FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

A False Dichotomy

“I’d like your opinion on the Cannabis vs Hemp issue,” writes Jeanette Doney of Fort Bragg. “Last week the house in CA passed AB 684, industrial hemp for farming. It now goes to the senate, and then to Arnold, as it did last year… Cannabis growers fear industrial hemp as a cross-pollinator. But I am with those who claim there should be no fear protecting small, indoor, legal cannabis crops from hemp crops.”

The “vs” never made sense to me, Jeanette: cannabis is hemp. It’s a myth that the plant grown for food and fiber has to be low on THC, or stalky. Japanese hemp fiber is the finest of all, and it comes from plants that are compact and bushy. If and when low-THC hemp is legalized, and low-THC strains are growing all over Mendoland, is there any doubt the local Burbanks will find ways to keep growing potent sinsemilla? Who’s afraid of wind-borne pollen? “If you don’t find a couple of seeds, it means the plant has been neutered,” says Bob Cannard, a most observant farmer. “It’s been short-changed… You’ve got to allow a plant to have a few seeds. How can it be a truly content plant without sexual fulfillment?”

Reform advocates have created niches for themselves and convinced their backers that legalizing the cannabis plant for food and fiber is a project that is and should be kept distinct from legalizing the plant for medical use (which they distinguish from legalizing it for “recreational” use, which they distinguish from legalizing coca and poppies). As if the single-issue trap wasn’t constrictive enough, these people focus on issues within issues. They think they’re being slick, they think they’re politically sophisticated, our leaders, the pros from Dover.

Last year, as you know, Schwarzenegger -who claimed while running for governor that he was “for” medical marijuana, whatever that means- vetoed the hemp bill. Because the hempster masterminds had kept their distance from the pot-smoking masses, there was nobody to hold Schwarzenegger’s veto against him. With no political price to pay, why shouldn’t the Governator do the same thing this year?

In late February I called the office of Assemblyman Mark Leno and told an aide named Bart Broome that the Society of Cannabis Clinicians wanted to get cannabis rescheduled in California in a way that jibed with medical reality, i.e., on a schedule all its own to reflect its unique range of effects and mechanism of action. (Each state has its own Controlled Substances Act and the state CSAs don’t have to mirror the one adopted by Congress in 1970.) The SCC docs were hoping Leno would sponsor a bill to reschedule cannabis and hold hearings at which they could present evidence that it is medically useful. They hoped he would move swiftly so that the discussion in California would be taken into account when Congress reconsiders whether cannabis belongs on Schedule I.

Broome said that Leno was reintroducing the hemp bill and therefore it was out of the question that he sponsor a rescheduling bill. I told Broome his boss was making a tactical mistake in treating “hemp” and “medical marijuana” as discrete issues. He said (as if educating me) that politicians were afraid to support any bill reforming the drug laws because opponents would then call them soft on crime. He said law enforcement in particular would oppose rescheduling marijuana in California because the ensuing conflict with the federal controlled substances act would put them in a terrible bind, as had Prop 215 itself.

It was a mind-blowing little sermon. Ten years after I first heard the head of the California Narcotics Officers Association complain that Prop 215 had created a “nightmare” for her members, I had to hear it from Mark Leno’s point man for drug policy reform! Young Broome seemed to assume that my real goal was “legalization,” and confided that he’d “seen some polling” indicating that a majority of Californians might vote for a legalization initiative, and that he’d recently heard from “some folks in Orange County… conservatives with ties to Lou Sheldon” that they were thinking about launching a legalization initiative… As if I should find that heartening. As if it had any relevance to the purpoe of my call on behalf of a doctors’ group.

Broome opined that changing the state CSA so that it didn’t mirror the federal CSA was probably not possible, “you’ll have to have some lawyers take a hard look at that.” I said, “Gerry Uelmen told me that in Arkansas cannabis is on Schedule Six. Rescheduling in California is definitely do-able.” Dropping the famous lawyer’s name produced an immediate change in tone. Broome asked if the doctors had money to hire a lobbyist. I told him to consider my call the first step in our lobbying process. He said “It would be very good if the doctors could hire a lobbyist.” Next I contacted the office of assemblyman Sandre Swanson and got a much friendlier reception. Stay tuned.

FRED GARDNER edits O’Shaughnessy’s, the Journal of Cannabis in Clinical Practice (soon to have a presence on the web). He can be reached at fred@plebesite.com

 

 

More articles by:

Fred Gardner is the managing editor of O’Shaughnessy’s. He can be reached at fred@plebesite.com

April 23, 2018
Patrick Cockburn
In Middle East Wars It Pays to be Skeptical
Thomas Knapp
Just When You Thought “Russiagate” Couldn’t Get Any Sillier …
Gregory Barrett
The Moral Mask
Robert Hunziker
Chemical Madness!
David Swanson
Senator Tim Kaine’s Brief Run-In With the Law
Dave Lindorff
Starbucks Has a Racism Problem
Uri Avnery
The Great Day
Nyla Ali Khan
Girls Reduced to Being Repositories of Communal and Religious Identities in Kashmir
Ted Rall
Stop Letting Trump Distract You From Your Wants and Needs
Steve Klinger
The Cautionary Tale of Donald J. Trump
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
Conflict Over the Future of the Planet
Cesar Chelala
Gideon Levy: A Voice of Sanity from Israel
Weekend Edition
April 20, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Ruling Class Operatives Say the Darndest Things: On Devils Known and Not
Conn Hallinan
The Great Game Comes to Syria
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Mother of War
Andrew Levine
“How Come?” Questions
Doug Noble
A Tale of Two Atrocities: Douma and Gaza
Kenneth Surin
The Blight of Ukania
Howard Lisnoff
How James Comey Became the Strange New Hero of the Liberals
William Blum
Anti-Empire Report: Unseen Persons
Lawrence Davidson
Missiles Over Damascus
Patrick Cockburn
The Plight of the Yazidi of Afrin
Pete Dolack
Fooled Again? Trump Trade Policy Elevates Corporate Power
Stan Cox
For Climate Mobilization, Look to 1960s Vietnam Before Turning to 1940s America
William Hawes
Global Weirding
Dan Glazebrook
World War is Still in the Cards
Nick Pemberton
In Defense of Cardi B: Beyond Bourgeois PC Culture
Ishmael Reed
Hollywood’s Last Days?
Peter Certo
There Was Nothing Humanitarian About Our Strikes on Syria
Dean Baker
China’s “Currency Devaluation Game”
Ann Garrison
Why Don’t We All Vote to Commit International Crimes?
LEJ Rachell
The Baddest Black Power Artist You Never Heard Of
Lawrence Ware
All Hell Broke Out in Oklahoma
Franklin Lamb
Tehran’s Syria: Lebanon Colonization Project is Collapsing
Donny Swanson
Janus v. AFSCME: What’s It All About?
Will Podmore
Brexit and the Windrush Britons
Brian Saady
Boehner’s Marijuana Lobbying is Symptomatic of Special-Interest Problem
Julian Vigo
Google’s Delisting and Censorship of Information
Patrick Walker
Political Dynamite: Poor People’s Campaign and the Movement for a People’s Party
Fred Gardner
Medical Board to MDs: Emphasize Dangers of Marijuana
Rob Seimetz
We Must Stand In Solidarity With Eric Reid
Missy Comley Beattie
Remembering Barbara Bush
Wim Laven
Teaching Peace in a Time of Hate
Thomas Knapp
Freedom is Winning in the Encryption Arms Race
Mir Alikhan
There Won’t be Peace in Afghanistan Until There’s Peace in Kashmir
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail