V. What Can Be Done?
[Author's Note: The following is the original text from the 1993
publication of this document. It has been left in tact to demonstrate the strong, but
predictable, political forces which guide this issue. It is not too late for restoration
of compassion but time is running out. The Clinton Administration must accept the strong
demand for change, demonstrated by the 1996 votes in Arizona and California. Sadly the
early indications are that Clinton will attempt to maintain the status quo. The result
will be political, scientific, and cultural chaos. ---- 12/31/96 ]
One thing is certain, inaction is not an option. The Clinton Administration will be
publicly compelled, early on, to take steps to resolve this problem. Fierce bureaucratic
resistance is likely.
Presidents Come & Go
Federal drug agencies will conspire to enmesh President Clinton in a foolhardy defense of
their publicly unpopular medical prohibition.
The bureaucrats will use pending legal actions against DEA to draw the new administration
into the issue on their side.(57) It is
also possible federal agencies could initiate actions designed to embarrass the new
administration.(58)
These bureaucratic pressures can be considerable. The nine months of policy chaos
triggered by PHS Chief Mason's impromptu attempt to kill the Compassionate IND program in
June 1991 was an outgrowth of the deeper struggle between ideologues in the bureaucracy
and political realists in the Bush White House.
By January 1992, White House realists, alarmed by the corrosive political effects of the
medical prohibition, publicly called bureaucratic efforts to kill the Compassionate IND
program "unconscionable." Yet, in March 1992, War on Drugs ideologues won. The
program was terminated. FDA dumped hundreds of Compassionate IND applications into the
trash and scores of patients were arbitrarily denied promised access to medical care. Only
a handful of patients -- those already receiving medical marijuana -- were spared.
In the end the bureaucrats got their (nearly) absolute prohibition. But at what price?
President Bush was subjected to months of negative news stories and scathing editorial
comment which reinforced the already widespread public apprehension that zealots had taken
over his administration -- as indeed they had.
Bureaucratic resistance to marijuana's medical use is deeply ingrained. Entrenched and
terrified of change, federal drug bureaucrats do not have to live with the political
consequences of their publicly discredited prohibition. Politicians, as Mr., Bush recently
learned, are not so easily forgiven.
On The Other Hand
If President Clinton fails to decisively address this problem, seriously ill Americans,
backed by an articulate, broad-based coalition of drug law reform, legal, libertarian,
medical and patient-advocacy groups will focus this same powerfully corrosive media energy
on the incoming administration.
Seriously ill Americans who medically need marijuana are increasingly well-organized and
have ample access to national media. Events from June, 1991 through June, 1992 suggest the
tremendous influence such patients can exercise. A review of media during this period
shows just how decisively these patients thrashed Bush and the bureaucrats who sought to
block marijuana's medical availability.
If President Clinton takes no action these demands for reform will intensify. Some
elements within this broad coalition may cynically exploit seriously ill Americans in a
misguided attempt to promote reforms which have nothing to do with marijuana's medical
availability. The notion that ending the medical prohibition will automatically lead to
the backyard cultivation of marijuana may appeal to romantics in "the movement."
But such antic aspirations do not seriously address the legitimate treatment needs of the
ill.
The American people -- in particular those who are seriously ill -- will not be well
served by a Punch 'n Judy culture clash between ultra-prohibitionists on the far right and
utopian reformers on the far left. The Clinton Administration cannot meet the needs of
seriously ill Americans by responding to pressure from "ideologues" and
"activists" operating on the political margin; left or right.
Beyond Cultural Warfare
By advancing a decisive, yet moderate plan to resolve the problem of marijuana's medical
availability the Clinton Administration can:
- avoid public identification with the extremely unpopular Bush policy,
- seize the initiative in crafting a credible solution, and effectively demonstrate a
willingness to cut through decades of ideological crap and bureaucratic stonewalling to
deliver the kind of "change" the American people expect.
The nation is ready to resolve this problem as two recent editorials illustrate.
On January 4, 1993, the Albany Times Union, noted,
"We are somewhat incredulous . . . that the federal law of the land still bars
marijuana for any medical use...." In keeping with public opinion, the editors in
Albany conclude, "There's no good reason to forbid such use."(59)
The following day, a continent away, the Oakland Tribune echoed the
comments of the Albany Times Union when it observed that the medical prohibition is
"wrong-headed because it denies reality." The Tribune noted that morphine
and cocaine "highly addictive drugs, are available for doctors to prescribe. Their
use is successfully controlled through extra-stringent prescriptions." The paper
concluded with a call for "clear-headed and compassionate policy that allows the
medical use of marijuana."(60)
The recommendations outlined in this document (See "Introduction")
will not satisfy libertarians and those on the left who advocate sweeping changes in U.S.
drug law. Nor will these recommendations appeal to ultra-prohibitionists in the
bureaucracy and on the right. In short, the recommendations advanced here are not designed
to satisfy those with a merely political agenda.
These recommendations instead appeal to the broad American middle. They focus on three
simple objectives: 1) meeting the legitimate treatment needs of those who are currently
ill, 2) increasing marijuana's availability for research, and 3) exploring pragmatic ways
to resolve the regulatory problems created by five decades of irrational federal
policy.
The American people know marijuana has important medical benefits. What is now needed is a
rational plan to make marijuana legally available, under medical supervision, to those
with legitimate medical needs.
Conclusion
Seriously ill Americans are suffering because of federal policies which prohibit
marijuana's prescriptive medical use. To maintain this irrational prohibition, federal
drug agencies have ignored the will of the people and the needs of seriously ill
Americans, retarded research, obstructed the intent of state legislatures and refused to
abide by administrative and judicial rulings.
In March 1992, President Bush, under pressure from War on Drugs ideologues in the
bureaucracy, arbitrarily terminated the nation's long-standing marijuana-as-medicine
program. People are dying, going blind, and being crippled by this cynical policy.
Based on polling data, election returns and the actions of their elected political
representatives, the American people do not support the medical prohibition. Indeed, it is
difficult to find any other question which unites so many of the American people in
opposition to an existing federal policy. A vast majority of Americans view the medical
prohibition as a regulatory fraud; an irrational outgrown of War on Drugs zealotry.
President Clinton has two options. He can commit his political credibility to a foolhardy
defense of the medical prohibition or he can move to end that prohibition.
By taking moderate steps to meet the medical needs of seriously ill Americans, President
Clinton can win broad public and political support for a rational system of prescriptive
access to marijuana. Failure to resolve this problem will leave the new President exposed
to attacks from ultra-prohibitionists on the right and utopian reformers on the left.
These attacks will have a very corrosive effect on President Clinton's evolving
relationship with the American people.
Federal drug agencies will, of course, strongly resistance efforts to end the medical
prohibition. It is likely these agencies will agitate their clients in politics, law
enforcement and the pharmaceutical sector to oppose such action. It is less likely, but
possible, that medical marijuana could be exploited by some as a cultural
"wedge" issue. However, there is precious little political profit to be gained
opposing compassion. All available data indicates such arguments have very limited public
appeal. Moreover, true conservatives are strongly opposed to bureaucratic interference in
personal medical decisions. Conservatives supported state legislation recognizing
marijuana's medical value. In Congress many conservatives sponsored a federal
marijuana-as-medicine measure.
The American people know marijuana has medical value, they are fed-up with bureaucratic
efforts to block marijuana's medical use, and they are weary of being victimized by those
on the political margins - left and right - who advocate the cult of cultural
warfare.
The American people did not elect President Clinton merely hoping for change. They voted
for Mr. Clinton to initiate change. We hope the pragmatic and moderate recommendations
advanced in this document help those in the new Administration to secure such change for
the benefit of all Americans.
[ Up ] [ Introduction ] [ The Public Supports Medical Access ] [ Inheriting Bad Policy ] [ Synthetic Solutions ] [ What Can Be Done? ] [ Footnotes ]
