That Carter and Clinton, the only two Democrats to serve since Nixon, have come out against the drug war is very significant. Unfortunately, their reasons share the same weakness as those of Ethan Nadelmann : they take an absurd and failing policy far too seriously. Given the complete lack of clinical research that preceded either federal law banning “marijuana,” the law itself should be put on the defensive far more aggressively.
My own limited study discloses more errors and inconsistencies in federal policy than “Reform” is even aware of. The reason is simple: Mitchell and Nixon foreclosed research and debate without coming up with a plausible theory of their own, thus the government’s response to Reform has been to steadfastly deny that pot can possibly be medical and then retreat to “it’s against federal law.” What reform should have been doing is sponsoring unbiased research by competent physicians on applicants in several of the states states with medical marijuana laws. In stead. they have been arguing that marijuana really is medicine for some people while implying that their own “recreational” use is harmless and should be allowed.
Thus reform wonks are guilty of the same error as the government: assuming they know the answer without having done the research. Because the public has bought into the bogus moral assertions of the feds, they are cautious. If they knew how ignorant the feds have been, they would be a lot more exercised. It hasn’t helped that Psychiatry jumped on the federal bandwagon almost before the ink was dry on the CSA and has been sucking up to NIDA since Nixon created it in ’74, just before being forced to resign by exposure of his own dishonesty.
Dr. Tom
