Pubdate: Fri, 07 Feb 2014
Source: Oregonian, The (Portland, OR)
Copyright: 2014 The Oregonian
Contact:  http://www.oregonlive.com/oregonian/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/324
Author: Noelle Crombie

MARIJUANA NEWS: U.S. REP. EARL BLUMENAUER BLASTS FEDERAL DRUG POLICY OFFICIAL

U.S. Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., took one of the White House's top 
drug policy advisors to task at a Congressional hearing earlier this 
week for failing to answer questions about how marijuana's health 
risks compare to meth and cocaine.

Michael Botticelli, deputy director of the Office of National Drug 
Policy, appeared Tuesday before the House Committee on Oversight and 
Government Reform. Blumenauer asked Botticelli a series of pointed 
questions beginning with the number of overdose deaths attributed to 
marijuana in the past five years.

(Botticelli's boss, Gil Kerlikowske, the director of the Office of 
National Drug Policy, is in Oregon today. In an interview Thursday 
with The Oregonian, Kerlikowske declined to comment on the exchange 
between Botticelli and Blumenauer.)

Blumenauer's questioning begins at the 30:55 minute mark.

Botticelli said he was "not sure" of the number of marijuana overdose 
deaths. Blumenauer, an outspoken advocate for marijuana policy reform 
at the federal level, said experts "whose judgment I respect" say 
they don't know of any.

Then he asked about how marijuana compares with other illicit drugs. 
Marijuana, along with heroin and LSD, is considered a Schedule I 
substance, which the government classifies as "dangerous," lacking 
medicinal value and prone to abuse.

Methamphetamine and cocaine are listed as Schedule II substances, 
also considered dangerous, but less prone to abuse than those in Schedule I.

"What is more dangerous and addictive: methamphetamine and cocaine or 
marijuana?" Blumenauer asked.

"I don't think anyone would dispute the fact that there is relative 
toxicity related to those drugs," Botticelli said.

Blumenauer pressed him, saying the question was a simple one. 
Botticelli said the comparison "minimizes the harm."

"No," said Blumenauer, "I am not trying to minimize the harm. ... I 
want to know which is more dangerous and addictive."

"Let me just say your equivocation right there, being unable to 
answer something clearly and definitively when there is unquestioned 
evidence to the contrary, is why young people don't believe the 
propanganda, why they think it's benign," Blumenauer said.

"If a professional like you cannot answer clearly that meth is more 
dangerous than marijuana, which every kid on the street knows, which 
every parent knows, if you can't answer that, maybe that's why we are 
failing to educate people about the dangers.

"I don't want kids smoking mariuana, but if the deputy director of 
drug policy can't answer that question, how do you expect high school 
kids to take you seriously?" 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D