Marijuana for Universal Medicine

Famous Quote

2010-06-22T23:02:00.001-07:00

"Hemp is of first necessity to the wealth & protection of the country."

- Thomas Jefferson

Famous Quote

2010-06-22T23:01:00.001-07:00

"Make the most you can of the Indian Hemp seed and sow it everywhere."

- George Washington

Tony Newman And Stephen Gutwillig Attack The Myths Championed By Prohibitionists

2010-04-23T17:38:00.000-07:00

Tony Newman And Stephen Gutwillig have written an article for The Huffington Post, titled "Dismantling the Talking Points of Marijuana Prohibitionists," in which they focus on a couple of prohibitionist spins on the war on drugs. Here are their take on the matter:

Opposition to this reform has crystallized within the drug war establishment, and so has their spin. Here are their top five talking points and the truth beyond them:

Drug Warrior Spin #1: Why would we authorize another harmful substance in our society?
The reality is that marijuana is already widely available in our society. Like it or not, it's a mainstream recreational drug consumed by millions, including one in ten Californians last year, according to federal data. The California ballot initiative simply acknowledges that marijuana is here and that it's more sensible to regulate this massive market, like we do with even more harmful drugs like cigarettes and alcohol. Prohibition of highly popular substances never works and brings terrible collateral damage. Alcohol prohibition didn't keep people from drinking, but it did give us Al Capone and gun battles in the streets. No one dies over sales of Budweiser today.

Drug Warrior Spin #2: Regulation will cause marijuana consumption to skyrocket with addiction rates to match.
The truth is rates of marijuana consumption aren't determined by penalties against it. If they were, the U.S. - which arrests an astounding 750,000 people for marijuana possession every year - wouldn't have double the consumption rate of The Netherlands, where marijuana sales have been tolerated for decades. That principle holds true across this country as some states that lowered penalties against marijuana possession years ago have among the lowest rates of use while some states that retained harsh marijuana laws have among the highest. As for addiction, the risk of becoming dependent on marijuana is mild compared to most other drugs including alcohol and tobacco. In fact, most people who enter treatment for marijuana addiction in this country today are referred by the criminal justice system, but 65% don't even meet the standard criteria for dependence.

Drug Warrior Spin #3: Regulating marijuana will aid drug cartels.
It is practically Orwellian to claim that state regulation of marijuana would benefit criminal cartels. More than 20,000 Mexicans have died in the last three years thanks to prohibition. There is nothing inherent about the plant that has caused these brutal murders. Banning marijuana makes it worth more than gold, so valuable that people are willing to kill each other over the right to sell it. By regulating marijuana and beginning to bring its production and distribution under the rule of law, we would eliminate the cartels' existing monopoly and dramatically siphon their profits. They would be the biggest losers in this reform.

Drug Warrior Spin #4: Regulating marijuana would cost society more than the taxes it generates.
Taxing marijuana like alcohol statewide would generate $1. 4 billion in California alone, according to the state Board of Equalization. Californians will also save hundreds of millions in scarce law enforcement dollars currently devoted to enforcing these futile laws. Yet opponents say that drugged driving, increased health care costs, and lost productivity will end up costing much more than taxes would generate. By that logic, alcohol, which causes nearly 100,000 American deaths annually, should be illegal and warrant life without parole. The bottom line is that marijuana is California's largest agricultural commodity, freely consumed by millions with no regulations or protections, and with no financial benefit to the state. In this economic climate, this is a reality we literally can't afford to ignore any longer.

Drug Warrior Spin #5: What kind of message does regulating marijuana send to kids?
The irony is that failed marijuana prohibition does nothing to protect kids. Despite 30 years of "Just Say No," half of high-school seniors admit to trying marijuana. Students are more likely to smoke marijuana than cigarettes and say it's easier to buy marijuana than alcohol because drug dealers don't ask for ID. Even more chilling, of the 78,000 Californians arrested for marijuana offenses in 2008, one in five was a child under 18 and half were under 30. Out of control access and mass arrests are prohibition's true impact on our youth. State regulation will reduce that access, separate marijuana from harder drugs, and allow us to focus on effective youth drug education programs.

Tony Newman is the Media Director and Stephen Gutwillig is the California Director of the Drug Policy Alliance (www.drugpolicy.org), the nation's leading organization promoting alternatives to the failed war on drugs.

California Ballot Measure For Legalization Of Marijuana

2010-04-05T08:04:00.000-07:00

By Kevin Kelley

After the collection of 694,248 signatures by proponents of the measure, and with those signatures verified by random sampling, California voters will have the opportunity to vote on whether or not to legalize the possession and sale of marijuana, as well as allowing individuals to grow a certain amount in their home for personal use.

While opponents view this as the first step in defeating the measure, the fact that it is going to be on the ballot is a tremendous success in it's own right, due to the percentage of people who support legalization and the quantity of signatures gathered. Support for the ballot measure has also come from across the board, from traditionally pro-legalization groups to fiscal hawks who see taxation as a way to dig the state out of financial ruin, but whatever the reason may be, the hard part comes in mobilizing voters to the polls.

Obama Signs Historic Legislation Into Law

2010-03-23T11:38:00.000-07:00

By Kevin Kelley

After over a year of debate, President Obama had signed health care reform legislation into law today, after a late night vote on Sunday in the House of Representatives passing the Senate version of the legislation that was voted on in December of 2009.

All that is left is to pass supplementary reconciliation package in the Senate, but as of today, health care reform is a reality.

Shifting Rhetoric From Decades Old "War On Drugs"

2010-03-20T16:21:00.000-07:00

By Kevin Kelley.

From an article by Mike Lillis at The Washington Independent:

Quietly, free of headlines and fanfare, the Obama White House is toning down the bellicose “war-on-drugs” position that’s defined the country’s narcotics policy for the last 25 years.

Appearing in Vienna last week for the 53rd annual United Nations meeting on global drug policy, administration officials shifted away from the decades-old approach of attacking drug use as a crime to be penalized. Instead they moved toward a strategy of tackling addiction as an illness to be treated, a number of health and human rights advocates who attended the event told TWI.

Drug reformers for years have promoted so-called “harm reduction” measures as a more effective and humane way to treat drug addiction and the diseases that often accompany it — an approach that runs counter to the punitive attitude epitomized by the Reagan administration’s “war on drugs.” And while the Obama White House — behind Gil Kerlikowske, the White House drug czar, and his deputy, Thomas McLellan — remains officially opposed to the hot-button harm reduction language, officials have also conceded that the current strategy isn’t working, advocates say. That sharp break from past administrations has left reformers hopeful that the Obama White House will mark a new era in the nation’s fight against drug abuse — one that prioritizes treatment and prevention above rap sheets and prison time.

“There was virtually no reference to a criminal justice approach,” Allan Clear, executive director of the Harm Reduction Coalition, an advocacy group, said of the U.S. delegation in Vienna. “I’m just so used to being appalled by their behavior … It was very encouraging.”

Deborah Peterson Small, executive director of Break the Chains, another group advocating for drug-policy reforms, agreed, noting a brand new willingness among White House officials to embrace certain elements of the harm reduction strategy. When she spoke about treatment reforms to U.S. drug officials in Vienna in 2008, Small said, the entire delegation walked out on her. “This year it was completely different,” she said. “We finally had a sense that they were listening.”

The comments mark quite a departure from those that drug reformers were making a year ago at the same U.N. event, where the Obama administration killed international efforts to include harm reduction language as part of a U.N. document that will guide the next decade’s global drug policy. Harm reduction refers to things like drug-substitute treatments and clean-needle exchanges — programs being tried (with promising results) in a number of countries to battle the spread of HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis C and other drug-related illnesses. The White House has argued that the broad harm reduction language is “ambiguous” and could include controversial programs the administration doesn’t support, including drug legalization, drug consumption rooms and heroin prescription initiatives.

This news is very promising for some, but is far from the absolute goal of legalization. It would most likely be safe to assume that once sensitive legislative measures, such as health care or immigration reform, are done with, the Administration might take a more open approach to politically risque subjects.

States Lessen Marijuana Restrictions

2010-03-09T09:23:00.000-08:00

By Kevin Kelley

A USA Today article recently published has identified a growing trend among states becoming more willing to address the legalization of marijuana, but not outright. These moves have been coming in steps, with passage of legislation allowing for medical marijuana use or decriminalization of the substance. Marijuana still remains as an illegal drug, but many local governments are taking steps to lessen limits, and the movement is gaining converts - conservative converts who were once the stalwarts of drug enforcement.

James Gray, a former superior court judge and congressional candidate has officially changed his position, stating that it is becoming easier for children to acquire the drug then compared to alcohol because marijuana is not regulated by the government. Steven Gutwillig of the Drug Policy Alliance had stated that "we are absolutely in an important new era in which increasing majorities of Americans are not just questioning the wisdom and efficacy of marijuana prohibition but are demanding alternatives."

According to Kurt Gardinier, spokesman for the Marijuana Policy Project, politicians have been increasingly tackling this once politically risky subject because "politicians are finally catching up with the American public." We can only hope that this trend continues and debate on the subject does not stop.

Refocusing Our Efforts

2010-03-09T09:09:00.000-08:00

By Kevin Kelley

Late last year, the realization that universal health care would be passed, and so the goals of this website were under reevaluation. While the authors of this site firmly believe that the legalization of marijuana could positively contribute the the overall benefit and well being of the general population, it is also evident that the two positions - universal health care and the legalization of marijuana - will not merge. This does not dampen the call for legalization. While health care legislation has taken a surprising turn in recent months since December 24th, 2009, the debate still continues, and so shall this website.

With that being said, I would like to address the adjusted goal of this website. While the combination of health care reform and marijuana reform seems to be far fetched, I still strongly believe that any reduction in restrictions on the drug should be made carefully, and any benefits should be closely guarded, as to not allow state and federal governments to miss out on any possible advantage. For this reason, the call for fiscal responsibility still stands, as well as the protection of government resources to help prevent monetary crises, such as what states are currently experiencing.

The U.S. Department Of Justice And Medicinal Cannabis

2009-10-20T07:25:00.000-07:00

By Kevin Kelley

In a momentous step in the right direction, the United States Department of Justice has issued a directive that will protect medicinal cannabis users in states with laws allowing marijuana use. Although seen by some as side stepping the issue of complete legalization, this news is a relief for those with medical problems, in which marijuana helps aid. Under the Bush administration, the federal government would enforce anti-marijuana laws regardless of state codes. This shift is a departure of the previous administration's policy and appears to be promising in reforming the nation's antiquated approach to drugs. Currently, there are 14 states that allow such use, with California law makers contemplating full-on legalization.

The concern of this website is the potential misappropriation of funds obtained from legalization, or in the meantime, from any sort of civil fine collected from decriminalization. It will be interesting to see the amount saved by this new new directive, now that agents can spend their time doing more worthwhile pursuits.

Unemployment And Health Care

2009-10-12T07:59:00.000-07:00

By Kevin Kelley

With the country in the midst of it's worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, unemployment rates are reaching their highest levels in recent history, and with the rise of unemployment includes the rise of uninsured. Although employees can maintain their employer-based health coverage under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA), the cost is unrealistically high, consuming the majority of one's unemployment benefits, if not higher. In addition to the high cost, many laid of workers who are unable to afford health care will lose coverage altogether, and for those with preexisting conditions, it establishes a dangerous cycle, with the worker finding themselves in a predicament where no insurer would sell them a policy that will cover preexisting conditions at any price.

The inability to pay for health care leads to other problems as well. If the individual cannot afford to continue coverage, then they risk becoming uninsured, and they face the possibility of having to pay the burden of a costly illness. If they do pay for continuation, then they risk the inability to pay other obligations, such as house or car payments, which could lead to further economic endangerment. If you consider the average unemployment benefits versus the average COBRA cost, for families, it could consume up to 84% of their monthly unemployment income. For individuals, the average is lower, consuming close to 30%. Considering housing and food cost for the typical individual $800 per month, this leaves workers in a tough situation.

61% of those under the age of 65 receive their benefits from an employer. Becoming uninsured, those people are more likely to forgo medical care and develop a preexisting condition. Those who do decide to get help face medical debt, with 61 percent of adults who were uninsured at some point in 2007 having medical debt or problems with medical bills. If you consider that every time the unemployment rate rises one percentage point, the number of uninsured Americans rise by about 1.1 million. Considering the current economic climate, this statistic is alarming, considering the lasting economic impact it will have on these individuals, and the American workforce in general, when these workers eventually become employed. Both medical problems and medical debt will still be there, causing an extra burden on the middle class.

For additional information, read here.

Cigarette Taxes

2009-10-11T08:50:00.000-07:00

By Kevin Kelley

Considering a comparable industry, taxation on cigarette consumption is a good place to look when considering the benefits of legalization of marijuana for the purpose of creating a tax base for funding universal healthcare. Currently, both the federal and state governments impose a tax on cigarettes, with income from cigarettes adding up to a significant amount for some states.

Although there have been increased legislation against cigarettes, with income derived from taxation decreasing steadily since 2002, with the federal cigarette tax collecting only $7.7 billion in 2005, compared to $8.1 billion in 2002, this is still a considerable amount. The individual states have also seen monetary gains. California earns about $1 billion a year, while Minnesota earns roughly half that. Just using these figures as a comparison, and using the proposed bill by Senator Max Baucus, the income generated at the federal level for the taxation of cigarettes constitutes almost ten percent of the total estimated cost of health reform, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Estimates for the legalization of marijuana has placed the figure around this level to even higher, with such a disparity due to the fact that it is difficult to gauge illegal consumption. Potentially, marijuana could offer far greater tax benefits that the government could use for funding universal health.

Here is a map depicting various state taxes on cigarettes (click to enlarge):

Overall Health Care Performance

2009-10-09T07:04:00.000-07:00

By Kevin Kelley

A report by the Commonwealth Fund has scored the states on health care, based on several factors. Here is a visual aid to explain the data (click to enlarge):

Cost Savings Associated With Legalization - Workplace Drug Testing

2009-09-29T07:05:00.000-07:00

By Kevin Kelley

As a cost associated with drug usage, workplace drug testing is a hidden cost of the war on drugs. It has been estimated in the mid-1990s that the United States spent $1 billion annually to drug test about 20 million workers.

According to a congressional committee, the estimated cost of each positive result for government positions was $77,000 because the positive rate was only 0.5%. Considering there are close to 2 million government employees at the federal, state, and local levels, and using the amount and percentage rate stated above, it has cost taxpayers a cumulative total of $7.6 billion to identify drug usage in 0.5% of all government applicants.

Sources:
Shepard, Edward M., and Thomas J. Clifton, Drug Testing and Labor Productivity: Estimates Applying a Production Function Model, Institute of Industrial Relations, Research Paper No. 18, Le Moyne University, Syracuse, NY (1998), p. 8.

"Workplace Substance Abuse Testing, Drug Testing: Cost and Effect," Cornell/Smithers Report, Utica, New York: Cornell University (January 1992).

Hemp For Victory

2009-09-26T23:30:00.000-07:00

As an interesting part of American marijuana history, the United States Department of Agricultural made an educational video to help aid farmers grow hemp for the war effort. Prior to 1989, this video was for the most part unknown, with the Department of Agriculture library and the Library of Congress denying it's existence. On May 19th, 1989, Maria Farrow, Carl Packard, and Jack Herer, author of The Emperor Wears No Clothes and presidential candidate in 1988 and 1992 for the Grassroots Party, recovered and donated two VHS copies to the Library of Congress.

This video is public domain and can be downloaded from the Internet Archive.

Why Should There Be Any Reform?

2009-09-21T10:18:00.000-07:00

By Kevin Kelley
Updated September 22nd, 2009

Why is it important to reform the American health care system? With the current debate taking place, including all the controversial headlines you may have been exposed to, this still remains an important question. You may have heard claims that America has the greatest health care, so if we have the greatest health care, why do we need to change things?

The reality of the matter is that America does have great care, just not the best. According to the World Health Organization, America ranks 37th, nestled between Costa Rica and Slovenia. Although there are still critics of these rankings, Americans pay more for health care then their foreign counterparts and receive similar results, but in tune with American isolationist rationality, providing universal coverage has become a must for some and an unnecessary evil for others. International health care systems have been demonized, but the fact is they still contribute groundbreaking medical research. The French pioneered hip and knee replacement, the Canadians developed deep-brain stimulation to treat depression, and laboratories found in Switzerland, Britain, and Japan have brought us medicines American's love, such as Viagra. Strict cost controls had actually forced the Japanese to develop more cost effective MRI diagnostic techniques, making their method one-fifteenth the price of the American procedure ($98 compared to $1500), and the Japanese still make a profit.

The major problem with the current debate is cost. Americans are suffering from fatigue as a consequence to the numerous bailouts of the banking and automotive industry over the past couple years, not to mention the economic stimulus plans of the previous administration. Americans tend to be fiscally conservative people when it comes to government spending, and understandably so, but another important question is why have we as a nation allowed health care costs to balloon out of control? Health care spending per capita in the United States has been increasing in recent years at alarming rates, and the trend only points upwards, but with such raises in costs, quality remains to stay the same, but arguably, those who are uninsured will face shorter life expectancies and worse health conditions then those who are, so it is reasonable to say that the current system offers adequate care to most citizens. Consider the following graph:

America pays almost twice as much as any of the other 31 nations on that map, but our life expectancy is more comparable to Cuba and Cyprus. America is a wealthy nation, with roughly three hundred million citizens, but when comparing health care spending as a percentage of gross domestic product, America's percentage of spending is again greater then other nations.

The overall GDP is no indication that the standard of living has increased or decreased, but considering the period of 1990-2006, earnings of American workers had increased 0.5%, while the GDP during that same period of time increased 3.6%. The consumer price index for medical care services has also risen, increasing 3.2% in the past twelve months alone. Costs are getting out of control, and this would eventually have a negative impact on quality of care. Currently, figures regarding reforming our current health care system have ranged between $1 trillion and $2 trillion over the next ten years. While these numbers can seem intimidating, the costs of providing universal health care can cost upwards of $200 billion dollars each year, which comparatively, is one-third the United States spends on defense, or if you consider the current cost for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the global war on terror, including the Administration's 2009 supplemental request and Congress approving 2010's war funding, the total would amount to over $1 trillion, equal to the lower estimates of reform.

This leads to the topic of this website. Where can America get the funding for universal health care? The current legislation that is being drafted has been floating around ideas that include various sin taxes, such as on alcohol and high fructose corn syrup, taxation on employer provided benefits, and the use of savings from Medicaid, but all are hotly debated issues. There have also been thoughts circulating that call for greater taxation on church-owned properties. Another unrealistic proposal that has circulated is pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and cut funding in national defense, but there are problems with that idea as well; America cannot withdraw troops until the region is stabilized and any cuts to national defense would be political suicide. Although it is possible to integrate these other ideas into a more comprehensive plan, I do not think such overhauls could be made to last. This leads to this sites proposal: Legalize marijuana and use the funds generated from taxation, as well as other associated benefits, to fund universal health care.

While there has been serious consideration in recent times to legalize marijuana to help fill budget gaps, I believe that the amounts raised from taxation by individual states would not make a significant impact on state budgets, and would overtime be abused by local municipalities, much like the increased tax revenues seen from the boom in the housing market, with local governments finding themselves in a tough economical situation in the future, due to improper expenditures and planning in the past. By earmarking any tax generated from the legalization of marijuana to go towards universal health care, the necessary reform needed on our system could take place now, and allow for debate to continue, minus the distractions we are experiencing now. Legalization can fund the system, and allow lawmakers the time to focus on other issues, and understandably, not all reform may work effectively, and so America would have a greater opportunity to work the kinks out of the system before it becomes too late and costs have bankrupted the citizens of this nation.

Considering the insurance status of Americans under 65 years of age, if nothing is done, the burden on the government will continue to grow, so now is the time to act.

Hopefully, those who consider this proposal will raise these questions to their local elected officials, and begin the serious debate on legalization of marijuana. I am reminded of the presidential campaign run by Eugene McCarthy in 1968, with the unofficial slogan "Get clean for Gene", which involved anti-war supporters with long hair and beards, who resembled "hippies", to get a haircuts and shave, to go door-to-door and campaign for McCarthy, who was in opposition of the Vietnam War. It is a general consensus that health care needs reform, but to propagate this issue, a degree of professionalism is required. Doctors, lawyers, politicians, and students alike must conduct themselves reasonably to get serious consideration of these ideas. Respectful discourse is required, or this will fail.

Contact all of your elected officials and spread this information.

Welcome!

2009-09-18T23:12:00.000-07:00

By Kevin Kelley
Updated September 22nd, 2009

I would like to welcome the visitors of this website, and I would like to express my gratitude for the time that you take to read the information presented here. I do not view myself as some sort of advocate for the legalization of marijuana, nor do I wish to argue the ramifications regarding the creation of socialized medicine, or any other quasi-governmental organization tasked with the responsibility of insuring Americans. The information on this website is not necessarily my own opinion, but a suggestion on how to accomplish health care reform, while keeping any changes cost neutral at worst. The results of such studies are intended to open new dialogue on an existing matter that is currently being debated in the public arena, and the ambitions of this website, as well as the people who contribute to the ideas presented on this website, are to help America progress into a nation that can move past ideological differences, beyond party platforms and journalistic sabotage, to help promote the general well being of America's citizens.

The combination of these two issues will surely spark some controversy, considering recent coverage of the health care legislation being proposed, and the 70-year-old war on drugs. Most people have their preconceived notions of both issues, and many people are unwilling to open themselves up to compromise, or to the acceptance that there are other possibilities out there. I ask the people who visit this website to keep an open mind and seriously consider the information that will be found on the articles to come.

The concept behind the combination of legalizing marijuana to fund universal medicine was not something I had ever considered, but was born through honest debate between politically diverse minds. I have never indulged in marijuana, or any drug, to be precise, but in my opinion, the benefits of supplying health care to the nation outweighed many of the traditional arguments in support of the criminalization of marijuana. My hope is to conduct a comprehensive study on not only how to fund universal health care, but to help improve American society, as well as the myriad of municipalities that are affected by both health care problems and drug problems.

I hope that this website helps in the continuing debate of health care reform and the legalization of marijuana.