The Marijuana Policy Initiative

Prevent Don't Promote Drug Use–Do You Want More Marijuana in Your Community or Less?

A volunteer non-partisan coalition of people from across the US and Canada who have come to understand the negative local-to-global public health and safety implications of an organized, legal, freely-traded, commercialized and industrialized marijuana market.

Hillary on Marijuana — Selling out the Village?

Hillary on Marijuana-- Selling Out the Village?

Hilllary knows full well it takes a village to raise a child. It also takes a village, and courageous leadership to keep kids off drugs. Pandering to those who would profit from the manufacture of addicts in order to get elected, is shameful.

She wrote the book on it, but will Hillary Clinton remember that it takes a village to raise a healthy child? And that the village is decidedly healthier with fewer drugs?

She is one smart cookie. And she didn’t spend her time at Wellesley College subtracting IQ points. Hillary says she didn’t use marijuana then, and won’t use marijuana now.

In 2012 findings from the most robust longitudinal study ever done on of the impacts of marijuana use over a lifetime showed clear evidence of an 8 point drop in IQ for marijuana users who began using in adolescence and persisted in using through their late 30’s. That’s a bigger drop in IQ than is caused by lead poisoning–a substance banned in our homes because of this risk.

Marijuana legalization/commercialization enthusiasts may think a liberal candidate will support their version of drug policy reform as drug legalization political funders drive messaging which pushes up demand and use. But Hillary wrote the book on what it takes for a village to raise a healthy child (It Takes A Village By Hillary Rodham Clinton, 1996).  Local pot shops are decidedly not in that village.

What we are seeing in Colorado in the wake of pot legalization is not good. The third Rocky Mountain HIDTA Report shows indicators of public health and safety moving in the wrong direction on every one of the eight priorities in enforcing the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) against marijuana-related conduct cited by the U.S. Department Of Justice (Cole Memo) as clear reasons to intervene in that state’s pot commercialization program.

ER visits for adverse reactions to marijuana’s are up significantly. Child exposures to the drug are up. Elementary age children have brought marijuana to school to sell. Illegal drug diversion from Colorado has spiked. 83% of school resource officers have reported an increase in marijuana related problems in schools.

The 21-yr-old age limit for sale and use of the drug is meaningless. Society is a porous phenomenon. Where there is more pot, more young people are exposed to it. And those exposures come with a price.

Teen use of marijuana has drifted back to a 30-year high. And this time around kids are using a plant genetically modified to multiply drug potency to levels resembling nothing which could ever have existed in nature. The developing adolescent brain — which is under construction through age 25 — is particularly susceptible to addictive agents. One in six adolescents who use 21st century marijuana develop dependence syndrome. For Moms in the village, that’s a little like watching kids play Russian roulette — not a welcome new normal for hometown or neighborhood life.

There is near universal agreement that incarceration is not the answer for drug abuse problems. Education, prevention and treatment are more effective and more humane.  Penalties do not have to include prison.  But opening the doors to marijuana commercialization through legalization, virtually laying down the welcome mat for the Pied Pipers of Pot to lead a generation into a recreational drug dependence, is not a policy that Americans will warm to once all the evidence is made plain to them. The only winners in that game will be the marijuana millionaires who will be laughing all the way to the bank.

The specter of Big Marijuana following in the footsteps of Big Tobacco and Big Food to wreak havoc on American public health while making profiteers ever richer is a losing political proposition.

A year ago, Hillary appeared to get this. In the face of highly financed pro-marijuana messaging, she took the politically wise position of “wait and see”.

But her rhetoric, in this October 2015 CNN coverage, is becoming wishy washy as she panders to the pro pot interest groups:

“I want to move on to marijuana. You said at the debate that you are not ready to take a position on the legalization of marijuana, but Colorado voters need to know how a Hillary Clinton administration would treat us. Would you promise not to, as Chris Christie said he would, use federal authority to shut down or interfere with the legal marijuana system we have in Colorado?” 

This is how she responded.

I really believe it’s important that states like Colorado lead the way so we can learn what works and what doesn’t work, and I would certainly not want the federal government to interfere with the legal decision made by the people of Colorado, and enforced by your elected officials, as to how you should be conducting this business that you have approved. So, no, I want to give you the space and have other states learn from you about what works and doesn’t work.

Lead the way? Is Colorado some sort of role model for other states? Did we elect them to “lead” the rest of us in this ill-conceived and illegal social experiment?

Hillary Clinton on Marijuana.jpgHer guarded position lacks conviction and leadership on this issue and has resulted in B- rating on the subject by legalization oppostion SAM (Smart Approaches to Marijuana).  Politicians on both sides who pander to the pro-pot crowd and act like drug legalization is a petri dish of democracy are tiresome. See how the other candidates rank29Oct2015-SAM-presidential-scorecard-updated-for-distribution
.

If experimentation is the cool thing, why don’t we get rid of all federal laws – drugs, guns, immigration, environment, commerce, ​ taxes, ​constitution . . . and let everyone ​tryout whatever works for them?

People can be grossly ignorant of the facts, purposely naive, or simply willing to say anything to get elected – anything – even if it harms the country as a whole.

We deserve better, and we should reject politicians of both parties who are willing to sell out our country for the benefit of a few who revel in addiction for profit schemes.   Public health stats already show this  drugs negatively impact the most vulnerable — the young and the poor — at the greatest rates.  Seventy percent of profits come from 30 percent of users who meet the clinical definition for addiction.  These “social experiments” create the most regressive revenue streams yet to be devised.  This is not progress.

​You can see the interview here.

http://www.9news.com/story/news/politics/2015/10/14/watch-live-hillary-cinton-interview/73930200/

Hillary, who wrote the book on “It Takes a Village (to raise a child)” knows full well that the village is safer and healthier when there are fewer drugs there.

Does she know that zip code by zip code, where there is more commercial pot activity, more pot supply and normalization, that we are seeing the highest rates of youth use, abuse and exposures and health harms in the nation?  Colorado is already the clearest example of this massive failure to protect our nation’s children.

Hillary needs to have the courage of her convictions.  If she no longer stands by children and children’s health, perhaps it is time to Move On to a candidate that does.