Hillary Clinton's Pledge To Reschedule Marijuana If Elected Could Backfire

Katelyn Baker

Well-Known Member
In less than three months' time, tens of millions of American voters will head to the polls to decide who will become the 45th president of the United States of America. Who their selection will be remains a mystery.

Marijuana is breaking barriers this election cycle

However, the candidates aren't the only thing voters are interested in this election cycle; they want to hear about the topics, too. For the first time ever, marijuana is taking center stage as a major issue. According to Gallup's 2015 national poll, 58% of respondents support the nationwide legalization of marijuana, up from around 33% just a decade ago. A similar poll conducted by CBS News last year showed that 84% of American favored the legalization of cannabis for medical purposes.

Americans, as a whole, are eager to see Capitol Hill change its stance on marijuana. Capitol Hill, however, isn't as excited. In fact, earlier this month the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency released a report detailing why it would not change marijuana from its current schedule 1 status. Schedule 1 drugs are deemed to have no medical benefits and are thus illegal. In its report, the DEA cited the potential for abuse and the still-unknown properties and risks of marijuana as its reasoning for not changing marijuana's long-standing schedule 1 classification.

Clinton throws her support behind rescheduling cannabis

But if Hillary Clinton is elected as the next president, changes may be coming to the cannabis industry. Based on statements from Clinton and her campaign, Clinton plans to see that marijuana is rescheduled to a schedule 2 drug if she is elected, effectively recognizing that marijuana has medical benefits and opening the door for researchers and drugmakers to research cannabis for medical ailments. Clinton has pointed to the success of individual states managing their own marijuana industries, along with those states' potential as "laboratories of democracy" to gauge whether further federal action should be taken down the road.

Because Clinton has laid out a well thought out approach on marijuana - even if it is vastly different from her views eight year ago when she originally ran for the Oval Office - it could net the Democratic candidate quite a few voters who favor legalization. Don't forget that rescheduling cannabis to schedule 2 would immediately allow doctors across the country to prescribe the drug for approved ailments.

Yet the irony is that Clinton's push to reschedule cannabis could actually wind up backfiring on the industry.

Rescheduling marijuana could backfire big-time

For as long as I can recall, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) and other non-profit organizations have been pushing for lawmakers to remove marijuana's schedule 1 status, effectively legalizing and decriminalizing the drug at the federal level. If Clinton has her way, NORML and its peers would get that first step toward a possible full legalization. However, the move to schedule 2 could come at a mighty cost to the cannabis industry.

Current therapies that bear the schedule 2 designation include Oxycontin, Percocet, and morphine, to name a few. While these narcotics can be prescribed by a physician for pain management, they're also tightly regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The FDA is the regulatory body responsible for establishing medicinal efficacy, approving medicines, regulating the manufacturing process of drugs, and overseeing the accuracy of the marketing and package labeling of therapeutics. Moving marijuana to a schedule 2 classification would, in effect, move medical marijuana into the pharmaceutical business and place the industry under the tight and costly rules and regulations of the FDA.

For example, the FDA could require all packaging and labeling be run by it prior to retail sale in medical marijuana shops. Perhaps that's not so bad, but it could certainly slow down the process through which medical marijuana makes it to store fronts.

Secondly, the FDA could tightly regulate the manufacturing process of medical marijuana grow farms. This could include ensuring that THC content from one grow to the next remains consistent and within certain guidelines. If growers aren't abiding by the strict guidelines laid out by the FDA, then they could be subject to fines, and their crops may not make it to medical marijuana dispensaries.

Yet the most damaging aspect of a schedule 2 designation could be the possibility of clinical trials. The FDA is under no obligation to take the cannabis industry at its word that marijuana has a medically beneficial effect on epilepsy or pain, as an example. Instead, the FDA could require that medical marijuana growers, processors, and retailers prove that medical marijuana can meet these primary endpoints in a traditionally run and supervised clinical trial. Clinical trials can take a long time, and they can be extremely costly. Filing for drug approval alone is a significant added cost.

FDA regulation over the marijuana industry could be a nightmare. Smaller marijuana players that can't afford the added regulatory costs could go out of business, while bigger businesses that can absorb those costs could take over. In theory, a rescheduling could give investors more legitimate ways to take part in marijuana's growth story - but it could also inhibit competition and thereby raise the price of medical marijuana for consumers.

At the end of the day, liberating marijuana from its schedule 1 status could do more harm than good.

gettyiamges.jpg


News Moderator: Katelyn Baker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Hillary Clinton's Pledge To Reschedule Marijuana If Elected Could Backfire
Author: Sean Williams
Contact: The Motley Fool
Photo Credit: Getty Images
Website: The Motley Fool
 
Could hurt? More like will hurt. Let's not be stupid here. Hillary Clinton is in the pockets of big Pharma and the only reason that you say that she would change it from schedule want to schedule two is to placate the Bernie Sanders supporters that Sanders told to go vote for Hillary Clinton. Presidential candidates are under absolutely no obligation to make good on their campaign promises so she doesn't even need to change the schedule. She could just say that she got overruled , which with the Republican-controlled Senate, she likely would be.

And let's say that she does an executive order. The problem with that is that those expire the moment the president leaves office, so at most the Executive Order would only hold her 4–8 years before expiring and, assuming that nothing is done in the meantime, it would go back to being schedule one.

On top of that, as the article points out, although I don't know why they don't state how long it actually takes for a clinical trial, click on trails can run as long as 10 years, and we consider how afraid the big Pharma is of cannabis, you can bet that they would insist, through their FDA puppets, that they would put a maximum amount of time on the research, i.e. 10 years. In short, even if Hillary Clinton were to make cannabis schedule two on day one, she would be two years out of office assuming she had a two term administration before anything came out of the studies. I've said it before, Hillary Clinton is no friend of cannabis and if people are smart, they're going to start buying of seeds and making their own banks.

And now on the other side of The aisle , Donald Trump.
I'm sorry how much flip-flopping and inept insanity that is coming out of this guy's mouth, I wouldn't even trust him with the pen to sign any bill into law, considering how crazy the guy is, he likely poke his eye out before handing the pen over to pens and telling him to sign it while he goes back to "making America great again".

I'm serious, if your grower even in a legal state, stock up on your seeds. What the article stated is the BEST case scenario, the worst case is that Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump quietly pass a law that allows The government to open up/destroy any packaging that's coming into the country that the suspect comes from a country with known seed vendors. If you think I'm being hyperbolic, just remember, big Pharma is losing millions to cannabis and likely candidate who will win the election is deep in their pockets, do you really think it is out of the realm of possibility that such a law would not be quietly passed?
 
Sounds like Hillary is purchasing votes to me.

Now that the debates are coming Clinton sees it time to start talking to make herself look more reasonable (to be honest, what I left in my toliet this morning I'd more reasonable than her opponent).

Frankly I don't trust either politician (sorry Trump supporters, trumps telling you what you want to hear, there's no possible way that he can deliver on a fraction of it, i.e. how politician talks ), his base is too volatile With some pretty fundamentalist elements that I can't help but suspect he won't decriminalize or legalize marijuana without risking losing his support.

Sanders was our candidate. He was the first to proudly announce it to entire group at a rally, all the other politicians saw how popular that was and then jumped on board. I hate to say it but the next administration is not going to be any friend to our plant with Clinton, as this article points out, being a likely enemy. in rather curious as to how the blow back eill be if it is indeed moved to schedule to allow in the pharmaceutical companies to seize it for 10 years on the name of " research " for them to come back 10 years later saying " sorry we can't recommend it because the THC and CBN varies from plant to plant but guess what we cooked up in our labs! $150 a pill after insurance and a fraction of the benefits courtesy of Monsanto. ( i'm sorry if I'm coming off paranoid, but Clinton's ties to the big Pharma, her saying that she will move cannabis to schedule two, and the rumors that of been flying around for a couple years now of Monsanta oh secretly researching the genome of cannabis, all they would need is time and schedule two would give it to them.)
 
The Democrats have had several chances, including getting on board with the CAREERS act. They have not, so far. As long as the 99% are the ones that want the cannabis situation change, we will not see it changed. Too many are willing to stick their heads in the ground when it comes to the real situation concerning the danger of cannabis, as a recreational drug, the Democrats included! They would rather drive us to drink!
 
Back
Top Bottom