Marijuana, the Straight Dope: Guidance for Federal Policy Reform

• Published in: Homeland security affairs
• Main Author: Baker, Erik
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Monterey Naval Postgraduate School, Center for Homeland Defense and Security 01.12.2017
• Subjects: Banking; Business law; Cannabis; Classification; Crime; Decision making; Decriminalization; Drug abuse; Drug legalization; Drug tolerance; Enforcement; Federal agencies; Federal government; Federal policy; Health risks; International law; Law enforcement; Legislation; Marijuana; Medical research; Municipalities; National security; Police; Policy reform; Prescription drugs; Prohibition; Public safety; Rescheduling; Schedules; Scheduling; Treaties; Voters; United States > US
• ISSN: 1558-643X

On August 14, 1970, marijuana was added to Schedule I of the Controlled Substance Act. This effectively outlawed the substance federally, classifying the drug as having a high likelihood of abuse and no medical purpose. More than four decades later, the current trend is one of state voters and legislators enacting laws, which are in conflict with this prohibition, allowing for the use of marijuana medically, and in the case of some states, recreationally. What policy changes should the federal government consider in light of the ongoing state marijuana reforms? This thesis seeks to answer that question. The states’ push for marijuana decriminalization and legalization creates numerous problems and raise concerns about the current federal marijuana policy. These include inconsistent enforcement and prosecutorial guidance, noncompliance with standing international counter-drug treaties, and citizens in many states now acting as research subjects. The enforcement inconsistencies are illustrated by the fact that the U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and countless state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies police the frontlines of the effort to disrupt the tide of marijuana into the United States—all while more and more states vote to legalize the same substance. The marijuana decriminalization movement is creating a climate in which markets are being created for a substance that cannot be imported or cultivated in vast quantities legally, nor can the proceeds associated with its sale be processed through the legitimate banking system. In an attempt to illustrate the problems created by the states’ movement, this thesis reviews the current literature. This author conducted research to identify dimensions of the issues that may warrant policy changes. This research explores four areas: 1. The impact of state legalization of marijuana on international accords that the United States has signed. 2. The impact of potential medical benefits on marijuana’s federal classification and the impact of its classification on research. 3. The impact of marijuana legalization on health and public safety risk. 4. The mechanism by which marijuana could be reclassified This thesis provides evidence that current states’ efforts are in conflict with federal marijuana law and policy in four areas explored: legal, law enforcement, medical, and health and public safety. The research shows that current scheduling stifles the very research that would tend to provide evidence for the need to reschedule marijuana in the first place. Similarly, current scheduling precludes the classification of marijuana as a prescription drug, which would provide for its regulation and compliance with both federal and international law. Evidence reported in this thesis shows a medicinal value of marijuana and also the dangers associated with its use early in life as well as impaired driving, and unknown THC content. While decriminalization appears to lead to greater use, even by those not legally authorized, there has been no evidence that increased marijuana use leads to an increase in Part-I (serious) reported criminal activity. The ambiguity in federal enforcement and the increasing tolerance by states and municipalities have started us down the road to rescheduling marijuana and THC. This thesis illustrates the need to finish the trip. This thesis explores three options for federal marijuana policy. The first is the status quo approach, or continued freedom of states to pass new laws while maintaining the relaxed enforcement of federal marijuana laws. Two other options considered are strict enforcement of federal marijuana law, and finally, the rescheduling of marijuana. The author’s advice to this federal administration and the yet to be appointed administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration is to look at the issue of marijuana legislation with a fresh eye and also through the lens of all that has been learned over the last few years. This thesis seeks to highlight some of this research knowledge and impart it on those that are in positions of decision-making. The author has come to believe that the placement of marijuana in Schedule I was never meant to be permanent. As more and more of the original questions surrounding marijuana are answered and for more questions to be properly addressed in the future, the federal classification of marijuana must change. This thesis is framed by the fact that 45 states and territories have already passed some form of legislation that decriminalizes marijuana. Most of those 45 states, the District of Columbia, and Guam have passed laws allowing for the medicinal use of marijuana. That is precisely what marijuana as a Schedule III drug would provide, along with treaty compliance, and the ability to use the country’s banking system in connection with marijuana as legitimate business.