|
Remarks By Ronald E. Brooks Past President California Narcotic Officers Association Before The Regarding The Issues Surrounding Medicinal Marijuana Note: This is the Prepared Text and may not reflect the change in actual delivery. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the issues surrounding medical marijuana and the overall movement in this country to legalize marijuana and other drugs. I am here as a past president of the California Narcotic Officer’s Association (CNOA) representing President Ed Ladd, the executive board and our 7,000 members. I am also appearing as the chair of the Drug Policy Committee of the National Narcotic Officer’s Association Coalition (NNOAC) which represents 33 state narcotic officer’s associations and more than 50,000 police officers from across the country. More importantly I am here as the father of two children and a concerned member of my community. Although I am not an expert on medicine or drug policy, I am a veteran narcotic agent with more than 22 years of service in California. I have seen firsthand the results of drug use and the affects that it has had on the quality of life of California’s citizens. I have been involved in fighting the move to legalize drugs and with drug prevention education for many years. With the end of the cold war, the greatest threat to the security of our nation is drug use. Use that carries with it the misery of addiction, broken homes, horrific violence, carnage on our highways and ruined health. Americans, when polled continue to describe drug use, violent crime and gangs as their major concerns, and they should be. As Americans we, have a right to live in safe, drug free communities. The answer to our nations drug problem is a comprehensive policy, which embraces drug prevention education, treatment and strong drug law enforcement. Since the 1960’s, there has been an active political movement in California and across the nation to promote the legalization of marijuana and other drugs. In 1972, an initiative was qualified for the California ballot to decriminalize marijuana. That initiative, proposition 19, was defeated by a margin of 2-1 statewide. It lost in every county except San Francisco. This defeat taught the pro-legalization lobby that the public would not accept outright legalization. A recent poll by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University found that California’s attitude towards outright legalization of marijuana has not changed substantially during the past 25 years. Our nations drug problems date back to before the turn of the century. They are complex and cannot be solved overnight. Based on frustration over issues of crime and drugs, and fueled by an underlying feeling that taxes are to high and government is not entirely trustworthy, many citizens are now seeking simple solutions to this very complex problem. This feeling of public frustration is being exploited by a small but growing group of drug legalizers, who over the years have adopted a strategy of working toward complete drug legalization by first approaching the medical marijuana issue. The tendency to underestimate the hazards of drug abuse has been made by successive generations. We, as voters tend to have short memories, and often times forget what has been painfully demonstrated in years past. Many researchers and physicians have grossly underestimated the danger posed by various drugs. Heroin was first developed as a non-addicting analgesic to replace morphine. And Sigmund Freud thought that cocaine was non-addictive and relatively harmless. A mistake that was repeated in the 1980’s by Dr. Lester Grinspoon of Harvard when he declared cocaine to be as safe as aspirin. This statement was made on the eve of the crack cocaine epidemic in this country. Dr. Grinspoon in his book, "Marihuana, the Forbidden Medicine" now calls for the use of marijuana for a variety of medical applications. The many claims for the benefits of smoked marijuana made in this book are based on anecdotal information and are not based on scientific study. One of the claims made by Dr. Grinspoon is that marijuana use promotes safe driving. To understand the problems that passage of medical marijuana initiatives and other decriminalization legislation would cause it is helpful to step back in time. At the turn of the century, unregulated syrups and other remedies were heavily laced with morphine, cocaine and heroin. These drugs were cheap, legal and readily available. Much like marijuana will become under many of the medical marijuana initiatives. Drugs were sold without medical examination or prescription. Opium dens were common in America’s cities. By 1910 there was an estimated 250,000 drug addicts. Many of whom became addicted using unregulated patent medicines. Rampant drug use resulted in record levels of crime and social disorder. Our nations murder rate jumped 300% in the ten-year period between 1907 and 1917. The leaders of our great nation strongly rejected the scourge of drugs in our communities. By popular demand the Food and Drug Act of 1906 required that all ingredients in foods and drugs be made known to consumers. This began the development of consumer protection laws, which continue to safeguard us to this day. With the passage of this act along with the Harrison Act in 1914 we began our fight to rid this country of the evils of drug abuse. Through vigorous drug enforcement, a strong anti-drug message and the regulation of patent medicines and other drugs, America’s addict population declined from 250,000 in 1900 to 50,000 in 1940. With the decline in drug addicts came a significant reduction in crime and public disorder. This strategy of using medical marijuana as the first step to drug legalization is well documented. In 1979, NORML director Keith Stroup told an Emory University audience that NORML would be using medical marijuana as a "red herring", to give marijuana a good name. Kevin Zeese of the Drug Policy Foundation was quoted on several occasions as having said "medical marijuana is the first step to decriminalization", and Eric Sterling, of the Criminal Justice Foundation has said, "medical use of marijuana is an integral part of the strategy to legalize". During California’s general election last November, a fraud was perpetrated on the voters and a cruel hoax was played on the sick. This hoax and fraud was the passage by voters of the so-called medical marijuana compassionate use act, proposition 215. This ballot initiative exploited public compassion for the seriously ill in order to legalize the widespread use and cultivation of marijuana in California. I believe that we should talk about compassion for a moment. True compassion would mean that the pro-drug lobby would stop using sick and dying persons as pawns in their strategy to achieve drug legalization. Under proposition 215, anyone who claims to have a doctor’s verbal approval can grow and smoke marijuana—even children. Although the age limit for smoking tobacco is 18 and for the consumption of alcohol it’s 21, there is no age restriction for the consumption of marijuana under the provisions of proposition 215. The pro proposition 215 lobby led voters to believe that marijuana would be used by persons suffering chronic or terminal illnesses. In fact it allows marijuana to be used for minor ailments including headaches and strained muscles. The public was also led to believe that Marijuana would be available based on a doctor’s prescription. In fact, all that is required is a recommendation of a physician without the requirement of an examination, written prescription or other records. A recommendation that is difficult, at best, for law enforcement officers investigating marijuana related crimes to prove. Marijuana is not medicine and the backers of the medical marijuana movement are not doctors. Proposition 215 was written in the fashion that it was, without medical examination or prescriptive controls, because it was never intended to be a medical marijuana initiative. Proposition 215 was written to provide de-facto legalization of marijuana in California. This was to be the pilot project, by the pro drug lobby, as the first step toward the legalization of marijuana and other drugs in America. The passage of proposition 215 and other similar initiatives will bring us back to the days of patent medicine. By regulating medicine at the ballot box rather than by scientific study and approval we have reversed 90 years of progress. Proposition 215 has effectively eliminated all patient and consumer protection established by our pure food and drug laws. In 1980, NORML petitioned to have marijuana moved to schedule II. In 1988 Francis Young, an administrative law judge, ruled that marijuana should be re-scheduled for limited medical purposes. On 12-21-89 Drug Enforcement Administration Administrator John Lawn refused to re-schedule marijuana based on his review of the evidence. NORML petitioned for a review. DEA Administrator Robert Bonner again refused to move marijuana to schedule II based on an extensive review of the evidence and existing studies. In 1994 the U.S. Court of Appeals, in Washington DC, upheld Administrator Bonner’s decision. In doing so the court stated that DEA had relied on scientific study and recognized experts while NORML had relied on anecdotal information. In 1992 the National Institute of Health concluded that crude marijuana was not an effective medicine for use in treating nausea, Aids wasting, glaucoma MS or pain. There are more than 1,000 studies showing the harmful affects of marijuana, including a recently published Columbia University study which indicates that marijuana use chemically alters the brain, leading to an increased propensity to use other drugs. This tends to show what many of us in treatment education and law enforcement already knew. Marijuana is a gateway drug! There are no scientific studies that demonstrate a medical benefit from smoking crude marijuana. It is important to remember that marijuana is a dangerous and addictive drug with a high potential for abuse. In 1994 the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) reported that more persons are being admitted to treatment for marijuana use than for heroin addiction. ONDCP and others involved in drug treatment and enforcement believe that marijuana use is on the rise in part due to the mixed message that is sent when marijuana is touted as a safe and effective medicine. Dr. Daryl Inaba, of the Haight Ashbuty Free Clinic in San Francisco states that marijuana is a highly addicting drug, which contains more than 360 chemicals that affect the brain. With THC contents ranging from 14-24% Dr. Inaba states that smoking one marijuana cigarette today is the equivalent of smoking fourteen marijuana joints in the 1960’s. During the 1960’s the Haight Ashbury clinic didn’t treat anyone for marijuana addiction due to the low THC content of that era. Today they treat 100 addicts each month. Dr. Eric Voth MD, has stated that "marijuana is clearly addictive and is responsible for behavioral, intellectual and cognitive deficits and is responsible for severe side-effects to the pulmonary, reproductive and immune systems. Marijuana could never pass the FDA pure drug standards. It contains 2,000 crude chemicals, some of which are carcinogens stronger than those found in cigarettes. Smoking crude marijuana is known to trigger attacks of manic depression, schizophrenia and memory loss. An increase in teen suicides has been linked to marijuana use. Researchers at the University of California at Davis have identified a strong link between smoking marijuana and throat cancer. Persons under the influence of marijuana are 10 times more likely to be involved in fatal traffic collisions than persons driving under the influence of alcohol. Despite what we know about marijuana, proposition 215 passed in California. It passed in spite of our efforts to stop it. Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, the California and American Medical Associations and every other credible medical group in California opposed its passage. In fact, the use of medical marijuana is opposed by all credible medical groups, nationwide. It passed despite opposition from politicians and public officials from both sides of the aisle, including, President Clinton; former Presidents Ford, Bush and Carter; Senators Bob Dole and Dianne Feistein, Congressman Vic Fazio, Governor Pete Wilson and Attorney General Dan Lungren. Proposition 215 and Arizona’s proposition 200 passed, as will other similar initiatives because they received the financial backing of George Soros from New York and a handful of other wealthy pro-legalizers. It has been estimated that Mr. Soros has spent over 15 million dollars to organizations, which promote liberalized drug laws. The proposition 200 and 215 campaigns were aided by the Drug Policy Foundation and other official sounding groups. The two million dollars donated by Mr. Soros and his friends paid for a television advertising campaign to sell proposition 215 to the voters. The ads, although deceptive, were well crafted and played upon the emotions of the viewers. The ads never told the viewers that proposition 215 would legalize marijuana for any medical condition without a written prescription. Polls taken in California and Arizona since the election indicate that voters would have rejected proposition 215 if they had simply known the facts. In the end, the well-informed and credible opponents of proposition 215 were simply out shouted by a slick and effective advertising campaign financed primarily by persons living outside of California. California has been left with a law that allows marijuana to be used with virtually no regulation based on the undocumented recommendation of a physician for any ailment. The pro drug lobby has bombarded the American public with the theory of harm reduction and the responsible use of marijuana and other drugs. We have, only to look to our nations history of drug use in the nineteenth century, or the pain, suffering and social ills caused by our two legal drugs, alcohol and tobacco to ask ourselves how realistic it is to teach people to use drugs responsibly. With the many documented public safety and healthcare problems associated with alcohol use, why would we want to make other, more powerful and addicting drugs cheap, legal and readily available. Serious conflict and confusion has resulted from the passage of proposition 215. The passage of similar measures in other states will only add to that confusion. These initiatives are in direct violation of federal law. The FDA has not approved the use of crude marijuana for any ailment or illness, and the Drug Enforcement Administration continues to classify marijuana as a schedule I drug. The so-called marijuana initiatives are encouraging doctors and citizens to violate federal law. There will be significant problems encountered in the enforcement of laws relating to driving under the influence. Unlike alcohol, police officers have no test available to determine if a person is driving under the influence of marijuana. And how will we regulate companies doing business that are controlled under the "drug free work place act". We must also ask ourselves if we want commercial truck drivers, airline pilots, doctors and public safety workers to be under the influence of marijuana during the course of their employment. And who will suffer from this change in drug policy. We all will. Although it is to early to determine the exact fallout from proposition 215 we already know that illegal marijuana cultivation seizures have increased by more than 50% in California since the passage of the initiative. In the recently published "California Student Substance Survey" dramatic increases in teen marijuana use were seen. Within the past six months, marijuana use among 11th graders was 43%, up from 28% in 1989. An increase, I believe due in part to the confusing message sent by the medical marijuana movement. I believe that we will see increases in traffic injuries and fatalities associated with marijuana use as well as a dramatic climb in workplace accidents, lost productivity, high school drop out and a whole host of other social problems. From 1979 to 1992 through education, treatment and law enforcement, we reduced drug use in America by 50%. If we reduced aids, teen pregnancy or cancer by that amount it would be considered a tremendous success. But for some reason we seem to labor under the belief that we have never achieved success in reducing drug abuse. This has led to frustration and a belief that our nations drug policies need overhauling. In 1992 we took our eye off the ball. Funding was cut and our drug prevention message was diluted. The passage of medical marijuana legislation further weakens that message and confuses the public, especially our nations youth. Increased drug use will be the direct result of that confusing message. Americans do not have a history of running away from problems and we shouldn’t be running away from the drug problem. It is time that we strengthen our resolve to reduce the scourge of drug use in this great nation. If we don’t take a stand now we will lose a generation or more of our countries most valuable commodity, it’s young people. Many will slip through the cracks. The window for learning will be gone. Opportunities will be lost that are impossible to regain. It will be too late to become an engineer, astronaut or physicist. These will be dreams that will always remain unfulfilled. In closing I would urge you, in the Congress to work towards the development of federal legislation that would prevent individual states from superseding the Federal Controlled Substances Act. This may be the only way to prevent the tragedy of proposition 215 from sweeping our nation. Thank you.
|