Reclassifying cannabis as a Schedule III drug only makes the bad situation worse

By Leo Beletsky, Shaleen Title and Shanel Lindsay

For the first time in decades, there are positive signs that the overdose crisis is finally slowing. What lies behind this progress is controversial, but one of its likely drivers is political reform.

Recent changes to our outdated laws have lowered barriers to life-saving medicines for treatment, increased access to the overdose antidote naloxone, and authorized other proven harm reduction measures.

One of the most notable reforms was the rapid expansion of effective drug treatment behind bars. Because of inadequate policies, millions of people are still arrested for drug possession in the United States each year. People re-entering society after a period of incarceration are up to 130 times more likely to die from an overdose than the general population. The U.S. Department of Justice and others have filed dozens of lawsuits to force prisons and jails to grapple with the catastrophic risk of deadly reentry, and they have achieved impressive results. At the same time, some states have significantly reduced their use of arrest and detention as a drug control tool.

Despite the positive news, we are still far from being able to end the crisis. As tens of thousands continue to die from overdoses, many other drug-related problems loom. For this reason, relief from the rising death toll should be viewed as an opportunity to do more of what works while dismantling outdated policies that have been detrimental to population health.

The Biden administration's recent proposal to reclassify cannabis from a Schedule I drug (alongside heroin) to a Schedule III drug (alongside anabolic steroids) does not address this challenge. While this may seem like progress, it risks adding another chapter to the long history of misguided drug regulation in the United States.

Others have raised equity and practical concerns about this proposal. List III drugs are controlled very strictly. Consistent with the chaotic design of American drug regulation, this category includes an incongruous selection of medications. This classification includes ketamine, as well as the life-saving opioid treatment drug Suboxone and, perhaps strangest of all, testosterone, which is used in hormone replacement and gender-affirming care. These drugs are legal, but their possession and distribution outside of a medical context remains heavily criminalized by federal and state laws.

The broader concern is that adding cannabis to Schedule III will force it into the deeply flawed American drug system. This system is known for high costs, chronic shortages and gaping inequalities. Vital medicines are too often inaccessible, especially for marginalized populations.

The pharmaceutical industry's handling of narcotics is particularly catastrophic. Conceived during President Nixon's “War on Drugs,” the Controlled Substances Act was intended to balance access and control for “dangerous” drugs. This regulatory framework has consistently failed to strike this balance, undermining public health.

The current overdose crisis is a clear example of this dysfunction. Lax regulation of Schedule III opioid painkillers triggered the first wave of overdose deaths, while barriers to pain management and addiction treatment have worsened. Recently, the shortage of stimulant medications such as Adderall has made the system's deficiencies in managing vital controlled medications even more apparent.

The system's shortcomings are so severe that it cannot handle even its most basic functions. Think of Schedule III as a rudderless, aging ship taking on water. Adding cannabis is like piling a whole new load of cargo onto this sinking ship.

Retaining cannabis as a controlled substance also ignores its many uses outside of healthcare. This leaves the recreational market in legal limbo – a blind spot for cultural and spiritual practices that have long been part of cannabis consumption.

Most tragically, the Biden administration's current proposal is a failure of imagination. It seeks to replace one broken system with another inefficient regulatory system, missing a crucial opportunity to rethink our approach. As other Schedule I substances such as psilocybin and MDMA are under consideration for rescheduling, and marijuana use has reached record levels in recent years, there is increasing urgency to establish a modern regulatory structure that will manage our complex and diverse use of psychoactive drugs into the 21st century can century.

Leo Beletsky is a drug policy researcher at Northeastern University and UC San Diego. Shaleen Title and Shanel Lindsay are board members of the Parabola Center for Law and Policy. This article was published by the Los Angeles Times and distributed by Tribune Content Agency.