TIME Magazine: What Is President Obama’s Problem With Medical Marijuana?

[Poll_Blind]

From TIME Magazine:
[div class="excerpt" style="border-left: 1px solid #bfbfbf; border-top: 1px solid #bfbfbf; border-right: 1px solid #bfbfbf; border-radius: 0.3077em 0.3077em 0em 0em; box-shadow: 2px 2px 6px #bfbfbf;"]What Is President Obama’s Problem With Medical Marijuana?
[div class="excerpt" style="border-left: 1px solid #bfbfbf; border-bottom: 1px solid #bfbfbf; border-right: 1px solid #bfbfbf; border-radius: 0em 0em 0.3077em 0.3077em; background-color: #f4f4f4; box-shadow: 2px 2px 6px #bfbfbf;"]For a brief moment in 2009, medical marijuana advocates exhaled. A new President had taken office promising to call off the federal prosecutors in states that had legalized weed for the sick. “What I’m not going to be doing is using Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws on this issue,” Barack Obama had said during his presidential campaign. In his first year in office, the Justice Department told prosecutors not to focus on “individuals whose actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana.” Medical marijuana patients and the growing industry that supported them thought they were in the clear.

But they weren’t. Two years later, the Obama Administration is cracking down on medical marijuana dispensaries and growers just as harshly as the Administration of George W. Bush did. In 2011, the Department of Justice revised its guidance to U.S. Attorneys, allowing them to target any medical marijuana activity except for ill patients and their immediate caregivers. The Drug Enforcement Administration has made it clear that “medical marijuana is not medicine,” and even called it a “mortal danger.” The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms has banned the sale of guns to medical marijuana patients. The Department of Housing and Urban Development has told public housing authorities that they can’t rent to medical marijuana patients. And the Internal Revenue Service has reiterated its position that medical pot businesses cannot deduct expenses related to an illegal drug. Fearing federal intervention, many banks are now dropping medical marijuana dispensaries as customers.

In many states, U.S. Attorneys have advised state and local officials to back away from plans to create rules and regulations that would codify the medical pot industry, in some cases raising the possibility that lawmakers could be prosecuted for promoting drug use that is legal under state law. As a result, dispensary openings in states like Delaware, Arizona and Washington have been delayed. Colorado has abandoned a plan to provide legal financing for medical marijuana operations, and a northern California sheriff has been ordered to stop tagging plants as legitimately grown for medical use. In Oakland, the city council was forced to abandon a plan for creating warehouse-sized medical marijuana growing facilities. At the same time, U.S. Attorneys have been seeking the closure of dispensaries in California and Colorado without any demonstration that there are violations of state law. There are no public government statistics about the scale of these efforts, but an medical marijuana advocates say publicly announced Obama Administration raids on ostensibly medical marijuana operations are happening at a greater clip than in the second term of George W. Bush.

This has created a clear disconnect between the policy on the ground, and the public statements of officials in Washington. Back in December, Attorney General Eric Holder reiterated his claim that only medical marijuana operators that are behaving outside state law would be targeted by federal officials. (His statement was brilliantly hard to parse: “If in fact people are not using the policy decision that we have made to use marijuana in a way that’s not consistent with the state statute, we will not use our limited resources in that way,” he testified before Congress.) More recently, Obama told Rolling Stone, “The only tension that’s come up—and this gets hyped up a lot—is a murky area where you have large-scale, commercial operations that may also be supplying medical marijuana users.”

This isn’t the whole story...
--snip--

More at the link- very interesting article. Apparently there's a bigger piece in this week's Time Magazine as well.

PB

[anti-alec]

1. Let me know when he does an EO removing the MJ off Schedule I as it should be.

And regulated. All that kind of riff-raff we go through in California, Colorado, Montana would have made it easier with that stroke of pen.

He won't do it - he's afraid. But I think he might go balls-on on this after the election, but I'm not optimistic.

He should have ordered Holder to tell the agencies to knock it off, and ordered the US Attornies of the said states that was threatened to resign effective immediately and appointed pro-MMJ US Attornies.

[tridim]

12. He did order the feds to stand down.

And that order is still in effect.

His order resulted in a immediate increase in MMJ production and sales in legal states that remains to this day. Some of those new businesses chose to break state law and are being dealt with accordingly. The confusion happened because ALL dispensaries in this country are technically breaking federal law, which is why the President issued his stand down order to the feds so early on.

But you're right, he didn't go far enough which resulted in some unfortunate legal limbo. Stay tuned.

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

[anti-alec]

17. Unfortunately, tridim - you and I don't see it that way.

As long as the DEA is involved, Obama & Holder are involved and they should BUTT OUT of states rights - 10th Amendment of the Constitution guarantees at least that.

Obama's order of the stand down has been ignored repeatedly. Obama and Holder needs to threaten to shut down DEA in order to get them to back off on the raids. The new businesses and the regular businesses were in fact state-compliant - as a matter of fact, my beloved dispensary was shut down because the feds thought it was "too close" to a school when the said school is more than 3 blocks away, a religious school, and not even public. I refuse to recognize the school zone area on that.

Now I go to a dispensary that's 6 blocks away from the school. Oh wait, there's a JCC nearby - somehow the feds has to close this dispensary as it's simply across the street from that place, so according to your logic, it has to be shut down.

Is that right?

[Comrade Grumpy]

32. You keep repeating factually incorrect statements.

The 2009 Ogden memo was superseded by the 2011 Cole memo. That was a change of DOJ policy, which has resulted in federal raids and federal prosecutions under federal law. So, "that order is still in effect" is not a factually correct statement.

The federal prosecutors are not charging dispensaries with breaking state law; they are threatening to close them down, and if that doesn't work, prosecuting them under federal laws.

If businesses are breaking state laws, isn't it the job of state prosecutors to prosecute them?

What do you think Nancy Pelosi is complaining about?

[pscot]

13. I don't think it's fear. There's an agenda behind this

that we don't k now about. I no longer believe much of anything he says.

[SammyWinstonJack]

41. Follow the money. I no longer believe much of anything he says. No reason to.

[Habibi]

2. Deal made with Big Pharma during the ACA negotiations?

Honestly, I can't figure it out, either.

[duhneece]

8. And/or the alcohol & tobacco industries

The original funders of drug-free org included Anheuser (sp?) Busch and at least one tobacco company.

[tridim]

16. Do you really believe Obama is a greasy, ass-kissing Republican?

If not, why did you write what you just did?

[duhneece]

23. I was adding two industries (alcohol & tobacco) to the reference about pharmaceutical industry

Someone else added the private prison industry. Together, we created a more complete response to those who are opposed to cannabis legalization, medical or otherwise. We could have added the DEA, prison guard union, District Attorneys who get HIDTA/Byrne funds.

[bbgrunt]

19. oh, and don't forget the private prison lobby.

[mike_c]

3. Obama's leadership has been weak in the face of entrenched interests...

...especially monied interests. He failed to significantly reform banking and Wall Street because he surrounded himself with advisers who have deep interests in maintaining the current system. He failed to fundamentally overhaul health care, settling for half measures that ultimately profit the industry most responsible for the current problems because he left the deal making to folks who had significant interests in maintaining the present system and constraining reforms to avoid fundamental change. Most of his efforts at "bipartisanship" begin with giving away some aspect of the farm to demonstrate his willingness to deal, which I think is a weak negotiating position. His education ideas have largely followed the lead of for-profit edu-business. He has expanded the drone war and other aspects of global U.S. militarism-- which greatly profits the MIC-- during a time of economic weakness when investment in economic stimulus and broad growth at home is needed, not more foreign misadventures.

Marijuana prohibition is one the biggest cash cows for the prison industrial complex. Whole federal agencies depend upon it to justify much of their budget. Big pharma likes prohibition just fine, just like the chemical manufacturing industry likes the ban on industrial hemp. Obama lets these sorts of monied interests influence public policy way too much, IMO.

[Phlem]

4. I've heard

He doesn't want to look soft on crime during an election cycle. He is a moderate republican IMHO.

-p

[a2liberal]

5. K&R (n/t)

[usrname]

6. The problem is that it doesn't play well during election season

I'd wait until after the election. We'll see if there's some change.

If not, then we know he's beholden to the pharmaceutical companies.

[demosincebirth]

7. My sentiments exactly. Leave all hotbutton issues for his next term, if he wins in Nov.

[pscot]

15. Dream on

[Logical]

27. LOL, add this to the list of stuff Obama will get "progressive" about!

[Tsiyu]

29. Dying people don't give a rat's ass about November

And sick people may not have the luxury of hoping it all works out.

Obama is going to lose many votes because of his hypocrisy. No matter how much those people - or their loved ones - are mocked or patronized.

[just1voice]

9. I don't understand waiting to tell the truth for corrupt political reasons

He'd get a lot more votes if he was pro-legalization rather than pandering to conservative hypocrites.

[frylock]

10. the problem is that everyday is election season..

after nov 2012, the excuse will be that he can't jeopardize the midterms.

[mike_c]

11. the majority of Americans favor decriminalization, legalization, rescheduling, whatever....

The War on Drugs generally is most popular with conservatives and law enforcement who have a vested financial interest in continuing it. Most Americans are tired of this shit, and see it as an expensive failure that criminalizes otherwise good people.

[Uncle Joe]

14. It plays worse when the nation doesn't know what you stand for.

With Romney that's not a big issue, because everybody knows he stands for the wealthy and powerful, the people expect nothing better from him and his financiers don't want anything better.

But the perception of President Obama being disingenuous to what Candidate Obama ran on in 2008 only damages him.

If he won the Presidency during a 2008 election season being more progressive on this issue why doesn't it "play well" during a 2012 election season when even more people and states have come out in favor of medical marijuana not to mention legalized cannabis?

[RainDog]

37. The majority of American support legal mmj - so it looks bad for Obama to do what he's doing

it's incredible to me that people make the argument that the public doesn't support legal medical marijuana and that this issue should be avoided for that reason.

REALITY does not support that position.

If EVERY poll indicates a HUGE majority in favor of legalization (and it does) and if the MAJORITY of states either has medical marijuana laws on the books or have them in the works...

there is NO FUCKING WAY that this issue does not have the support of the American people.

it's propaganda to claim this issue is divisive in a way that hurts Democrats if Democrats took a stand in favor. the reality is that it's a divisive issue because too many federal level democrats will not take a stand on this issue that represents the will of the people.

[Uncle Joe]

39. I hope the dam is beginning to crack in regards to federal level Democrats coming out.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014112586#post27

I hear there is safety in numbers, so come on out federal level Democrats, the water is fine and the people most prone to having been brainwashed by "reefer madness" have already or are moving on to the next great adventure.

The people are rapidly becoming aware to the wool that's been pulled over their eyes for so long and I don't believe you want to be on the wrong side of this issue.

[ihavenobias]

36. Marijuana Legalization Support At All Time High - Poll

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/29/rasmussen-record-percent-support-marijuana-legalization/

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/30/general-u-s-may-export-terror-war-tactics-to-fight-drug-gangs/

[Poll_Blind]

43. +1 nt

PB

[nxylas]

18. He knows how the reich-wing would play it

"The food stamp, ghetto, (insert other racist code word for black here) president is decriminalising the weed. Why do you think that is, huh? Huh?"

[RainDog]

38. so what? They're in the minority on this issue

on the other hand, the president would open a huge market in cannabis and hemp related products, would actually do something the majority of Americans want, and the right wingers who are not in support, such as Romney, would have to defend imprisoning people for possession of something less harmful than aspirin.

[nxylas]

42. They may be in the minority in the country, but there are a lot of them in Congress

Add to that Obama's natural caution (to put it politely, since it's election season and we have to play nice) and you have a recipe for, ahem, "bipartisan compromise".

[ihavenobias]

44. President Obama doesn't have to decriminalize marijuana

For now many of us would just like him to not GO OUT OF HIS WAY to crack down on medical marijuana, which has the support of over 70% of the public (see my previous post above in the thread).

There's a huge difference between the president pushing for decriminalization/legalization and simply having his administration have better priorities than breaking up dispensaries. In this era of massive budget cuts does anyone really think we couldn't come up with a list of 1,000 ways to better spend that (limited) taxpayer money?

[99th_Monkey]

20. Landscape is shifting: SCOTUS, Jimmy Kimmel and now Time Magazine?

Supremes recently REFUSED to even consider overturning a lower court ruling that the US Dept of Justice and DEA
need to honor states that have adopted medical marijuana programs.
http://www.thedailychronic.net/2011/7350/supreme-court-state-medical-marijuana-laws-not-preempted-by-federal-law/

Jimmy Kimmel's brilliant roasting of Obama at National Press Club dinner the other night was jaw-dropping, calling
on the audience to "raise your hand if you've never smoked weed" and maybe 2-3 hands in the whole huge room
were raised. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/28/jimmy-kimmel-whcd-pot_n_1462140.html

And now Time is weighing in to support states with medical marijuana programs. And all these thing happened
within ONE WEEK of each other. Simply amazingly wonderful.





Edited to add links

[kestrel91316]

21. I find Obama's stance on MJ just as despicable as I did Bush's. It is one of

my biggest complaints against him.

I'm a responsible adult, and I have recently begun using medical MJ to manage chronic back/neck pain from a skiing injury 35 years ago. My body's response has exceeded my wildest expectations, and I feel like a new person. And all I do is have a brownie every evening before bed. Beats hell out of taking 880mg+ naproxen every single day and seeing little response. And my work doesn't allow for me to use narcotics during the day. I need a clear head.

I don't appreciate authoritarians trying to tell me I can't use this herb. I don't appreciate the implication that I harm ANYONE by using it. ALL IT DOES IS HELP ME SLEEP WITHOUT PAIN. And I really don't appreciate my own tax dollars being used to persecute me and others like me.

I am one of millions of Americans who benefit from this most excellent medication. I'm not backing down. I have seeds now, and will NEVER be without it again. DOJ can go suck an egg.

[progressoid]

22. He's telling us that it's OK to break the law.

Like he did when he was young...just don't get caught.

[felix_numinous]

24. Here's a question for you

Why do police union, private prison corporations, alcohol and beer companies, pharmaceutical companies and prison guard unions get to LOBBY congress to keep marijuana illegal? THIS should be illegal--because of the obvious conflict of interest????!!!!!!

http://truth-out.org/news/item/8854-the-top-five-special-interest-groups-lobbying-to-keep-marijuana-illegal

I did post this article in another thread, but think this deserves attention.

[Fumesucker]

25. Because they are "stakeholders", silly..

They have a huge stake in cannabis remaining illegal so they are by definition stakeholders.

Don't you remember during the health care negotiations how the pharma companies and the insurance companies and the hospital companies all got places at the negotiations because they were stakeholders?

People advocating single payer? They were arrested.

[felix_numinous]

28. It's --so--corrupt

--and no one wants to call it bribery or conflict of interest, oh no.

[fascisthunter]

26. he's been bought and sold...

[Romulox]

30. Oh, just let them lock you up for a few years. Why would you think civil liberties are important???

The Democratic Party has more important things to focus on this eclection, like the right of woman to do what she wants with her own body (as long as it's not smoke pot!!!!)--you know, "choice"!

[RainDog]

31. good article n/t

[cbrer]

33. Follow the Money (link)

http://www.alternet.org/story/155269/5_special_interest_groups_that_help_keep_marijuana_illegal?akid=8717.1077804.ixVP2w&rd=1&t=12

[DeSwiss]

34. Standard Operating Procedure. In A Police State. Period. - K&R n/t

[Egalitarian Thug]

35. The problem is not President Obama.

The problem is with his employers, and they will not see the loss of hundreds of billions of dollars in profits just because it make the nation a better place.

Big (insert corporate sector here) frequently only exists because of the legal status of this weed.

[Dr Fate]

40. Think of it as a job creation program for teen-aged street dealers.

Unless Obama keeps on busting medical clinics, many street dealers and gang members will lose their jobs.

[mojowork_n]

45. There's way more to it than that.

For instance:

http://www.alternet.org/drugs/151135/american_banks_%27high%27_on_drug_money%3A_how_a_whistleblower_blew_the_lid_off_wachovia-drug_cartel_money_laundering_scheme/?page=entire

This high-profile investigation ultimately revealed that from 2004-2007, a staggering amount of illegal drug proceeds totaling $378.4 billion dollars were transferred into Wachovia by the Mexico-based Casa Cambios that violated U.S. government anti-money laundering compliance.

That's the money trail between one US bank, and one Mexican company. Do you think there might have been others?