Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2016

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEMING. I thank my good friend for yielding.

Madam Chairman, years ago, one of the positions I served was as a director for drug addiction and alcoholism, and one of my duties was as a methadone doctor.

This drug is really a new form of methadone. It can be applied and can be employed in the treatment of heroin addiction. But at the end of the day, it too is highly addictive. It is a scheduled drug, and it is abused. So it deserves the same kind of safeguards and protections and oversight as any other addictive drug.

And so if my friends really want to see this used as an effective tool and not itself become a dangerous drug out on the open market being diverted and perhaps even sold on the black market, I suggest that we oppose this amendment and let's continue the good, strong oversight that we have under the CSA.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEMING. Madam Chair, the cultivation of cannabis for industrial purposes is governed by the Controlled Substances Act and permitted pursuant to the registration requirements found in title 21, United States Code.

Let's face it, hemp is very closely related to cannabis. And DEA agents tell us that it is very difficult to detect, determine, and distinguish between hemp and marijuana, so it only makes their job more difficult. However, the Agricultural Act of 2014--and Mr. Massie just referred to this, I believe--permits institutions of higher learning and State departments of agriculture to grow or cultivate industrial hemp as defined in the statute for purposes of research conducted under an agricultural pilot program or other agricultural or academic research.

In short, we are studying it, we are analyzing it, and we are evaluating it, but we don't have the results yet of those studies. I think it would be premature, especially considering the problem with the rapid expansion of the marijuana industry and the problems which I will speak about later this evening with marijuana and abuse of marijuana and the damage to brains of our children and so forth. The last thing I think that we want to do now is to create more problems for enforcement for the DEA.

Madam Chairman, if we are going to study it, let's study it, but I do not believe it is time that we remove these restraints on industrial hemp.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEMING. Madam Chairman, I would just say in conclusion that DEA tells us otherwise, that it is difficult to distinguish. It is a problem for them. They are the ones who have to enforce this. Also, there isn't any product that you can get from hemp. Hemp production, industrial hemp is not abundant in many other ways, whether it is paper, rope, or what have you. So with that, it is not necessary. It is not some vital resource that we can't do without. It does create and complicate problems when it comes to the enforcement of schedule I drugs such as marijuana.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.

First of all, I hear constantly of this idea about individual rights, about the 10th Amendment, et cetera. This was all settled back in 2005 in the Supreme Court with Gonzales v. Raich, which was a 6-3 victory in favor of the government's having preemptive rights when it comes to the drug laws, the CSA. That has been settled. We can claim this over and over again, but bring it back to the Court and see if you can change that.

Now, how is this affecting us in real life? It is now legal in Colorado, but Nebraska and Oklahoma are now suing Colorado. Why? It is because of all of the problems that are developing across the State borders--again, interstate commerce, a big problem.

Let's talk about the huge problem that marijuana represents. First of all, it has no accepted medical use.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEMING. I yield myself an additional 30 seconds.

There are synthetic marijuana equivalents that are useful--yes, indeed--but the drug itself, which is the smokeable part of it, is not safe and has not been accepted.

Here is the thing. It is known to have brain development alterations; schizophrenia and other forms of mental illness, psychosis; heart complications; and an increased risk of stroke.

A study recently found that even casual users experience severe brain abnormalities found on MRIs and that pot smoking leads to the loss of ambition; to lower IQs; and that it impairs attention, judgment, memory, and many other things.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEMING. Let me say, first of all, this whole idea of medical marijuana is a big joke. It is an end run around the laws. There are more pot shops in California than there are Starbucks or McDonald's; okay?

Now, is it really a medical treatment? Well, the AMA says no. The American Society of Addiction Medicine says no. Even the American Glaucoma Society, which is of course in charge of glaucoma treatment, says that this is not a medical treatment for glaucoma. So there is no single approved use of marijuana for medical diseases.

The whole idea about medical marijuana is to get around the laws on legalization or illegalization of marijuana. But make no mistake about it, the most common addiction diagnosis for young people admitted to drug treatment centers is addiction to marijuana. The rate is 9 percent addiction rate in adults; it is 17 percent in young people.

We all know the studies show very clearly that the States that are more permissive have higher addiction and abuse rates than any others. We also know that NIDA tells us that it is a developmental disease. What does that mean? It means the younger a child is exposed to it, the more likely that child will later become an addict to something else, like methamphetamine, prescription drugs, heroin. So if you support this, which is really the legalization of marijuana, then you are really supporting allowing our children to be harmed and addicted to this terrible drug.

Now, I am all in favor of research, and we are in discussions with DEA about allowing it in some way, whether we go to a 1a category to allow such research. Some suggest that it may have some benefit for seizures. That is yet to be seen. Some suggest that it may be beneficial to those who have spastic muscle disease, but there is absolutely no proof of that.

So with that, I urge everyone to oppose this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEMING. Okay. I am not going to dominate the gentleman's time.

This has been under study for over 40 years. My university, the University of Mississippi, has been legally growing pot for over 40 years and studying it, so it has been studied.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chair, I yield myself 2 minutes.

My friend Mr. McClintock makes the point that this should be an experiment within the States, and certainly, that is something that has been a long-held goal and value, but we already have that ongoing.

Today, Colorado, as everyone knows, has legalization of marijuana, notwithstanding what is going on with the Federal Government and its laws, and the information is rolling in, and the information is bad. The black market is worse than ever when it comes to drugs. Interstate commerce has increased, not decreased.

Again, as I stated before, two States, Oklahoma and Nebraska, are now suing Colorado over the bleedover of problems that are occurring. The strength of marijuana is much stronger today in Colorado than it has ever been. The problems are much worse. We are actually seeing related deaths, accidents; and we have even had an overdose death now with the stronger forms of marijuana.

Look, if this is about allowing doctors to work with their patients, let's admit it. We don't allow, as a society, doctors to just do anything with any patient. We do have some guidelines and restrictions.

Furthermore, children are the end result of bad decisions in all this. We know that the more it is in the homes, the more it is going to get into the brains and bloodstream of children.

Again, I will mention the number of problems that are developing from it are growing, mostly from what we are seeing in Colorado. Studies show that MRI scans show, even in casual users, profound brain changes. We see that the area that deals with ambition is being greatly affected, thus, the ambition killer sort of knowledge that we have and understand about this drug.

IQ, studies show a lowering of IQ.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEMING. If the gentleman is yielding to me, I would point out that the Colorado he describes does not exist.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEMING. I yield myself another minute.

What we are finding out from Colorado, we are learning a lot of lessons. One is the way that marijuana is now getting into baked goods, gummy bears. There is a huge spike in emergency room visits, children who are overdosing on marijuana.

Know that if you look, if you actually read what the media says and what the studies show is there are increasing problems in Colorado, not decreasing problems.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEMING. Back to the constitutionality, we may all have different opinions about this, but it has been settled.

The Supreme Court in 2005, Gonzales v. Raich, 6-3, said that the Federal Government does have a right to enforce drug policies and for good reason because we know that drugs cross State lines. It is an interstate commerce issue. What happens in one State affects the other States.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEMING. Again, my good friend from California would suggest that, really, Federal laws have no application, that we should just turn all laws and law enforcement over to the States. That simply isn't the case.

Again, yes, the Federal Government does have jurisdiction. It is called the CSA, the Controlled Substances Act, and it has been around for a long time, and it is enforced by the DEA and many other agencies. I would just say that the gentleman is just flat wrong on that and that the Supreme Court came down on my side.

Again, we can have different opinions, but that is where we are today. I would suggest that perhaps we get the Supreme Court to rule differently if we believe differently.

But again, what is important to me is not the law. What is important to me is what is happening to the children of our Nation, especially Colorado: overdosages, brain changes, loss of IQ, memory loss, and cognitive impairment.

Marijuana smoke has four times the tar of cigarette smoke. Who really believes that we are not going to see an epidemic down the road of lung cancer related to marijuana?

As far as use for medical purposes, again, we don't have a single approved specific use of marijuana for medical purposes. And for heaven's sakes, we know that up to 17 percent of people who use it become addicted to it. So the first rule for us as physicians--and I have been a doctor for 40 years--is first do no harm. Well, we are doing a lot of harm with marijuana by legalizing it and liberalizing its use.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, some of the things that have been said about this are quite true. First of all, it is pronounced--I can't even say it myself. We will say CBD oil for short.

It is not psychoactive, although it is an extract from the plant of marijuana. There have been anecdotal reports that it reduces seizures in kids who have severe seizure disorders, so-called Charlotte's Web. It is actually on fast-track evaluation by the FDA both for safety and for effectiveness. Actually, the early reports are disappointing. Despite the anecdotal reports, they are not finding, thus far, the benefits that have been promised. Also, they are finding, in some cases, pretty severe side effects.

One of the things that hasn't been discussed on this issue is, just as we don't allow people or encourage people, at least, to eat mold in order to get penicillin as an antibiotic for disease, it doesn't make any sense to give a raw plant as a medication. What we do in health care by using the scientific method is to extract the component, make sure we have a precise measurement, fully study it for safety and for efficaciousness, and then we prescribe it under the direction of a physician.

The CBD oil right now is not being produced. It is not in a pill or injectable form or even in a liquid form. It is sort of grown on the side, and people are sort of experimenting with it to see whether it works.

What I would say to my colleagues is let's let this thing play out. Let the FDA finish its fast-track evaluation. If they find it to be efficacious and safe, let them put it in the proper measurement form. Let's make sure we know what all the side effects are. As far as I am concerned, we would make it a nonscheduled drug.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, what my colleagues are suggesting here is that we just pull a plant from someplace or something off the shelf and we give it to children, something that has not been a practice in probably 100 years.

We just don't do it that way. That is why we spend millions, if not billions, of dollars of research to be sure that what we give the public is going to be healthy for them and safe for them.

You may recall a drug that was prescribed for pregnancy, nausea and pregnancy, which was approved back in Europe but not approved here, and we found out that babies were born without arms and legs as a result. Saving children in America--why? Because we waited to be sure that not only was it efficacious, but it was safe.

So I would say to my friends, my heart is in the same place. I want to see treatment for children who may have severe seizure disorders. We have it on a fast track. We may be months away.

But I don't think turning this over to parents and others who may fiddle with it and experiment with it, in essence, making our children guinea pigs, is the right way to go.

There are centers that are doing these studies, and certainly children can go and talk to those doctors, get on their studies, and get the trials. But I would again warn people that the preliminary results are not good, and in some cases we are seeing adverse side effects.

So I think we need to stay with the scientific method. We need to stay with the discipline that has made us the leader in the world when it comes to health care. We should not depart from something that has been proven right.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source