Dailey 1

Melissa Dailey
Alison Fernley
English 1010 Section 63
14 December 2015
No More Reefer Madness
Legalizing marijuana, both on the medicinal and recreational levels, has recently seen a
lot of progress throughout the nation. With the latest momentum in legalization, it has become a
popular topic in the media and politics. Ask any American citizen, and more than likely they will
currently have an opinion on the subject. Going back in history, prior to 1937, marijuana was
freely bought, sold, grown and smoked in the United States. With the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937,
on a federal level it became illegal to buy, sell, grow or ingest it, with consequences such as,
severe financial penalties and incarceration. The act originated from fears of a criminal element
sneaking into the country, in the form of Mexican immigrants. Mexican people were accused of
being addicted to marijuana, and the substance itself was credited with making people become
violent and insane, a condition labeled reefer madness. Moving forward to 1970, congress
classified marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug, establishing it as a dangerous, addictive drug with no
medicinal benefits. A solid debate over the legalization of marijuana has been ongoing since the
classification was established. In California, marijuana achieved almost complete legal status by
1976. Possession was no longer a felonious crime in the state, and hemp could be cultivated
without restriction. Still to this day, marijuana remains at the federal level, illegal to possess, sell,
grow and ingest. At the state level, many have progressed to achieve medical and recreational
legal status. As of 2015, twenty-three states and Washington D.C. have laws legalizing marijuana
in some form (Stingl and Alexander).

Dailey 2
Growing up in a suburb of Detroit, I have had a lot of exposure to marijuana. From
friends and family who smoked it recreationally, to my own my brother who used it to treat some
of the symptoms of Crohns disease. My observation of the use I witnessed never led me to
believe that it was a dangerous or addictive drug. In fact, in my brothers case, he noted and was
also noted in a recent CNN article, that inhaled cannabis alleviates pain associated with Crohns
disease, decreases diarrhea and helped with weight gain. He never became addicted, or ever
experienced reefer madness. All of the people I know that have consumed or continue to
consume weed, lead healthy, successful and productive lives. However, when I moved to Utah,
overall many of the conversations Ive had with people were not as open to the use of marijuana.
As of late, I overheard a conversation in my office where it was quoted Smoking weed will
make you stupid. The overall view in Utah has led me to question my view related to my
experiences and prompted me to pick the topic for this paper. Should marijuana be legalized,
and, if so, to what level? Recreational or medical?
There are a number of large organizations against the legalization of marijuana, in any
form, one of those groups being CALM (Citizens Against the Legalization of Marijuana). CALM
claims that the legalization of marijuana will result in an increase of the need for law
enforcement. Growers and dispensaries selling medical marijuana are doing so on a cash basis
and are not paying taxes, as is noted in the law. It becomes impossible to track sales unless it is
investigated by law enforcement, adding another burden on law enforcement and their already
stretched budgets.
Arguing in favor of prohibition, Charles Stimson vehemently opposes legalization. As
many in the opposition stance assert, weed is a harmful substance to the body and mind, highly
addictive and impairs bodily and mental functions. It is believed that the health risks of use far

Dailey 3
outweigh any benefit, including compromised immune system, increase in heart attack and short
term memory loss. The statements would alarm me and I would use caution or not use at all,
knowing the risks I was taking with my life. However, isnt that very similar to any prescription
drug commercial you see on TV today? If you take this prescription drug, it may cause seizures,
dry mouth, heart palpitations, headache, nausea, irritability, fatigue, and so on and so on.
Marijuana seems to be on a similar level as many of the regularly prescribed drugs.
On the other side of the argument, those groups in favor of both recreational and
medicinal, emphasize how the current legalization programs have generated substantial revenue
in tax dollars. In the states where medical marijuana has been legal for a number of years, they
are reporting great tax revenue on both the city and state level. The extra revenue, dependent on
the location, is being designated for infrastructure, education, substance abuse programs, and
administration costs of medical marijuana programs. Between the reports that the programs are
running smoothly, and the additional tax revenue, medical marijuana implementation is proving
to be a successful market. Not only do they generate extra tax dollars, but there are a number of
jobs created, from accountants, security companies, bakeries, and delivery services, amongst
others (Cooper).
The 1937 prohibition of marijuana has been compared to the prohibition of alcohol.
Alcohol prohibition was intended to reduce crime and social problems and to improve the health
of the nation (Rich and Alexander). Being regarded as a failure of American policy, it actually
saw the creation of organized crime, an overall increase in alcohol consumption and without
regulation, a more potent and dangerous alcohol. Those arguing in favor of recreational
marijuana, have noted much of the same with the 1937 prohibition, with organized crime as it is
related to marijuana distribution and sales, and an increased potency without regulation. Should

Dailey 4
marijuana prohibition cease, a significant decrease in organized crime would follow, creating less
of a burden on law enforcement. Regulations on the potency and dosage of marijuana would
lessen the possibility of adverse side effects.
NORML (National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws) established in 1970,
is the voice in public policy debate for Americans opposing marijuana prohibition. Quoted from
their website NORML believes that the time has come to amend criminal prohibition and
replace it with a system of legalization, taxation, regulation, and education. In support of their
belief, they report that over 100 million Americans have used marijuana, and one in ten use it on
a regular basis. That is an astounding number, 31.8 million people consume marijuana regularly.
Criminal prohibition does not discourage people from using marijuana, nor does it reduce its
accessibility. The severe enforcement of the current policies and laws impacts the lives and
careers of folks who choose to use a substance to relax, proven to be safer than alcohol.
On October 21, 2015 Gallup poll reported that fifty-eight percent of Americans support
the legalization of marijuana. The support has seen a consistent increase over the last 46 years.
1969 was the first poll reflecting only a twelve percent support of Americans. Why has that
number changed to over half of Americans in support? I suspect that education on the subject
may to blame, and removing the stigma that was assigned so many years ago.
Motivated by various reasons, there are five interest groups spending big money on
lobbying against marijuana legalization. The groups named are the alcohol and beer companies,
police unions, private prison corporations, prison guard unions and pharmaceutical corporations.
According to the article Money, Not Morals, Drives Marijuana Prohibition Movement from
opensecrets.org, these groups spent approximately 417.1 million dollars on lobbying efforts in

Dailey 5
2013. Money in those amounts would seem to be a surefire way to derail the legislative efforts to
push legalization.
It may be easy to read in the title, but I feel that the hype and stigma that marijuana
garners is unnecessary and somewhat hypocritical, especially when compared to legal
prescription drugs and alcohol. Although I do not use marijuana, the research I have completed
reinforces my original opinion that marijuana has many more beneficial components, as
compared to the risks. When compared to alcohol, I am certain that it presents fewer risks and
consequences. Alcohol is a legal intoxicating, psychoactive drug that is managed by regulation
and policy. Is it a perfect system? Absolutely not. I would agree that the regulation of legal
recreational or medical marijuana will not be, as well. The programs that would be implemented
will need trial and error to find a balance to meet the needs of the American citizens. I say
remove the strict enforcement currently in place for prohibition, and move that enforcement to
regulate legal medical and recreational marijuana. In terms of use and driving, that should never
be an option. Strict enforcement should be established in just the same way as alcohol. Any
advertising campaigns and PSA announcements should include marijuana use as a zero tolerance
when it comes to driving.
With it hitting so close to home, there is no question for me that medical marijuana
legalization should be passed on a federal level. Many Americans would have another option to
treat pain, and other symptoms related to many diseases and conditions. When it comes to pain
management, marijuana is a far better option to opiates. Opiates are highly addictive and can
easily lead to heroin addiction. I have seen and heard that story far too many times.
It is clear with the legislation proposals from state to state and the current legalization
status throughout the nation, that America is ready for a change in this arena. My hope is that

Dailey 6
Big Money lobbying does not hamper a movement that is in full momentum. There are many
that truly need marijuana as a treatment option, and many who desire the pursuit to find
relaxation on their own terms.

Works Cited
Bentsen, Kendall. "Money, Not Morals, Drives Marijuana Prohibition Movement." Opensecrets
RSS. 5 Aug. 2014. Web. 12 Dec. 2015.
Christensen, Jen. "10 Diseases Where Medical Marijuana Could Have Impact - CNN.com."
CNN. Cable News Network, 16 Apr. 2015. Web. 29 Nov. 2015.
Dilley, Sara. "The Top 5 Industries Lobbying Against Cannabis Legalization Will Infuriate You."
Leafly. Leafly, 21 Jan. 2015. Web. 12 Dec. 2015.
Stimson, Charles Cully. Legalizing Marijuana: Why Citizens Should Just Say NO
heritage.org 13 September 2010
Stingl, Rich, and Alexander, Alex K. "Legalization of Marijuana." Salem Press, 2013. Web. 29
Nov. 2015.
"Take Action." Americans for Safe Access. Web. 29 Nov. 2015.
"Welcome." CALM USA. Web. 29 Nov. 2015.
Cooper, Michael. "Struggling Cities Turn to a Crop for Cash." The New York Times. The New
York Times, 11 Feb. 2012. Web. 29 Nov. 2015.
"'Medical' Marijuana: 10 Health Benefits That Legitimize Legalization." International Business
Times. 8 Aug. 2012. Web. 29 Nov. 2015.

Dailey 7
"In U.S., 58% Back Legal Marijuana Use." Gallup.com. 21 Oct. 2015. Web. 30 Nov. 2015.
"NORML.org - Working to Reform Marijuana Laws." NORML.org - Working to Reform
Marijuana Laws. Web. 30 Nov. 2015.

Dailey 8
1. Describe the feedback you got on your presentation and on your rough draft during peer
review. Give specific details. How did your revise your paper using this feedback?
I didnt receive any feedback on the rough draft paper. With the feedback I received on the
presentation, I made sure I added the names of the medical organizations and added
information to support recreational legalization.
2. Who is your think tank audience or organization? How did you revise your paper to make it
more appealing and persuasive to the think tank as your audience? Give details,
especially pointing out where in the paper we can see how you are addressing the
organization you have chosen.
My think tank audience would be a liberal, progressive one in support of legalization. The
rhetorical appeals used were primarily logos and ethos. I supported my paper with facts
and data, and from reliable, trustworthy sources.
3. How well do you think you have met the criteria for this paper? Give me details and point to
places where I can see you meeting the criteria
As far as the content and structure is concerned, I am sure that I met the requirements. I pulled
from many various sources, quoted sparingly, used my own voice to synthesize the
information and reflected on whether I opposed or agreed with the information found.