate public statements in support of medical marijuana over the years. On June 4, 1997, Pelosi spoke about her co-sponsorship of a bill that would recognize the legitimacy of marijuana as medicine in the eyes of the federal government. On both March 24 and September 15, 1998, she respectively repeated her support of this bill. In 1999, Pelosi made three statements in favor of medical marijuana. In 2001, Pelosi offered her support for the Hinchey amendment, which would prevent the Drug Enforcement Administration from spending money investigating or prosecuting medical marijuana patients and providers in the States that have medical marijuana laws. On July 8, 2004, Pelosi reasserted her support for the medical use of marijuana, and she recommitted herself to that idea on June 15, 2005.
Those willing to search stories from California media sources for “Pelosi” and “medical marijuana” will find that on October 29, 1996, the San Francisco Chronicle endorsed both Nancy Pelosi and California’s Proposition 215—the first medical marijuana law in the country since prohibition, which started in 1937. On November 3, 1996, the Chronicle repeated those endorsements for its pre-election Sunday edition. Almost nine years later (ten days after the United States Supreme Court held that Congress ought to remedy the unjust nature of medical marijuana prohibition), on June 15, 2005, the Associated Press (AP) reported Pelosi’s statement opposing the 109th Congress’ efforts to block the aforementioned Hinchey amendment. On June 16, 2005, the Sacramento Bee and the Ventura Star also ran the previous day’s AP report. Otherwise, the news in California is silent about Pelosi’s statements on medical marijuana.
Why is the media in the Golden State so mute about Pelosi’s support of medical marijuana? Why haven’t the media outlets reported the rationale behind her nine compassionate statements calling for the decriminalization of medical marijuana under federal law? Is it because Pelosi herself has not much advertised or emphasized her position regarding medical marijuana? Is it possible that even this kind and caring representative is too afraid of the stigma associated with speaking out for medical marijuana reform to do anything substantive in terms of policy change? In short, is Pelosi scared to spend her newfound “political capital” on medical marijuana reform?
It is interesting to note that Pelosi’s “Six for ‘06” agenda does not mention the word “marijuana.” In fact, the term is expressly absent from her homepage. However, there are within four of these six important issues places for debate about medical marijuana. First, the 9/11 Commission Recommendations do not include the decriminalization of medical marijuana, but they should—any end, even an incremental one, to the policy of prohibition disrupts a source of terrorist funding. For this reason alone Pelosi should end federal medical marijuana prohibition. Maybe it will help stabilize Afghanistan by making corruption less profitable. Second, stem-cell research is designed to end suffering due to debilitating illnesses; however, marijuana research, with its potential in anti-tumor and anti-Alzheimer’s applications, shows as much or more promise than stem-cells in this regard. Plus, the benefits of marijuana can be actualized today; it is not just a promise of future research. Third, the cost of prescription drugs is outrageous, and a viable alternative for some people may be a (nearly) cost-free alternative, i.e., homegrown medical marijuana. Physicians should at least have the choice to recommend it to patients. Finally, “Big Oil” is troubling, but if the Congress is going to seriously try to replace it with “Renewable Energy,” then Pelosi ought to take a look at the only plant on the planet with significant potential for fuel, fabric, paper, and other industrial uses (none of which contribute to global warming).
The American People are tired of politicians who seek to aggrandize their own power and/or prevent progress at the expense of the common good. In general, it is good to be moderate, and it is good for change to come incrementally. But, the solution to major errors must itself be major. The 75th Congress criminalized the medical use of marijuana in 1937 on the basis of racial animus and without deliberation. We, as a country, have paid a heavy price for that mistake: the corruption and violence associated with prohibition (think of Al Capone). Now is the time for a new direction away from that past. Speaker Pelosi, now is the time to speak up for what you know to be right.
Kenneth Michael White is an attorney and the author of “The Beginning of Today: The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937” and “Buck” (both by PublishAmerica 2004). Visit www.thebeginningoftoday.com for more information.
Those willing to search Pelosi’s website will find that she has issued nine separate public statements in support of medical marijuana over the years. On June 4, 1997, Pelosi spoke about her co-sponsorship of a bill that would recognize the legitimacy of marijuana as medicine in the eyes of the federal government. On both March 24 and September 15, 1998, she respectively repeated her support of this bill. In 1999, Pelosi made three statements in favor of medical marijuana. In 2001, Pelosi offered her support for the Hinchey amendment, which would prevent the Drug Enforcement Administration from spending money investigating or prosecuting medical marijuana patients and providers in the States that have medical marijuana laws. On July 8, 2004, Pelosi reasserted her support for the medical use of marijuana, and she recommitted herself to that idea on June 15, 2005.
Those willing to search stories from California media sources for “Pelosi” and “medical marijuana” will find that on October 29, 1996, the San Francisco Chronicle endorsed both Nancy Pelosi and California’s Proposition 215—the first medical marijuana law in the country since prohibition, which started in 1937. On November 3, 1996, the Chronicle repeated those endorsements for its pre-election Sunday edition. Almost nine years later (ten days after the United States Supreme Court held that Congress ought to remedy the unjust nature of medical marijuana prohibition), on June 15, 2005, the Associated Press (AP) reported Pelosi’s statement opposing the 109th Congress’ efforts to block the aforementioned Hinchey amendment. On June 16, 2005, the Sacramento Bee and the Ventura Star also ran the previous day’s AP report. Otherwise, the news in California is silent about Pelosi’s statements on medical marijuana.
Why is the media in the Golden State so mute about Pelosi’s support of medical marijuana? Why haven’t the media outlets reported the rationale behind her nine compassionate statements calling for the decriminalization of medical marijuana under federal law? Is it because Pelosi herself has not much advertised or emphasized her position regarding medical marijuana? Is it possible that even this kind and caring representative is too afraid of the stigma associated with speaking out for medical marijuana reform to do anything substantive in terms of policy change? In short, is Pelosi scared to spend her newfound “political capital” on medical marijuana reform?
It is interesting to note that Pelosi’s “Six for ‘06” agenda does not mention the word “marijuana.” In fact, the term is expressly absent from her homepage. However, there are within four of these six important issues places for debate about medical marijuana. First, the 9/11 Commission Recommendations do not include the decriminalization of medical marijuana, but they should—any end, even an incremental one, to the policy of prohibition disrupts a source of terrorist funding. For this reason alone Pelosi should end federal medical marijuana prohibition. Maybe it will help stabilize Afghanistan by making corruption less profitable. Second, stem-cell research is designed to end suffering due to debilitating illnesses; however, marijuana research, with its potential in anti-tumor and anti-Alzheimer’s applications, shows as much or more promise than stem-cells in this regard. Plus, the benefits of marijuana can be actualized today; it is not just a promise of future research. Third, the cost of prescription drugs is outrageous, and a viable alternative for some people may be a (nearly) cost-free alternative, i.e., homegrown medical marijuana. Physicians should at least have the choice to recommend it to patients. Finally, “Big Oil” is troubling, but if the Congress is going to seriously try to replace it with “Renewable Energy,” then Pelosi ought to take a look at the only plant on the planet with significant potential for fuel, fabric, paper, and other industrial uses (none of which contribute to global warming).
The American People are tired of politicians who seek to aggrandize their own power and/or prevent progress at the expense of the common good. In general, it is good to be moderate, and it is good for change to come incrementally. But, the solution to major errors must itself be major. The 75th Congress criminalized the medical use of marijuana in 1937 on the basis of racial animus and without deliberation. We, as a country, have paid a heavy price for that mistake: the corruption and violence associated with prohibition (think of Al Capone). Now is the time for a new direction away from that past. Speaker Pelosi, now is the time to speak up for what you know to be right.
Kenneth Michael White is an attorney and the author of “The Beginning of Today: The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937” and “Buck” (both by PublishAmerica 2004). Visit www.thebeginningoftoday.com for more information.
posted by Kenneth Michael White | 3:12 PM
|
1 comments
