WHAT IS AMERICA SMOKING?

It's time that America got real about pot.

Charlie Lynch of California should not be facing up to 100 years in
federal prison for selling medical marijuana to prescription-holding
sick people - a practice that's legal in California but not under
federal law.

His marijuana dispensary was raided in 2007. It was one of several
targeted by the Drug Enforcement Administration before the Obama
administration decided to stop the raids in states that allow medical
marijuana.

That news comes two years too late for Mr. Lynch, whose sentencing is
set for March 23. "It just seems so unfair what they've done to me,"
Mr. Lynch said to ABC News.

Unfair and hypocritical.

According to an article for The Bulletin for Cannabis Reform, local
and federal governments spend an estimated $10.7 billion arresting,
prosecuting and punishing marijuana offenders, and lose $31.1 billion
a year in lost tax revenues by keeping the $113 billion-a-year
marijuana industry underground.

Yet the federal government promotes "pot in a pill."

Here's the endorsement from the DEA: "Medical marijuana already
exists. It's called Marinol. The active ingredient of Marinol is
synthetic THC, which has been found to relieve the nausea and vomiting
associated with chemotherapy for cancer patients and to assist with
loss of appetite with AIDS patients."

THC is the "active" ingredient in marijuana. Leave it to Uncle Sam to
advocate fake dope.

I learned about Marinol during my mother's recent hospitalization. She
hasn't had an appetite in weeks, so the doctor prescribed the drug,
anticipating that she'd get the munchies. When it didn't work, he
doubled her dose. It's since been doubled again, and she's still not
eating.

When I asked why they didn't just let her smoke a joint, I got
laughter. But, seriously, why go to the trouble and expense - Marinol
costs between $200 and $800 a month, depending on the dose - of making
fake pot to do the job of the real thing?

That wouldn't be necessary if we just decriminalized marijuana use.
Already, 13 states allow marijuana use for medical purposes, and
others - Illinois, Iowa and New Hampshire - are considering bills to
do so. Last year, Massachusetts voters decriminalized possession of
small amounts of marijuana. Getting caught with less than an ounce of
pot is punishable by a civil fine of $100. No criminal record.

And in California, where desperate times call for reasonable measures,
San Francisco Assemblyman Tom Ammiano has introduced a bill to tax and
regulate marijuana like alcohol, saying that it would bring about $1
billion to state coffers. The legislation would allow access only to
people over 21.

As for the arguments against decriminalizing marijuana, most have been
debunked. More people smoke pot in the U.S. than in the Netherlands,
where it's been decriminalized - you can buy and smoke weed at coffee
shops - for more than 30 years. Decriminalizing it in the U.S. isn't
likely to entice hordes of new smokers.

There's no convincing scientific evidence that the drug causes
psychological damage, and fewer than 1 percent of smokers get hooked.
Marijuana poses minimal damage to the lungs - a lot less than legal
tobacco - and there's no proof that it's a gateway drug to crack or
heroin.

What has been proven, the Drug Policy Alliance Network argues, is that
marijuana does for sick people exactly what the government claims pot
in a pill does - but better. And the war on drugs has done nothing to
keep people from getting high.

"Use and perception of the drug are little different now than they
were 30 years ago," said Taxpayers for Common Sense senior analyst
Erich Zimmermann. "Rather than continue to spend billions of dollars
on the problem, it would be better for the U.S. government to get out
of the marijuana business entirely."

Charlie Lynch would agree.

Rhonda Swan is an editorial writer for The Palm Beach Post.