What Would Rescheduling Marijuana Accomplish?
In response to the recent New Yorker magazine article in which Obama placed marijuana in the same category of substances as alcohol and cigarettes, and Mark Kleiman's statement that rescheduling would have little to no effect, the author notes it was incorrect to claim rescheduling marijuana is only possible through an act of Congress, and notes there are significant benefits to placing marijuana as a Schedule III - V substance.
Since marijuana itself cannot be patented, a pharmaceutical company would not have much incentive to go through the arduous, time-consuming, and expensive process required to gain FDA approval. Furthermore, drug regulators tend to look askance at herbal medicine, preferring isolated chemicals. “They’re never going to approve a whole-plant organic product,” says Dan Riffle, director of federal policies at the Marijuana Policy Project.
But Riffle adds that rescheduling marijuana would make it easier to conduct research on the plant’s medical utility, which could lead to cannabis-derived medications that would pass muster with the FDA. “The biggest obstacle, at least historically, to doing research on marijuana to prove its medical benefit is that it’s in Schedule I,” Riffle says. “So you had that Catch-22, where marijuana is a Schedule I drug because there’s no evidence, and there’s no evidence because marijuana is a Schedule I drug.”
Beyond the ability to do research is the ability to even consider the research because of "burdensome registration requirements and regulations" for Schedule I substances that do not exist for research into Schedule III or lower substances.
In addition, Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code prohibits the deduction of business expenses related to “trafficking in controlled substances,” only for Schedule I or II substances.
Removing marijuana as a Schedule I substance would make it possible for the Drug Czar's Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) to be more honest, since they are required by law to oppose the legalization of any Schedule I substance. As Blumenauer recently noted, this inability to speak honestly about marijuana undermines any statement such organizations make when they cannot admit marijuana is less harmful than meth, while every mother and her child know this is reality.
Currently, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), is barred from using any of its funds to promote the legalization of Schedule I substances, but this ban does not exist for substances below Schedule I.
Rescheduling would be a powerful message that science and evidence are more important than the tangle of laws that have resisted this same science and evidence.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2014/02/07/more-than-zero-reclassifying-marijuana-would-have-a-significant-impact-on-drug-policy/2/
= new reply since forum marked as read
contact lawmakers to inform them of this new development re: the re-declaration that cannabis is a Botanical Medicine. That alone will allow a scientific foundation of credible and sensible arguments against the continuation of cannabis prohibition based upon the 80 years long perpetuated myth cannabis is a drug.
I wish I could A) afford it and B) If I wouldn't get in trouble for it--I would buy every member of congress this "old/new" Cannabis Monograph.
This is, as "Joe" would say: A BFD! 
If we recognize lawmakers are under-informed, misinformed and/or are intentionally ignoring the glaring realities of science? I feel I would be derelict in my job as a constituent if I didn't make every effort to, maybe not change minds-but at least provide accurate information so at the very least-they are making Informed statements and votes
At the end of the day: The laws, rules and policies governing cannabis Are the most dangerous elements surrounding its use.
Response to RainDog (Original post)
