norml23 - Page 65

Page 65 Previous , Next , Original Image
Return to Index

 physicians, and patients. This aspect of a reschedu[ing decision cannot
 be ignored. At least one expert has stated:
 Based on my experience, knowledge and
 observations, I believe that madjuana's present
 classification as a Schedule I drug is a major
 factor in discouraging research and in preventing
 medical access to the drug. It is my belief that
 this classification is causing irreparable harm to
 NORML members and members of the public at large.
 Affidavit of Alice Mo O'Leary, filed in NORML w DEA.
 The difficulties which researchers and physicians have in
 obtaining marijuana because of its classification in Schedule I of the
 CSA were discussed at both CSAC meetings by witnesses and members of
 the Committee. See, Transcript of November 16, 1977 meeting, remarks of
 Committee member Dro Chades R. Schuster (at pgso .1 07-8, 127); remarks
 of Committee member Dr. E. Leong Way (at pgs. 143-44); remarks of Dr.
 Richard Ciout, Director of FDA's Bureau of Drugs (at pgs. 31,35);
 and remarks of Tom Collier, counsel for Robert Randall (at pgs. 48°49)
 HEW states that "FDA and other units of the Department have
 already acted to facilitate research with these-substances by other
 means," 44 Fed. Reg. at 36127 CoL 3, but HEW provides no support for
 this statement° The O'Leary Affidavit indicates that FDA and other
 federal agencies are major impediments to obtaining access to
 marijuana, citing the findings contained in a number of the state
 marijuana laws and reports by state agencies. Id., at pgs. 3-6, 9-1 i.
 It should also be emphasized that the federal agencies have not
 rejected the NORML petition three times without making the findings
 Congress required° C_eafly, the DEA has grossly abused its discretion.
 Finally, defendant would note that HEW's findings on Section
 202(b) totally ignored the criteria relative to "potential for abuse."
 This Js the first criterion of each of the five ScheduJes, and it was
 describod as "a key criterion for controlling a substance" in the House
 Report, H.R. Rep. No. 91_t444 at P9o 4601o HEW's findings on
 marijuana's "potential for abuse" were limited to :Section 201(c), but
 additional findings must be made under Section 202(b). In making these
 findings, HEW should have consulted the reports and studies referred to
 above, and should have evaluated "potential for abuse" in terms of
 risks to the individual and society°

Previous , Next , Return to Index