High Stakes: America’s Love and Hate of Cannabis

High Stakes: America’s Love and Hate of Cannabis

By Daniel Hernan

Marijuana is the most widely used federally illegal drug in the United States; 48.2 million people, or about 18% of Americans, used it at least once in 2019. 8 Despite its present day illegality at the Federal level, early American Colonies, including Massachusetts, Virginia, and Connecticut mandated that farmers grow hemp, a plant of the same family, to sustain their booming textile industry. 9 Later, in 1839, physician William O’Shaughnessy introduced a cannabis plant with more concentrated levels of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) to the United States. This strain is responsible for producing psychoactive effects on people who consume it. 10 The late 1800s saw a significant increase in the acceptance of cannabis for various medical treatments such as stomach aches and infections, with a majority of pharmacists prescribing it for at least one course of treatment. 11 Yet, by the 1910s, aggressive policies targeted the sale of all drugs. Most notably, the Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914 made it a crime to consume opium, heroin, morphine, and cocaine, and created the legal framework for gradually outlawing cannabis possession throughout the US. Though cannabis restrictions were implemented by the US government throughout the 20th century, social movements rooted in nativism, racism, and erroneous fears of moral deterioration were ultimately responsible for the popularization and implementation of these restrictive policies.

The five-leafed hemp plant commonly mistaken for modern day weed originated in Central Asia. Colonization introduced the plant to Europe and then to the Americas, with nearly all Spanish and English colonies cultivating hemp for its fibers. These fibers were utilized for rope, sails, and fabrics in the Southwest Spanish Missions. The Northeast also had demand for

8

Center for Behavioral Health Statistics

9

Onion, Sullivan, Mullen. “Marijuana”

10

Desjardins, “6,000 Year History”

11

Onion, Sullivan, Mullen. “Marijuana”

35

hemp as population growth led to a growing textile industry which often relied on the easy-to-grow and widely available hemp plant. Hemp is a strain of cannabis that the US Government states must have less than 0.3% THC concentration. Above this level, cannabis is classified as marijuana. People began to seek out these higher levels of THC in the 19th century as Western medicine began embracing cannabis as a remedy for illness. The increased usage of cannabis in medicine was a factor in the passage of the Pure Food and Drug Act, which required manufacturers to specify ingredients and regulated the previously unchecked industry. 12 Then, in 1917, the US Treasury Department expressed concern over “Mexicans and sometimes Negroes and lower class whites” smoking cannabis despite the fact that, by the start of the 1920s, the US had become a net exporter of cannabis to Mexico. 13 Nonetheless, cannabis was viewed as a foreign product and it became known as marijuana throughout the US due to its affiliation with Spanish speaking countries. An influx of Mexican immigration during the Mexican Revolution of 1910-1917 further reinforced Americans’ negative attitudes toward cannabis. 14 These factors created fertile grounds for anti-Mexican sentiment to blossom, and in 1929, when the Great Depression began, Americans seemed to have already chosen a scapegoat for the collapsing economy.

As economic conditions rapidly deteriorated, a broad nativist movement lobbied politicians to persecute foreigners under the presumption that they were taking jobs from “real Americans”: this newly established rationale provided political support for the sweeping illegality of cannabis across the US. The stock market crash, the collapse of major industries, and skyrocketing unemployment created a large degree of uncertainty and insecurity among

12

Mohebbi, Greenberg, Speir, “Crafting”

13

Waxman, “Surprising Link”

14

Onion, Sullivan, Mullen. “Marijuana.”

36

Americans. The 1930s was a period of tremendous social upheaval. The widespread suffering of Americans drove out immigration activists and ushered in a new era of nativism. Since Mexicans were held responsible for weakening the economy, and they, along with Indians, were profoundly associated with weed, Americans became embittered with the substance as well. Mexicans in particular, even those with American citizenship, were expelled from the US under the superstition that they were causing White America’s grievances. 15 Furthermore, the change from the name “cannabis” to the Spanish word “marijuana” was used to emphasize differences in cultures. The debate surrounding cannabis wasn’t rooted in science and facts. It was rooted in racism.

The nontraditional nature of cannabis became associated with a general distrust of minorities. 16 Through views of White racial superiority, underlined by derogatory symbolizations of cannabis, a link was constructed between the economic slump and the presence of Mexicans. Particularly, Americans in the South and West sought to distinguish themselves from “dirty” behaviors like smoking weed. Indeed, even the California State Board of Pharmacy wrote of a fear that the recent wave of immigration from India had increased cannabis consumption and that this “very undesirable lot” was “initiating our Whites into this habit.” 17 The hypocrisy of this uniquely American reaction is that Mexico had implemented a full ban on cannabis in 1920, long before the US had. 18 Evidence from the period indicates that Mexican smugglers bought cannabis at US pharmacies to transport back to Mexico for illegal sale. 19 Americans insisted that cannabis

15

Onion, Sullivan, Mullen. “Marijuana.”

16

Goode, “Marijuana and Policies”

17

Waxman, “Surprising Link”

18

Waxman, “Surprising Link”

19

Waxman, “Surprising Link”

37

was a foreign threat, and used it as rationale for the deportation of hundreds of thousands of Mexican-American citizens and otherwise legal immigrants across the Southern Border. 20 Policies rooted in lies spread quickly across a prejudiced public, resulting in the violation of rights for millions of racial minorities.

Throughout US history, anti-cannabis movements have also found continued support from the perception that America was morally tainted by widespread drug use. Those who saw alcohol and drug use as evil supported the prohibition movement of the early 20th century. As the first commissioner of the US Treasury Department's Federal Bureau of Narcotics, Harry Anslinger stated, "There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing result from marijuana use. This marijuana induces white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others." 21 He, among others, blamed drug use for the increased acceptance of biracial relationships which was considered sinful at the time. Additionally, directly referencing the Devil while grouping marijuana use with new styles of music and other forms of expression points to the intense moral push back Americans had. It perfectly epitomizes how the response to social change by traditionalists often came at the expense of access to cannabis. Many believed that cannabis was similar and related to the increase in the sexualization of entertainment. For example, the presence of Flapper Girls in jazz clubs was a threat to orthodox Americans in favor of women remaining under the strict control of a patriarch and revealing little when it came to fashion.

20

Waxman, “Surprising Link”

21

Sraders, “History of Marijuana”

38

The rise in cannabis consumption was also grouped with the rise in civil rights reform, an issue many Republican and Democratic conservatives vehemently opposed. Anslinger's impression of cannabis was riveted with nativist and racist bigotry, yet it was widely supported by Americans because of his notoriety as being the figurehead of the US Prohibition movement. By 1931, 29 states had outlawed cannabis. This social reform movement seeped into federal policy as well with the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937. 22 The new law, apart from outlawing all non-medical uses of marijuana, required all users to seek special approval from the Treasury, pay a tax, and then obtain a stamp to prove legality. 23 The first person to be convicted under the new law received a sentence of four years of hard labor, which was a dramatic increase in the severity of sentences for the sale of marijuana. During this period, the name for cannabis further evolved to reflect the newly racist attitudes of the anti-weed movement. “Locoweed” became the commonplace name for weed; when translated to English from Spanish it means “crazy weed,” clearly a derogatory term. The term created a misplaced view that people who consumed cannabis were not of their right minds and therefore moral deteriorates, a notion that persisted into the 21st century. Journalists popularized these terms in the media while also exaggerating the hazards of addiction to favor anti-drug legislation. 24 Furthermore, “rumors spread that Mexicans were distributing this 'killer weed' to unsuspecting American schoolchildren.” 25 Consequently, a sense of urgency arose which established an unlikely, and diverse political coalition of progressives, the elite, and traditionalists. This coalition joined

22

Onion, Sullivan, Mullen. “Marijuana.”

23

Marshall,”Legalization : A Debate” (31)

24

Marshall,”Legalization : A Debate” (27)

25

Sraders, “History of Marijuana”

39

forces to “cleanse” the US of sins and intentionally ignored the disproportionate effects of these policies on minorities, some going as far as to blame minorities for the persistent use of cannabis.

After the Great Depression, a period of passivity ensued for nearly half a century which came to an end during the 1970s when a new anti-drug movement took hold. Stagflation—the rise in prices accompanied by a recession—became the norm and through the 1960s into the ‘70s, crime rates rose, and social reform movements, such as the Civil Rights Movement, implemented structural changes to US society. Many Americans, mostly on the political right, felt threatened by these issues and sought to blame them on a few key problems. Drugs were principally held liable for these and other changes like increased unemployment rates and the rise in anti-establishment, youth counterculture. These problems were highlighted at the federal level by freshly elected President Richard Nixon. President Nixon passed the Controlled Substances Act in 1970 creating a ranking of drugs from most potential for abuse (Schedule I) to least (Schedule V). In June of 1971, President Nixon gave a four and a half minute speech that marked a watershed moment in the popularization of anti-drug measures. Not only did he announce drug abuse as “public enemy number one,” but he also requested and later received 155 million dollars (1.1 billion dollars adjusted to inflation levels of 2022) to “fight” this War on Drugs. 26 This short press briefing along with the Federal government's freshly enacted drug reform law drove public sentiment even further in support of anti-drug policy.

However, to garner support for the War on Drugs, Nixon and other conservative politicians had to prove that these anti-drug measures would prevent significant societal change in the United States. Accordingly, the War on Drugs took a hard line approach to “solving” drug abuse. For reference, the American Medical Association defined drug abuse as “taking drugs

26

Nixon, Richard. Public Enemy Number One.

40

without professional advice or direction.” 27 Many crimes related to drug usage became grouped together with mandatory minimum prison sentences that overwhelmingly incarcerated lower class, urban, Black and Latino Americans. 28 A study published by the ACLU showed Black people are over four times as likely to be arrested for marijuana possession. 29 All nuance to drug policy was eliminated from US laws in exchange for universal, extreme punishment. For example, cannabis was classified as a Schedule I drug, which outlawed all usage of the substance for medical purposes and further increased sentencing for crimes of possession, sale, and consumption. Other noteworthy Schedule I drugs included LSD and heroin. For reference, cocaine was considered a Schedule II drug, apparently having lower potential for misuse and greater medicinal applications than cannabis. 30 Gradually, the response to truly detrimental and addictive drug abuse became police force and prison time rather than treatment and rehabilitation.

Despite politicians’ attitude that all drugs were equally deadly, destructive, and debilitating, cannabis was, in particular, called out by scientists for being incorrectly categorized. In response to Nixon’s “public enemy number one” speech from 1971 and his support of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, the National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse presented a thorough report called “Marijuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding” to Congress. The commission became known as the “Shafer Commission” because of its chairman: former Pennsylvania Governor and close political ally of President Nixon, Raymond P. Shafer. The “Shafer Commission,” which included medical experts appointed by President Nixon,

27

Goode, “Marijuana and Policies”

28

Laguaite. "Medicine and Health."

29

ACLU, “Marijuana Arrests”

30

Onion, Sullivan, Mullen. “Marijuana.”

41

recommended minor penalties for charges of cannabis possession because of its relatively low addiction levels and near zero overdose rate. Additionally, it advocated for partial prohibition because of its potential adoption as an effective treatment against other medical conditions. 31 It's vital to point out that even scientists closely tied to President Nixon sounded the alarm when it came to the excessively harsh policies being implemented. Cannabis was essentially debunked as a threat to society by researchers, yet popular opinion relished the increase of police budgets and arrests. In fact, “Police officers in Texas claimed that marijuana incited violent crimes, aroused a 'lust for blood' and gave its users 'superhuman strength.'” 32 Americans were enthralled by the false, dangerous narrative of cannabis, and overwhelmingly supported responding to this apparent threat with police force. Even more alarming was the propagation by government officials of the depiction of drug users as Black, Hispanic, poor, and urban. Consequently, a disproportionate number of those convicted for minor drug usage crimes were Americans of color.

In sum, nativism, racism, and fears of moral deterioration fueled misguided public perceptions of cannabis along with popular anti-drug movements, prompting the government to implement restrictions on cannabis. Americans have been “terribly and systematically misled for nearly seventy years” 33 concerning cannabis’ effects on human health. The debate on legalization continues to form a significant topic of conversation in politics. A Californian ballot initiative in 1996 approved Proposition 215, also known as the Compassionate Use Act, which legalized medical marijuana use. This exemplified the national reversal of support for the “War on Drugs,” as President Nixon retained support from Californians through both of his election bids just

31

Goode, “Marijuana and Policies”

32

Sraders, “History of Marijuana”

33

Laguaite. "Medicine and Health."

42

twenty five years earlier. In February of 2009, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that raids on medical marijuana clinics would cease. 34 By 2015, twenty three states had at least partially legalized cannabis, with Alaska, Colorado, Oregon, and Washington legalizing recreational use. 35 Still, in 2016, Attorney General Jeff Sessions implemented stricter policies on cannabis enforcement based on his personal “moral” standing. That year, over 600,000 people were arrested for cannabis offenses, a disproportionate of which were from minority groups. However, this has not changed the upwards trend in support for the legalization of marijuana use which reached 68% in 2021, up from 12% in 1969. 36 This growing, widespread bipartisan support almost guarantees that any future ballot measures will ultimately approve marijuana legalization. The facts are clear: Americans want to legalize weed. How soon this happens depends entirely on the political process’ ability to respond to the popular demand. In July, 2022, Democratic Senate Leader Chuck Schumer introduced a bill that would provide the legal framework to reverse marijuana prohibition at the federal level. Sadly, the lack of data available on the long term effects of marijuana use leaves my generation as a guinea pig generation. While marijuana criminalization led to discriminatory policy, it had simultaneously shielded young people from its dangerous affects. Additionally, the potency or concentration of THC in marijuana has increased substantially over the past decades because of the development of more efficient THC extraction technologies. Again, this feeds into the fear that if the country moved towards full, recreational legalization, young people (and their developing bodies) would face the brunt of these effects. The legalization of cannabis remains the most direct way to uproot racist

34

Laguaite. "Medicine and Health."

35

Mohebbi, Greenberg, Speir, “Crafting”

36

Gallup, “Support for Marijuana””

43

policy, yet we must ensure our country’s public health remains at the forefront of these policychanges.