New York Comptroller calls for Marijuana legalization in city
Associated Press
NEW YORK — New York City Comptroller John Liu is
proposing a historic overhaul of the city's marijuana laws, believing
that legalizing medical marijuana and allowing adults to possess an
ounce of pot for recreational use would pump more than $400 million into
the city's coffers.
The sweeping change, which would put New York at the forefront of a
growing national debate over use of the drug, calls for recreational
marijuana to be regulated and taxed like alcohol and tobacco.
Liu, the city's top financial officer who is also running for mayor,
commissioned a report that finds that New York City has a $1.65 billion
marijuana market. If a 20 percent excise tax and the standard 8.875
percent city sales tax is imposed on the pot sales, it would yield $400
million annually in revenue, Liu believes. Another $31 million could be
saved a year in law enforcement and court costs.
"It is economically and socially just to tax it," Liu told the
Associated Press in an interview Tuesday. "We can eliminate some of the
criminal nature that surrounds the drug and obtain revenue from it."
The comptroller's plan, which likely faces stiff opposition from
state lawmakers who would have to authorize it, calls for the state to
oversee private businesses selling pot. Licenses would be required, fees
would be charged, and using the drug in public or while driving would
be prohibited.
Liu's team calculated that 900,000 city pot smokers spend about
$2,000 a year on the drug. He is calling for the revenue surge to be
used to reduce tuition at the City University of New York for city
residents.
Twenty states and the District of Columbia currently permit medicinal
marijuana. Two states, Washington and Colorado, last year voted to
allow recreational marijuana for adults.
Officials in both states predicted that the change would be create a
surge in revenue — up to $60 million annually in Colorado alone,
according to supporters there. But while it is too soon to evaluate the
exact economic ramifications in those states, experts do believe that
the city budget would be bolstered by a similar measure.
"Now, people selling the product are doing it under the table and
aren't paying any taxes on it," said Carl Davis, Senior Analyst at the
Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. "That would change. And, it
stands to reason, people would also start legally producing it locally,
so there would be economic benefits there too."
One of the nation's leading pro-marijuana industry groups applauded Liu's proposal.
"We recognize that marijuana is better sold behind the counter than
on the streets," said Betty Aldworth, deputy director of the National
Cannabis Industry Association.
But neither Liu nor any city official has the authority to
decriminalize marijuana; that can only be done by a law that passes the
state legislature and is then signed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo.
Cuomo has steadfastly opposed any decriminalization efforts and is
seen as unlikely to waver from that stance, particularly as he
approaches a re-election campaign next year. The Republicans who share
majority control of the Senate have also opposed decriminalization
proposals. Neither Cuomo nor the Senate GOP leadership would comment on
Liu's proposal.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg, whose support could sway minds in Albany,
has also long opposed efforts to legalize marijuana. His top spokesman
declined comment on Liu's proposal.
Liu is currently placing fifth in Democratic mayoral polls.
Sal Alabanese, a longshot Democratic mayoral candidate, has also called for legalizing marijuana.
Tuesday, August 13, 2013
Kevin Abraham Sabet-Sharghi, Ph.D., aka Kevin Sabet, has been a headline-grabbing right-winger ever since his U.C. Berkeley days [3]—where he did not study science or medicine despite his current appointment as an assistant professor of medicine [4] at the University of Florida. His most recent incarnation [5] as a co-founder of Project SAM [6] (Smart Approaches to Marijuana) follows a stint in the Obama White House on its drug policy staff from 2009-2011. His personal website [7] claims he is the “quarterback” of a new anti-drug movement, boasting that he’s been “quoted in over 15,000 news stories.” [8]
Project
SAM’s anti-marijuana priorities include emphasizing the “lifelong
stigma” of pot-related arrests, the prospect of “Big Marijuana”
marketing it to children, the industry being taken over by Big Tobacco,
and seeking federal research on pharmaceuticalized medical marijuana
products.
Unlike Sabet, I have spent more than a decade
training in the relevant disciplines he attempts to speak for. I’ve
earned degrees in medicine and medical social scientific fields, not
social policy like Sabet, and I feel the need to debunk his "moral entrepreneurship" [9] that demonizes marijuana use and ignores scientific research that contradicts his drug warrior claims.
What follows are five claims from his list of talking points—fictions—followed by the facts.
Claim #1: There’s no need to smoke it.
"Since we don't smoke opium to get the effects of morphine, why should we smoke marijuana to receive its therapeutic effects?" [10](Published or aired on Reason.com, Christian Science Monitor, CNN’s Dr. Drew, Huffington Post, Project SAM website.)
However
one medicinal agent is delivered into the body should have no bearing
whatsoever on how another medicinal agent should or should not be given.
To believe so shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the
variation of medicines and modes of delivery in modern clinical
practice. To allow medicinal use of cannabis-marijuana does not mean
that one would only be presented with the option of smoking it
to receive its therapeutic effects. Many other modes of delivery: oral,
topical, sublingual, vaporized, etc. are available.
Moreover, the harms of cannabis smoking are nowhere near [11]
the harms of tobacco smoke. All large-scale, long-term epidemiological
studies conducted to date have not shown any links to COPD or lung
cancer. In fact, cancer-protective effects have been demonstrated in at
least two studies. Opium is consumed orally in medicine today in the
tincture form of paregoric [12], used across the United States in hospitals and clinics for refractory diarrhea.
Claim #2: The plant has dangerous unknown elements.
"The
raw marijuana plant material -- itself containing hundreds of unknown
components -- has not met FDA's standards of safety and efficacy." [13] (CNN, Huffington Post, Project SAM website.)
Adequate and well-controlled studies proving the medical efficacy of cannabis exist, but are ignored by marijuana schedulers [14]
in the Department of Health and Human Services, under which the FDA
resides. Large, multicenter, randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled studies involving hundreds of patients in America and
abroad that are in some cases a year in duration have been published in
U.S. National Library of Medicine indexed journals showing that
marijuana, orally administered in extract form, can treat intractable pain [15] in cancer and improve mobility [16]and symptom control [17] in multiple sclerosis.
Cannabis-marijuana
plant material is one of the best studied and characterized plant
materials in science. As of 2008, there were over 15,000 articles alone on the chemistry and pharmacology of cannabis [18].
Claim #3: Marijuana use stunts intelligence.
"Recently completed research shows that pot can significantly decrease IQ." [19] (USnews.com, CNN.com, CNN’s Piers Morgan, Reason, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Project SAM website.)
This assertion is based on a reference to a research study [20]
from New Zealand published in the Proceedings of the National Academies
of Science in August 2012 that grossly mischaracterizes its results,
and did not in fact establish this causal link.
In this
research, there was no breakdown of frequency or amount of cannabis used
to see if there was any "dose dependency" to the effects—an important
item in association studies. The study’s cannabis exposure data was
strictly based on self-report, even though other data, such as the
subjects’ reported cognitive performances, were corroborated by
statements from close contacts. There was only consideration of alcohol
dependence, not binge drinking patterns, which have also been shown to
be neurotoxic, and if occurring, would confound results. Schizophrenia
was considered as a confounding factor, but other mental illnesses such
as major depression, anxiety, PTSD or traumatic brain injuries, such as
concussions, all of which can reduce performance on neurocognitive
tests, were not factored in.
In other words, the "pot makes you stupider" proof was not there. There was no neuroimaging or physiological/neurochemical/
Pioneering
scientists and doctors such as Carl Sagan, Lester Grinspoon, Richard
Feynman, Stephen Jay Gould, Andrew Weil, Oliver Sacks, and others [22]
have stated that cannabis use improved the quality of their
intellectual work. This aspect of cannabis use is entirely ignored by
Sabet and his colleagues. Finally, Dutch senior high school students
rank number one in math and number two in science globally [23], despite the country having a de facto legal marijuana market for over 30 years.
Claim #4: Today’s pot is much stronger than it used to be.
“Today's marijuana is 10 times more dangerous than the marijuana of the '60s that many parents smoked in their dorm rooms,” [24] Sabet told Salon.com. It's “five to six times greater in potency and strength” [25] he told Huffington Post's Ryan Grim and “4-5 times stronger" [19] he wrote in a recent U.S. News and World Reportcommentary.
Aside
from the fact that Sabet varies his figures based on which media outlet
he is communicating to, it is patently false to claim that
marijuana-cannabis and the forms it was ingested in were somehow so
different 50 years ago. Cannabis resin, produced by its flowers, has
always been concentrated in solutions that were consumed orally. So it
is false to claim that the cannabis available today is somehow so
different than what it was in the past.
If there are
higher potency forms of herbal cannabis available, based on THC content,
it’s due to the pressures produced by prohibition and the lack of legal
regulation. And it can be a good thing, if a higher THC percentage is
present, as a consumer would need to consume less to achieve a desired
effect. Additionally, there are other cannabinioids and terpeniods whose
concentration can be varied to produce a variety of effects.
While
people can certainly have unpleasant reactions from consuming too much
THC-rich cannabis, the best way to address this is labeling and consumer
education, not blackmarket-generating
prohibition and contrabanding.
Claim #5: 1 out of 6 youngsters get hooked.
“Marijuana addicts 1 out of every 6 children who ever try the drug.” [26] (Baker Institute Blog, Russia Today,CNN.com, Huffington Post, Project SAM website.)
Sabet
has made this outrageous statement by citing Johns Hopkins
epidemiologist J.C. Anthony, as well as federal drug abuse research
summaries produced by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), whose
director, Nora Volkow, has made this same claim [27].
Both sources, however, rely on psychiatric diagnostic manuals widely criticized in peer-reviewed literature (see here [28] and here [29])
for gross over-pathologization of substance-related problems. Eager to
diagnose, these studies ignore the impact that aggressive policing of
cannabis has on users. The illegality of marijuana not only affects what
subjects will be willing to disclose to researchers, but the stress of
engaging in behavior that can lead to "social death"—suspension, arrest,
loss of job, benefits, etc.—may be more psychologically trying than the
drug itself.
The research supporting the claim is
also based on faulty math. While the "1 out of 6" statistic does not
appear anywhere in the text, figures or tables of the references (2002 [30], 1994 [31]),
the only way to come to this number is by manipulating numbers. The
study's authors attempt to measure the “Cumulative Probability for
Meeting Criteria for [Marijuana] Dependence” by a certain age does not
follow users over time, and thus represents a survey-based snapshot of
their lives in which they recollect their past use. This data, collected
from 3,940 total users sampled of whom 354 were classified as
dependent, allows for the inference that, by age 18, 5.61% or "1 in 17"
marijuana users are at risk for dependence. It does not, however, allow
for an analyst to add together dependence risk percentages from ages 10,
15, 16, 17 and 18 , to get 14.5% or "1 in 6." If the same math were
applied to all ages reported, you would end up with 162.24%.
The NIDA reference to “1 in 6” [32] is based on self-reported data [33] from the annual National Survey on Drug Use and Health to analyze data for "age of first marijuana use" and "Illicit Drug Dependence or Abuse in the Past Year." [34]
In a similar maneuver, the authors added the percentages for
drug-dependent youths who had used marijuana age 14 or younger (12.7%)
and ages 15-18 (4.9%), which equalled 17.6%, or "1 in 6." They
effectively played with numbers to invoke the widely debunked [35] marijuana gateway theory.
Culture Warrior Propagandist
The
proposals that Sabet pushes, while dressed in science, are essentially
moral judgments. This is why there is no attempt to take seriously the large body of evidence [36]
showing the beneficial impacts of cannabis use or regulated cannabis
markets on human health and social well-being. His major thrust is moral
entrepreneurship: to popularize negative associations such as
"threatening" and "culturally foreign" with cross-cultural, millennia-old, common human-cannabis relationship behaviors [37] such as cultivation, consumption and trade.
Surprisingly, even Sabet's Baha'i faith [38]’s policymaking body, the Universal House of Justice, the leading body of a religion that itself continues to face persecution [39], pronounced in 1967 [40] that cannabis is allowed for medical purposes by followers:
Concerning "the use of marijuana, LSD and other psychedelic products," we have already informed the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States that Bahá'ís should not use...substances, except when prescribed for medical treatment.
Sabet may seek to seem reasonable by saying [41]
that there is benefit to "components” of cannabis, but despite his
wishes, we must not allow it to remain tightly in the hands of the
pharmaceutical sector but rather available as widely as possible like
other herbal medicines.
Cannabis, a commonwealth plant [42] that evolved 34 million years ago [43],
which has a myriad of benefits as medicine, food, fiber, fuel,
relaxant, etc. should not belong only to a wealthy, well-connected
elite. Given Sabet’s prior political track record—campaigning against
drugs and other "immoral" indignities since his U.C. Berkeley days—it is
not surprising that he has chosen to serve the interests of the few
over the many.
Fortunately, the pushback on the
talking points epitomized by Project SAM is forcing Sabet to retreat
from his most strident comments. His Huffingtonpost blog recently noted [44] that “folks” who are studying how to “do legalization best” have come up with some “laudable proposals.”
But
marijuana proponents should not be fooled. Kevin Sabet has built a
career being a drug warrior and conservative contrarian. And if the bio
on his personal website tells us anything, it is that right-wingers like
Sabet know how to reinvent themselves to perpetuate the 1960s culture
war.
Links:
[1] http://alternet.org
[2] http://www.alternet.org/authors/sunil-kumar-aggarwal
[3] http://calstuff.blogspot.com/2002/07/time-for-another-blast-from-past.html
[4] https://directory.ufl.edu/people/WHESVVTEE/
[5] http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2013/01/marjiuana_project_sam_colorado_chapter_mason_tvert.php
[6] http://learnaboutsam.org/
[7] http://kevinsabet.com/
[8] http://kevinsabet.com/biography
[9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_entrepreneur
[10] http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/11/drug-policy-and-the-obama-administration/1
[11] http://www.atsjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1513/AnnalsATS.201302-034ED?journalCode=annalsats
[12] http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/meds/a601090.html
[13] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-a-sabet-phd/cmas-decision-not-based_b_1024471.html
[14] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sunil-kumar-aggarwal/marijuana-schedule-1_b_3071725.html
[15] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22483680
[16] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1739436/
[17] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21362108
[18] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18777572
[19] http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/should-marijuana-use-be-legalized/there-are-smarter-ways-to-deal-with-marijuana-than-legalization
[20] http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/08/22/1206820109.abstract
[21] http://www.pnas.org/content/110/11/4251
[22] http://coed.com/2011/02/02/the-10-smartest-pot-smokers-on-the-planet-cool-enough-to-admit-it/
[23] http://4brevard.com/choice/international-test-scores.htm
[24] http://www.salon.com/2013/02/13/meet_the_quarterback_of_the_new_anti_drug_movement/
[25] http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/anti-pot-advocate-kevin-sabet-talks-marijuana-legislation/5111653a78c90a5cb4000068
[26] http://blog.chron.com/bakerblog/2013/05/civil-liberties-erode-when-drug-use-widens/
[27] http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2012/12/19/marijuana-use-holds-steady-among-u-s-teens/
[28] http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/9/1/4
[29] http://cannabinergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/JNMD_distress_coping_and_drug_law_medical_cannabis_Aggarwal_et_al_2013.pdf
[30] http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v26/n4/full/1395810a.html
[31] http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=fulltext.journal&jcode=pha&vol=2&issue=3&page=244&format=HTML#c7
[32] http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana
[33] http://www.samhsa.gov/data/NSDUH/2k11Results/NSDUHresults2011.htm
[34] http://www.samhsa.gov/data/NSDUH/2011SummNatFindDetTables/NSDUH-DetTabsPDFWHTML2011/2k11DetailedTabs/Web/HTML/NSDUH-DetTabsSect6peTabs1to54-2011.htm#Tab6.38B
[35] http://healthland.time.com/2010/10/29/marijuna-as-a-gateway-drug-the-myth-that-will-not-die/
[36] http://cannabinergy.com/dr-cannabinergy-library/
[37] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3581812/
[38] http://malden.advocatenews.net/bahai-open-house-honors-100th-anniversary-of-founders-sons-visit-to-malden/
[39] http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/05/31/iran-government-assault-academic-freedom
[40] http://www.aqdasproject.com/lg-hbh/lg-1183-1188.html#ptop
[41] http://learnaboutsam.com/medicine/
[42] http://www.denverlawreview.org/medical-marijuana/2010/8/23/cannabis-a-commonwealth-medicinal-plant-long-suppressed-now.html
[43] http://books.google.com/books?id=AznCzOxvrtwC&pg=PA71&lpg=PA71&dq=The+evolution+of+Cannabis+and+coevolution+with+the+cannabinoid+receptor&source=bl&ots=zp4kDDAWAs&sig=F4WAbdP82EIRJFL92fdnO5x4Luk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=O98CUtrADajc4APehIHgBw&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=The%20evolution%20of%20Cannabis%20and%20coevolution%20with%20the%20cannabinoid%20receptor&f=false
[44] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-a-sabet-phd/washington-post-marijuana_b_3417017.html
[45] http://www.alternet.org/tags/keivn-sabet
[46] http://www.alternet.org/tags/marijuana
[47] http://www.alternet.org/tags/myths
[48] http://www.alternet.org/tags/project-sam
[49] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
Children taken from medical marijuana-prescribed parents in California
August 12, 2013 18:10- RT.com
A family from southern California is suing the City of Coronado after their children were taken away for nearly a year because the father admitted to legally smoking medical marijuana.
According to legal filings obtained this week by the Courthouse News Service, Michael Lewis and Lauren Taylor have filed a lawsuit against Coronado, CA, San Diego County and nine local police officers for what they say is a violation of civil rights that started with a routine visit from law enforcement in August 2011.
Attorneys for the family say Lewis was recommended medical marijuana by his physician in order to counter the debilitating migraines he started suffering from after being exposed to chemicals during the Gulf War, but investigators who stopped by their Coronado home two summers ago disregarded the prescription.
The lawsuit alleges that police officers were called to investigate the Lewis residence after being told that the family was running an illegal day care center on the same site where marijuana was being regularly smoked. Following a visit during August 2011, police wrote that they found pot, but identified no other hazards — or a day care facility, for that matter. Three days later, however, agents with the United States Department of Health and Human Services returned to the residence and seized the couple’s two children, ages four and two.
According to the lawsuit, the children were removed from their parents’ care and then deposited at a San Diego County emergency shelter for allegedly abused and neglected minors.
“The children were there for approximately two weeks without their parents and were no doubt terrified," the complaint states. Meanwhile, adds the lawsuit, "The only allegations against Lewis and Taylor were, essentially, that Lewis legally used marijuana, and police found marijuana in the home.”
The lawsuit claims the children were taken based on allegations of “general neglect,” but attorneys for the plaintiffs say there was no reasonable or articulable evidence to suggest such was the case.
"Nonetheless, even though they knew Michael Lewis' use of medical marijuana was completely legal in that he had obtained a medical marijuana recommendation after an evaluation from a licensed medical doctor, and that Lewis only used the marijuana outside the presence of the children and only for amelioration of pain, these defendants seized and detained the children. They failed to conduct any independent investigation prior to seizing the children. Michael and Lauren were shocked, stunned, amazed and terrified,” it reads.
And although the parents tried to take appropriate measures to have their children returned, their attempts proved unsuccessful for nearly a full year: 364 days, to be exact. During that span of time, defendants from the HHS allegedly lied to the court, the family’s attorney says, and insisted that the children were in danger.
One of those defendants, Ian Baxter of the HHS, “misled the court by stating that he did not need to conduct any pre-placement preventive services because of the 'emergent nature' of the situation and asserted that Michael and Lauren left their children 'inadequately attended and inadequately supervised' around the marijuana. This statement was totally false, and Baxter knew it, or - even worse - simply didn't care,” the complaint alleges.
Other statements were soon made by defendants from the Department of Health and Human Services, the complaint continues, including N. Quinteros, Benita Jemison, Abigail Joseph, Antonia Torres, Brooke Guild and Alfredo Guardado. Other defendants named in the lawsuit are Coronado police Officers Patrick O'Malley and Robert Cline.
"Based on Joseph's and Torres' multiple false statements to the juvenile court, the children continued to be detained in county facilities and not at home with their loving parents. As a result, they were deprived of regular, open, and free contact and companionship of family and friends, including their parents,” the complaint alleges.
"Throughout the ordeal, Taylor and the children never tested positive for any drug. Although Michael Lewis ingested marijuana for medicinal purposes pursuant to a physician's recommendation, he never tested positive for any other drugs. Further, there was (1) no evidence of abuse or neglect by either parent, (2) no evidence that Michael's marijuana use impaired his parenting skills or judgment and (3) no evidence that Michael Lewis acted inappropriately toward his children at any time - ever.”
Finally on August 2 of last year, a Fourth Appellate District Court ruled against a previous decision and said "'the record does not support a finding that Lewis' marijuana use or alleged mental illness had any negative impact on the children.” The children were returned five days later, and now the family is suing for abduction of a child, invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress and false imprisonment.
News of the lawsuit against Coronado and its officers comes days after a 2-year-old Texas girl died while in the custody of a foster mom who was put in charge of the child because her parents admitted to smoking pot. The foster mother, 54-year-old Sherill Small, has since been charged in the murder of Alexandria Hill.
“We never hurt our daughter,” the girl’s father, Joshua Hill, told KVUE earlier this month. “She was never sick, she was never in the hospital, and she never had any issues until she went into state care.”
Thursday, August 8, 2013
Wednesday, August 7, 2013
Marijuana Prohibition Responsible for Death of 2-Year-Old Girl
by Sabrina Fendrick, Director of Women's Outreach
August 7, 2013
Marijuana prohibition has taken yet another innocent life. In January 2013, two- year-old Alexandra Hill was taken from her home in Round Rock, Texas because her parents had admitted to smoking pot after their child had gone to bed. As a result, she was placed with an abusive foster mother, who subsequently beat her to death.
According to her father, Joshua Hill, who spoke with KVUE, a local ABC affiliate, “She would come to visitation with bruises on her, and mold and mildew in her bag. It got to a point where [he] actually told CPS that they would have to have [him] arrested because [he] wouldn’t let her go back.” A few days later, the Hill family got a call informing them that their daughter was in a coma, and they needed to get to the hospital right away. Two days after that, Alex was taken off life support. Up until she was snatched from her family in January, the 2 year old had never been sick or gone to the hospital.
“When a parent who responsibly consumes marijuana after hours is seen as neglectful in comparison to a parent who responsibly enjoys a glass of wine, then the system isn’t just broken, it’s deadly,” said Sabrina Fendrick, Director of Women’s Outreach at NORML. Little Alex’s fate was sealed the minute the Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) determined that such behavior qualifies as “neglectful supervision,” and put her with a foster mother who had not been given a proper background check.
This is just one more tragic casualty of marijuana prohibition. However, the practice of child snatching by CPS from marijuana-using parents is by no means unique to this story. Current policy gives state agencies the right to legally kidnap minors and infants from their loving parents’ home (simply for the fact that they are cannabis consumers), and place them in an unknown, possibly dangerous or truly neglectful environment. Hundreds of similar CPS cases pop up around the country every year. Only when the government changes its view, and policies on marijuana can we truly protect the rights and integrity of good parents who responsibly consume cannabis after hours and out of their child’s view. It’s time for CPS, the state of Texas and the federal government to step up, take responsibility for all of the damage they have caused, and commit to ending this disastrous and fatal policy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)