The Food and Drug Administration classifies cannabis as a Schedule One drug, meaning it has no medicinal value. But did you know that our federal government funds a cannabis farm in the University of Mississippi?
Look up the Compassionate Investigational New Drug Program if you don’t believe me to find proof of government two-facedness at its best. The program works with the University of Mississippi to provide 300 joints a month to the four people who are part of the program and need the plant for medical reasons.
The fact that the government classifies cannabis as medically invaluable while distributing and researching it for medical reasons is just one sign that medicinal cannabis should be legalized. Yet the federal government will not enact change unless they see more and more states legalize. Thus, Florida should join the ranks of the 23 other states that have legalized medicinal cannabis.
If passed on Nov. 4, Florida Amendment 2 would legalize medicinal cannabis. The Amendment requires a staggering 60 percent “Yes” vote to pass — the highest threshold for any state that passed medicinal cannabis in the past. It is crucial that anyone who supports this issue votes. Many who oppose this amendment fear Florida will be negatively impacted and that there will be “clouds of weed smoke inside Starbucks shops” as Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri put it in a recent debate on NBC Orlando. This is preposterous. Medicinal cannabis is about compassion and those who really need the plant; it’s not as if hippies will pollute the streets with pot smoke. But rather than reiterate why cannabis should be legalized, let’s look at common objections instead.
Didn’t we already pass a bill for cannabis? Yes, Senate Bill 1030 allows for “Charlotte’s Web,” a high-CBD-low-THC strain that is most commonly used to treat younger children, especially those with epilepsy. This is wonderful for those children, but what about the other suffering victims who need medicinal cannabis in Florida? Cannabis is known to have medical benefits for a myriad of diseases such as ALS, multiple sclerosis and even post-traumatic stress disorder. Why the government decided to ignore all those people, especially our veterans, is beyond me.
In addition, SB 1030 allows for only five licenses for businesses to grow Charlotte’s Web, and the Department of Health decided to issue those licenses based off of a lottery system. This is a huge drawback for Charlotte’s Web in Florida. First off, there should have be many more licenses allowable. Having only five licensees cuts out a number of nursery farms that truly want to grow Charlotte’s Web for the right reasons. The lottery system demolishes the bill completely. The department should assess their licensees based on qualitative procedures to decide who could grow the strain most effectively, preventing the chance that ineffective medicine is administered. More detailed provisions of the licensing process states that licensees must be established nursery owners in Florida for at least 30 years, which I think is an issue; even if these nursery owners are great, professional growers, unless they have been growing cannabis illegally in the past, I don’t see how they can cultivate Charlotte’s Web most effectively, especially if a less-skilled nursery happens to win the licensing lottery.
Florida’s law enforcement argues that Amendment 2 is a guise for recreational use because there’s a line in the potential law that says a person can receive cannabis for “other conditions for which a physician believes” deemed necessary. What they don’t seem to realize is that that line was included to ensure flexibility on the statute. The medical field is always finding new discoveries, so this line allows the physician to administer cannabis for a disease that, for example, may have been recently discovered to be treatable by cannabis.
The No on 2 Campaign, which opposes Amendment 2, claims that Amendment’s wording has too many loopholes and too much room for abuse. For example, the bill does not specify age limits, locations of dispensaries and requirements for caregivers. What all these arguments don’t mention, however, are the last three sections of the bill. Section D specifies the duties of the Department of Health, who could then clarify loopholes like caregiver requirements and establish an age limit. Perhaps they could even adopt a successful regulation from other medical cannabis states, such as Illinois’s rigorous background checks on caregivers. Regarding the age limit, even if one is not established by the Department, the Amendment still says that a physician must approve the use of medicinal cannabis. I don’t think any doctor in their right mind would prescribe cannabis to someone underage. Plus, an age limit could work out, especially for a young child suffering from a debilitating disease who may need a cannabis-derivative other than Charlotte’s Web, a cannabis strain used to treat younger children. Sections E and F allow the state government to edit and revise the Amendment, and Section E allows the legislature to enact laws concerning medicinal cannabis. Section F says the judicial court can change any line it deems inadequate. This is what happened in Colorado, and it led to the founding of the Marijuana Enforcement Division in their Department of Revenue, which establishes and enforces ethical standards for cannabis businesses.
The guise-for-recreational-use argument is the typical one I often come across when talking to those who oppose cannabis. They always refer to California’s medical laws that seems to make it relatively easy to get cannabis for any condition. The social benefits, along with the probable economic boost, vastly outweigh a few individuals getting away with smoking pot. Plus, is alcohol any better? It’s easy for someone to have that one drink that pushes them over the limit makes them lose their composure, whereas an extra hit of cannabis would, at worst, glue one to their couch. How about cops focus on the rowdy drunks wreaking havoc in public and leave us stoners to our intellectual conversations emanating from our living rooms?
There’s a national group of police for cannabis legalization as well. The Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) is a national organization started by police officials and even former DEA agents who believe the underground market for cannabis is so difficult to control that enforcement agencies waste countless resources combating drug dealers. It’s not too difficult to start selling cannabis illegally, so even if a drug dealer is dealt with by the law, a few more could easily pop up and take his or her place within a matter of days. Ending prohibition could eventually make the black market smaller while creating a safer environment for adults to access cannabis.
An NAACP study found that black males are sent to prison at least 10 times more than white males on drug charges. For these unfair, costly and unnecessary trends to stop, the federal government must enact change. Legalizing medicinal cannabis in Florida is a huge step toward joining the 23 other states that show our federal government that cannabis prohibition should end. Let us citizens have our right to choose to use.
