Marijuana has NOT been recognized for use as an effective medical treatment. In the case Alliance for Cannabis v. DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration), 15 F.3d 1131 (D.C. Cir. 1994), the DEA final order which set forth five necessary characteristics for a drug to qualify as an accepted one for medical use, withstood appellate scrutiny. Within the meaning of the Federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA), a drug must have (1) a known and reproducible chemistry; (2) adequate safety studies; (3) proven efficacy through adequate and well-controlled studies; (4) acceptance by qualified experts; and (5) widely available scientific evidence. Marijuana Scheduling Petition, 57 Fed. Reg. 10, 499 (1992). See also Suzanne D. McGuire, SAN JOAQIN AGRICULTURAL LAW REVIEW, Medical Marijuana: State Law Undermines Federal Marijuana Policy-Is the Establishment Going To The Pot, 1997. Marijuana does not possess any of these characteristics. First, the chemical makeup of marijuana is highly variable making it almost impossible to reproduce in a standardized way. Second, there is a lack of adequate scientific studies on the medical use of marijuana. There are inadequate safety studies on humans. In fact, marijuana is not widely embraced by the medical community. Id at 93. Finally, Marijuana is harmful. According to DEA and others, its harms outweighs its potential benefits. The component THC found in marijuana has been found to cause several side effects: destruction of brain cells, increased rates of miscarriages, decreased birth rates, decreased testosterone levels, impaired sexual development, and weakened immune systems. See Lisa M. Bianculli, SETON HALL LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL, The War on Drugs: Fact, Fiction and Controversy, at 191, 1997. It is for these reasons that marijuana has been classified as a Schedule I drug under the CSA.

Legalization of narcotics and drugs like Marijuana can potentially INCREASE addiction and other problems/crimes. In a study by Dr. Kim Edward Light, Ph.D, "Myths of Drug Legalization (1995)," Dr. Light found that the legalization of drugs like marijuana will increase drug use; fail to eliminate violent crime; fail to decrease the costs of drug use; fail to help the poor; and fail to remove profit motives from the drug trade. See The War on Drugs at 192-193. Furthermore, contrary to the argument made by proponents of legalization, criminalization does not make marijuana use more attractive to young people. In fact, 60-70% of high school students do not use drugs because they are afraid of getting into trouble with law enforcement officials. Id. at 193. Moreover, Dr. Eric Voth, chairman of the International Drug Strategy Institute, stated that discussions of marijuana use for medical purposes and legalization have been a major cause of actually increasing the use of marijuana among teens. Id. at 193-194. Legalization of marijuana in other countries have also been shown to increase the use of drugs among teens. In fact, after Alaskans noticed the increasing trend of marijuana use after legalization, it recriminalized marijuana in 1990. Other countries have "re-toughened" drug laws as well including, Sweden, Spain, Italy and Great Britain. Frank O. Bowman, WASHINGTON AND LEE LAW REVIEW, Playing "21" with Narcotics Enforcement: A Response to Professor Carrington, at 956-957 (1995).

Marijuana has also been labeled as a "gateway" drug. According to the White House conference for a Drug Free America, Final Report 5 (June 1988), a "gateway drug," while it may not have as harsh an effect as other "hard" drugs, it does often lead new users to experiment with stronger and more potent drugs, leading to even more severe consequences.

Finally, while proponents of legalizing drugs argue that legalization will make drugs less expensive, resulting in a decrease in the crime rate, the facts are that legalizing drugs will not get rid of the black market unless drugs are legalized for everyone, in every state. Furthermore, it could actually cost more to legalize drugs than to fund the "war on drugs" because society will have to bare the cost of treating those hurt from extensive drug use and bear the cost of decreased productivity in the workplace.

Legalization of Marijuana - leaving decision up to the states - would be an administrative nightmare. In his article, Playing "21" with Narcotics Enforcement: A Response to Professor Carrington, Frank O. Bowman analyzes the potential problems of legalizing marijuana and other drugs in various states, if an amendment was passed releasing federal control over drug regulation. Bowman concludes that this would result in even more chaos. According to Bowman, there is no rational way to create a single-state market for an "intensely pleasurable, fungible, and easily concealable product like recreational drugs." Further, what happens to those states who do not want drugs within their boundaries? Bowman argues that allowing some states to have drugs will trample on the rights of those who do not want drugs because nearby states having a "supermarket" for drugs would almost certainly have a negative impact on the drug-free states.

Finally, what would happen to all those previously convicted for drug possession, use, and/or sale currently in prison. Would all of them be released retroactively? Would this result be good for society? This is the type of world proponents of legalized marijuana hope for. As a concerned member of American society, we hope that you will seriously consider arguments on both sides and lobby for the continuation of the successful war on drugs in America.