Medical Marijuana Use and National Drug Policy

Introduction and Overview

The marijuana plant contains numerous compounds that may prove valuable for treating a variety of symptoms and illnesses, leading many individuals to argue that it should be made legally obtainable for medical purposes. Colorado and Washington have legalized marijuana for recreational use, while a growing number of other states have legalized marijuana specifically for medical utilization. Research shows that even more states are passing laws permitting individuals to access medical marijuana. In states where medical marijuana is permitted, individuals whose physicians believe the treatment would be beneficial can obtain a "marijuana card." This paper examines medical marijuana use and its relationship to national drug policy, analyzing the legal framework, supporting arguments, and evidence surrounding this contested issue.

Current National Policy Framework

Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia have passed medical marijuana laws permitting the production and use of marijuana for qualifying patients under state law. However, the medical use of marijuana remains illegal under federal law, leaving patients in remaining states without legal access. Even in states with medical marijuana laws, providers and patients remain vulnerable to federal arrest and prosecution. Marijuana's Schedule I classification has also frustrated research within the United States to determine the best and most legitimate medical uses for the drug, making efforts to improve medical marijuana laws considerably difficult.

Arguments Supporting Medical Marijuana Laws

Although legislators have made progress on medical marijuana, lawmakers remain troubled about full authorization. Notably, a provision in the federal expenditure package—attached at the request of anti-marijuana advocate Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.)—has risked implementation of recreational marijuana in Washington, D.C., which voters approved the previous month.

The Drug Policy Alliance is dedicated to increasing the number of states with medical marijuana laws, improving existing state programs, protecting medical marijuana patients, and ending the federal prohibition on medical marijuana so all patients in the United States have safe access to quality medicine and research can advance.

Research Evidence and International Comparisons

According to Jeffrey A. Miron, PhD, a visiting professor of economics at Harvard University, in a June 6, 2003 editorial in the San Francisco Journal, "Medical marijuana legalization laws have the potential of limiting general marijuana implementation." The argument holds that these laws have significant impact because of the broad circumstances for which a person can utilize marijuana as medicine. Furthermore, federal authorities recognize that permitting medical marijuana could create complications.

However, research challenging concerns about medical marijuana's effects on general use rates comes from multiple sources. According to the American Journal of Public Health, a May 2004 investigation by Craig Reinarman, PhD, et al., compared cannabis use among users in San Francisco and Amsterdam "in order to test the premise that punishment for cannabis use deters use and thus benefits public health." The study concluded: "We discovered no evidence to support assertions that criminalization decreases use or that decriminalization increases use."

Supporting this argument, a June 1997 policy examination by the RAND Corporation titled "Drug Warriors and Policy Reformers: The Debate Over Medical Marijuana," published in the RAND Drug Policy Research Center Newsletter, noted: "The medical use of marijuana provokes significant difference within the technical community. Research shows that if marijuana is made medically available, the quantities dispensed are probable to be small compared to what is sold on the black market. With that being said, the medical use of marijuana poses no threat to drug control."

Public Opinion and Federal Response

International experience supports these findings. According to Lynn Zimmer, PhD, Lecturer Emeritus at Queens College of the City University of New York, and John Morgan, MD, Professor at the City University of New York Medical School, in their 1997 book Marijuana Myths, Marijuana Truths: "For more than twenty years, Dutch citizens over the age of eighteen were allowed to buy and use cannabis in government-controlled coffee shops. However, this policy has not resulted in dramatically mounting cannabis utilization. For most age groups, rates of marijuana use in the Netherlands are similar to those in the United States."

Conclusion

Federal policy has shifted in recent years. The Obama administration directed federal prosecutors last year to halt implementation of drug laws that oppose state marijuana policies. Following this directive, federal raids of marijuana wholesalers and growers working legally within their states have been restricted to those accused of other offenses, such as money laundering.

In conclusion, it is clear that recent polls have shown that while Republican voters are far less likely than the wider public to support absolute legalization, they favor permitting marijuana for medical use by a directing mainstream. Legalization likewise holds great appeal to millennials, a demographic group with which those in politics are aggressively trying to make inroads. Some states remain opposed to medical use of the drug despite national policy that protects this right. Even with some states legalizing and enforcing medical marijuana policies, there remains fear that the drug will be abused and not used for legitimate medical purposes.