The New York Times call to repeal federal marijuana prohibition was a monumental event for advocates and the mainstream media’s coverage of of all things cannabis. Once derided in the media, the support of the Gray Lady. While more and more people move away from traditional media, like print newspapers, the “newspaper of record” still means a lot to politicos and other media outlets. The New York Times’ influence still permeates across the political and cultural spectrum.
Since the paper’s endorsement we have seen several improvements at the federal level, but the Congressional action has been too slow for advocates of sensible marijuana policies. Not one to rest on its laurels, The New York Times has prodded Congress and President Obama (“Congress and Obama Are Too Timid on Marijuana Reform“) to be reflect the will of the voters and implement sensible cannabis laws:
Lawmakers who hope their colleagues in Congress will act face an uphill struggle. For example, a bill introduced in the Senate by Cory Booker and Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrats of New Jersey and New York, respectively, and Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, would allow states to legalize marijuana for medical use. It would also allow banks and credit unions to provide financial services to cannabis-based businesses in states that have legalized the drug. The bill has 16 sponsors, including two Republicans, but the Judiciary Committee, which is chaired by Charles Grassley, Republican of Iowa, has not scheduled it for a hearing or a vote. An identical bill in the House with 17 sponsors, eight of them Republican, is also languishing in committee.
Congress has taken a few positive steps, like approving a provision that would prevent the Justice Department from using federal funds to keep states from carrying out their own medical marijuana laws. And some senior Republicans, including Mr. Grassley and Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, have expressed support for the medical use of a compound known as cannabidiol, which is found in the cannabis plant but is not psychoactive. The Obama administration recently made it easier for scientists to study marijuana by removing a requirement that studies not funded by the federal government go through an additional review process, beyond what is required for researchers working with other drugs.
But both Congress and the White House should be doing more. Specifically, marijuana should be removed from the Controlled Substances Act, where it is classified as a Schedule I drug like heroin and LSD, and considered to have no medical value. Removing marijuana from the act would not make it legal everywhere, but it would make it easier for states to decide how they want to regulate it.
The Times’ coverage of George W. Bush’s case for the Iraq War provided cover for W’s cabinet members as they marketed the ill-fated quagmire. The Bush Administration’s shameful era of torture was assisted by the Times’ refusal to even call waterboarding torture. I can tell you first hand the that paper’s endorsement of Measure 91 (as well as legalization measures in Alaska and Washington, D.C.) meant a lot to our campaign team as it uplifted the campaign, gave us a couple of good news days and it certainly impacted the media members covering the marijuana beat. Quite strangely, the person most responsible for the attention directed towards the testing, dosage levels and packaging of marijuana-infused edibles may just be The Times’ Pulitzer Prize winning columnist Maureen Dowd.
It would be great if this editorial is as influential on Congress as the paper’s coverage of the Iraq War or as impactful of Dowd’s tale of her long, strange trip, but unfortunately most politicians are years behind the people. But the times are changing, as they say and many members of Congress may just find themselves losing to challengers who decide to represent the majority of Americans that want to legalize marijuana. Many people tend to call politicians “bold” for supporting marijuana regulation, but really there isn’t anything bold about representing the majority of the people; in this case, sensible marijuana regulations are good policies and good politics.
Anthony Johnson
Anthony, a longtime cannabis law reform advocate, was Chief Petitioner and co-author of Measure 91, Oregon's cannabis legalization effort. He served as director of both the New Approach Oregon and Vote Yes on 91 PACs, the political action committees responsible for the state's legalization campaign. As director of New Approach Oregon, Anthony continues to work towards effectively implementing the cannabis legalization system while protecting small business owners and the rights of patients. He sits on the Oregon Marijuana Rules Advisory Committee and fights for sensible rules at the legislature as well as city councils and county commissions across the state. Anthony helps cannabis business comply with Oregon's laws and advises advocates across the country. He also serves as content director of both the International Cannabis Business Conference and the Oregon Marijuana Business Conference, helping share the vision of moving the cannabis industry forward in a way that maintains the focus on keeping people out of prison and protecting patients. He was a member of the Oregon Health Authority Rules Advisory Committee, assisting the drafting of the administrative rules governing Oregon’s state-licensed medical marijuana facilities. He first co-authored and helped pass successful marijuana law reform measures while a law student at the University of Missouri-Columbia School of Law. He passed the Oregon Bar in 2005 and practiced criminal defense for two years before transitioning to working full-time in the political advocacy realm. His blogs on Marijuana Politics are personal in nature and don't speak for or reflect the opinions of any group or organization.
