Open Government Dialogue
« Back To OpenGov - Open Government Brainstorm

DarthNole

User Profile Image DarthNole
Member since : May-26-2009 (Verified)
1 Ideas, 21 Comments, 36 Votes

User Activity Stream

Ideas Posted

Dear Mr. President,

Please direct the DEA to remove marijuana from Schedule I and correctly classify it under the definitions that the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) provides. You said in your press conference (after you released the ban on federal funds for stem-cell research) that you believed that science should dictate policy not politics and I respectfully request that you follow through with this pledge even on something so politically toxic as marijuana.

Schedule I of the CSA specifically states that in order to be placed in this schedule I that the substance in question must have "no accepted medical use for treatment in the United States." Well... as of 1996 there are states that have accepted the medicinal uses of marijuana for treatment. Currently there are 13 states that have ACCEPTED the medical use for treatment therefore the current scheduling goes against the definition that was put into place.

In 1970, when the CSA was established there were NO accepted uses for treatment in the US, so the initial scheduling was correct. In 1988, when Administrative Law Judge Francis Young ruled that the DEA was required to reclassify marijuana there again were no states that had accepted the use for treatment and therefore the DEA had due cause to ignore the recommendation. But after California ACCEPTED the medical use for treatment in 1996 the Scheduel I classification became incorrect soley based on the definition.

Why does the Federal Government currently provide Medical Marijuana to 4 citizens of the United States for treatment of their illnesses while upholding the classification under "no medical use for treatment"? Isn't this a little hypocritical???
Displaying 1 - 25 of 4205 Ideas
12345678910….168169Next »

Comments Posted

DarthNole 9 months ago
TO THE MODERATOR:

Once again I implore you to reconsider including this idea into Phase II of this process. Not only has this idea garned some of the highest support on the site, but it makes good public policy (you know following the law). I have laid out previously why the idea in general clearly meets the purpose of this brainstorm. But the concept goes even further. Once marijuana is correctly removed from Schedule I of the CSA there will need to be a discussion as to where it should be placed. It will be that discussion that the transparency of government can take place. By providing all of the scientific research that has been done (the US Government does hold a patent for medical marijuana). During that discussion the government can seek participation from scientists from around the globe (since the US has effectivle shut out any attempts to research the plant as a whole). After collecting the necessary scientific research and recommendations, the government can collaborate amogst federal agencies (HHS, DEA, DOJ, Agriculture, etc.) to correctly schedule marijuana in the CSA (or not to if that is the prevailing wisdom).
DarthNole 9 months ago
BTW - Here is what the President has said about Medical Marijuana....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvUziSfMwAw

"I think the basic concept that using Medical Marijuana in the same way, with the same controls, as other drugs prescribed by doctors... I think that's entirely appropriate."

SO MR. PRESIDENT....this doesn't take an act of Congress to get done. All you need to do is tell the DEA to appropriately schedule marijuana so that doctors can go ahead and prescribe it!

52% of Americans suport the outright legalization of Marijuana for recreation use (recent Zogby poll).... so what political capital are you going to use up by simply dealing with Medical Marijuana? I promise you that the statistics are much higher for those that support allowing marijuana to be used with the recommendation of their doctor!!!
DarthNole 9 months ago
Mr Boehner:

As the Minorty Leader of the House and a person that believes in the rule of law and person freedoms, I have a serious question for you:

Why doesn't the Republican Party support the idea of Medical Marijuana?

Currently Congress has left marijuana as a Schedule I substance according to the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. But the definition in the Act states that in order to be classified in Schedule I there must be NO accepted medical use for treatment in the US. But currently there are 13 states that have already ACCEPTED the use for medical treatment. On top of that the Federal Government supplies 4 US Citizen with Medical Marijuana each month and has for the past 26 years. I think that this is pretty simple, and will garner the Republican Party a lot of support, if you would get out there and push that we either do one of two things. Either the Congress decides to re-define the CSA OR you decide to follow the law as it is written and move Marijuana from Schedule I.

I realize that you might be concerned with doctors widely prescribing it but is it the Government's role to dictate forms of treatment or is that the doctors job (you know the thing they went to school for)? Now I would concead that it is the Government role to keep me safe, but in this instance that should not be a concern. Can you name one person in the past 5000 years that has overdosed on Marijuana?

And before you talk about the risks of smoking anything, there are alternative ways to extract the medicine from the plant. The most obvious is through baking cookies, cakes and other items that you can eat or drink. Most people don;t like those because it is harder to titrate the doses as the effects take longer to arrive. The second way is to use a vaporizor that heats the plant below the combustion point for the palnt material but above the point for the THC and other cannabinoids which turn to vapors that are collected and inhaled. This keeps all of the carcinogens out of the human body but allows the medicine to be injested. The misconception that smoking a joint is the only possible way is not only absurd but can be fixed by educating the public (something your doctor would do when he presribed it to you).

So what's your stance? Will you get the Party behind the rule of law and get the CSA corrected? Will you fight for the rights of the sick and injured to receive any treatment that their doctor believes can help?

I'll look forward to your response over on the Idea: "Remove Marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act".... good or bad I'll be looking to hear your views.
DarthNole 9 months ago
Although this site is still open for ideas and votes.... the voting really ended on May 28th when the ideas that are moving to Phase II were decided.
DarthNole 9 months ago
To Whom It May Concern:

I just got a chance to read the report that was released concerning the site analysis for the “Open Government Brainstorm”. Being that today has been the scheduled day for Phase II to begin I have been interested in seeing which ideas would be pushed forward and discussed in more detail. I am the author of the idea: “Remove Marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act” which as of now has garnered 578 votes (703 positive and 125 negative votes). In your report you mention that fact that like “other civic engagement efforts by the White House, the Brainstorm saw many comments from those in favor of legalizing Marijuana and/or “ending the war on drugs”. Then the report goes on to say “Other comments that may be loosely categorized as “legal and policy”, but were clearly off-topic as it relates to this Brainstorm,”. The report makes it sound like marijuana issues are “clearly off-topic”.

I am taking the time to write this letter as I 100% disagree that the issue I brought forward is “clearly off-topic”. The only way for you to make this determination is if you had not actually read the idea and just assumed that you knew what it said. The fact of the matter is that the President’s Memorandum clearly makes this to be an issue worth discussing further (not to mention that it gained one of the most votes on the site):

“I direct the Chief Technology Officer, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Administrator of General Services, to coordinate the development by appropriate executive departments and agencies, within 120 days, of recommendations for an Open Government Directive, to be issued by the Director of OMB, that instructs executive departments and agencies to take specific actions implementing the principles set forth in this memorandum. The independent agencies should comply with the Open Government Directive.”

On Transparency:

My idea is to instruct the DEA (an executive agency) to remove Marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act as it no longer meets the definition that was established in 1970. President Obama also stated in his memo that his “Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use.” He goes on to say that “Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public.” For the hundreds of thousands of patients that could benefit from Medical Marijuana (that they are currently barred from because of the classification) think that this is information that is of great use to them.

On Participation:

In his memo, the President states that “Knowledge is widely dispersed in society, and public officials benefit from having access to that dispersed knowledge. Executive departments and agencies should offer Americans increased opportunities to participate in policymaking and to provide their Government with the benefits of their collective expertise and information.” This idea calls on the President to take the information and expertise of the 13 States that have already accepted the use for treatment and recognize that the current scheduling is contrary to the law as it is written. These 13 States (as well as many others that have tried and failed to pass sensible medical marijuana laws) have participated in the National Discussion dating back to 1996 when Prop 215 passed in California. I ask the President to draw on the expertise of Judge Francis Young that ruled in 1988 that the DEA should re-schedule Marijuana. Our efforts to participate in the legal system were successful in relation to the recommendation that was given to the DEA, however we were not successful in having the DEA listen to that recommendation. We are simply asking the President to put science over politics and to enforce the law that was written by taking Marijuana out of Schedule I.

On Collaboration:

This actually gets to the root of the issue at hand. The President said, “Executive departments and agencies should solicit public feedback to assess and improve their level of collaboration and to identify new opportunities for cooperation.” I submit to you today that the DEA did not collaborate with Administrative Law Judge Francis Young in 1988 when the recommendation to re-schedule was made. The DEA simply choose to ignore that recommendation without providing any information to the contrary. I can also say that the DEA has also not collaborated with the Congress to either change the law as it is written or to re-schedule based on the definition that Congress came up with.

I humbly submit to you that my idea is in fact “clearly on-topic” and due to the high support for the issue should be moved into Phase II for further discussion. As it stands today this is the #2 issue on the web site and to ignore the views of those you asked for ideas from is astounding. I hope that this clearly identifies why this is a topic that should be discussed further. I look forward to your thoughtful response and consideration of this issue.
DarthNole 9 months ago
felkakarp:

I will say that I am in agreement that prohibition has caused more issues than it has solved (well... has it solved anything???) Marijuana has caused ZERO deaths in 5000 years and I would think that the Government would want to keep us away from harmful things.

It just frustrates me to see anyone vote this down as it should have nothing to do with your views on Marijuana. The government gives it to 4 US Citzens for medical use and 13 states have accepted the use for treatment. It is clear that the scheduling is incorrect.

MR PRESIDENT:

As our country's first black president the hysteria that was disseminated by the Federal Government dating back to the Marihuana Tax Stamp Act of 1937 should appaul you.

"Marihuana influences Negroes to to look at white people in the eye, step on white men's shadows and look at a white woman twice."
William Randolph Hearst - Newspaper Tycoon (1936)

"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others."
Harry J. Anslinger - America's 1st Drug Czar (FDR - JFK)

IF this is what our laws were formed around, don't you think its good time to relook at these failed policies? Have we not come into the 21st Century?
DarthNole 9 months ago
THIS IS NOT AN IDEA TO LEGALIZE MARIJUANA ---- THIS IS A SIMPLE CALL TO CLASSIFY MARIJUANA UNDER THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT BASED ON THE DEFINITIONS THAT WERE ESTABLISHED IN 1970..... PLEASE READ THE IDEA BEFORE VOTING UP OR DOWN!!!

THE SIMPLE QUESTION: ARE THERE MEDICAL USES FOR TREATMENT IN THE US OR NOT?
DarthNole 9 months ago
IF he is not ELIGIBLE to be our President, it doesn't change the fact that Biden does qualify and that he is the Current VP.... IF Obama is removed the election would not be overturned... BIDEN would fill his spot and the Speaker would move to VP...

BTW - I did not vote for Obama... and this issue was brought before the court system in PA before the election took place. IF the RNC REALLY believed this to be valid... don't you think they would have spent the $500K on fighting his eligibility in court rather than spending it on Palin's clothes????
DarthNole 9 months ago
IF he is not ELIGIBLE to be our President, it doesn't change the fact that Biden does qualify and that he is the Current VP.... IF Obama is removed the election would not be overturned... BIDEN would fill his spot and the Speaker would move to VP...

BTW - I did not vote for Obama... and this issue was brought before the court system in PA before the election took place. IF the RNC REALLY believed this to be valid... don't you think they would have spent the $500K on fighting his eligibility in court rather than spending it on Palin's clothes????
DarthNole 9 months ago
DO YOUR RESEARCH:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

SO WOULD YOU PREFER TO HAVE BIDEN AS PRESIDENT AND PELOSI AS VP???

Becarful what you wish for.....
DarthNole 9 months ago
DO YOUR RESEARCH:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

SO WOULD YOU PREFER TO HAVE BIDEN AS PRESIDENT AND PELOSI AS VP???

Becarful what you wish for....
DarthNole 9 months ago
DO YOUR RESEARCH:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

SO WOULD YOU PREFER TO HAVE BIDEN AS PRESIDENT AND PELOSI AS VP???

Becarful what you wish for...
DarthNole 9 months ago
DO YOUR RESEARCH:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

SO WOULD YOU PREFER TO HAVE BIDEN AS PRESIDENT AND PELOSI AS VP???

Becarful what you wish for.....
DarthNole 9 months ago
DO YOUR RESEARCH:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

SO WOULD YOU PREFER TO HAVE BIDEN AS PRESIDENT AND PELOSI AS VP???

Becarful what you wish for....
DarthNole 9 months ago
DO YOUR RESEARCH:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

SO WOULD YOU PREFER TO HAVE BIDEN AS PRESIDENT AND PELOSI AS VP???

Becarful what you wish for...
DarthNole 9 months ago
You can't be SERIOUS....

If you take out "pot smokers" and replace it with "Prohibition" you might have a point.
DarthNole 9 months ago
I have to say the the "elimination of the Senate" is ONE reason not to support this topic...

The role of the Senate is to give equal representation to each State. If all we had was the House, then ideas from the populist states (California, New York) would trump the ideas and philosophies of the smaller States.

Unfortunately you're under some false idea that we live in a pure Democracy. We DON"T!!! The US Government was formed under the idea of a Representative Democracy. There is a big difference.

Why not eliminate both the House AND Senate and just have a website we as individual citizens logged into to place our vote for a particular issue/bill? That would be pure Democracy!
DarthNole 9 months ago
72 Hours?? Is that all?

Do you think you can actually read through AND understand the substance of a 1200 page bill in 3 days?

I am not a speed reader, but just having the time to read a bill is not enough (did you see the spectical when a spped reader was brought in so no one could say the bill wasn't read), understanding what the bill will do is what matters.

There should be a one week delay between the final drafting of a bill and the actual vote on that bill. Any additional admendments should reset that time frame.
DarthNole 9 months ago
Josh...

My concern has never been for the full out legalization... My concern is for the rule of law...if our law makers found it necessary to design a set of laws to protect us then that law is one that should guide us. If the majority of the population believes otherwise they can do what they can to change that law. This request has NOTHING to do with changing laws, but to enforce them as they are written. Even REPUBLICANS have to agree with this as one of their major tennents is the strict interpretation of the constitution. If you say that Schedule I is for those substances with NO medical value then fine... but when a substance is ACCEPTED for use in treatment (by 13 states... and frankly even by the Federal Government that provides Medical Marijuana to 4 US citizens each month) then you have to reclassify it based on the definition.

This is not the "first step".... this is rationale policy making... whatever your ideas on recreational use separate them from those that could benefit that have dibilitating diseases and chronic pain...

MEDICAL DECISIONS AND TREATMENTS SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU AND YOUR DOCTOR NOT UNCLE SAM!!!!
DarthNole 9 months ago
FOR THOSE THAT ARE VOTING THIS DOWN:

Are you saying that our Government is correctly enforcing the definition that they created? Or do you really just think that marijuana is so dangerous that doctors shouldn't be allowed to recommend it?

Your ideas on Marijuana should be put to the side as this in no way is recommending the legalization for recreational use. This is strictly about following the definition of the Schedules in the Controlled Substances Act. IF there are 13 states that have officially ACCEPTED the medical use AND the US Government supplies citizens with MEDICAL MARIJUANA for treatment then how is it that marijuana is still classified under the definition that there are NO ACCEPTED medical uses for treatment in the United States????
DarthNole 9 months ago
Josh...
So your friend used it and it was effective to numb her pain...

I'm not here trying to debate whether this should be allowed for recreational use, but whether the Federal Government has marijuana in accurately classified. Should it be pulled off the CSA altogether... NO I think that it should end up as a Schedule III or IV drug. The point is that it no longer meets the defination that was put in place for Schedule I back in 1970.

Your friend's experience should prove to you that there are medical uses for the drug and that for some people it provides better results than prescription drugs. ASk yourself this question:

Should the Federal Government determine what is acceptable treatment for your illness or should that decision be made by you and your doctor?