Questions

• Ballot Initiatives
• Highest and lowest values
• Trendable questions
• Wording of questions
• Voter support
• Medicinal value
• Paying attention

What Questions Were Asked?

The exact line of questioning used in the surveys was located for about half of the sixty-six polls. In earlier studies, questions related mostly to whether or not patients should be legally permitted to use cannabis or whether physicians should be able to prescribe it. As polling on this issue has evolved, so has the questioning.

Ballot Initiatives

After passage of the Arizona initiative, citizens were again asked in May of 1999 (#27) whether they favored or opposed Federal sanctions against doctors who prescribe medical marijuana, such as license revocation. The percentage opposed – favorable to medical marijuana – had risen to 66%.

Survey questions that asked specifically about upcoming ballot initiatives were also fielded in Colorado (#34), Nevada (#33 and #16), and Oregon (#18), returning respective favorable percentages of 67%, 63%, 52%, and 59%. Each of these polls foretold its initiative’s success with the respective voting percentages of 54%, 65%, 59%, and 55%, showing that polls taken prior to medicinal cannabis ballot initiatives successfully predict their passage every time.

Highest and Lowest Values

The next highest percentages come from the Medscape poll of physicians (#48) where 81% favored the "decriminalization of marijuana for medical purposes (palliative care in HIV/AIDS, cancer, glaucoma, etc.)." A similar 80% of Wisconsin voters (#54) believe that their state legislature should pass a law to allow seriously or terminally ill patients to use marijuana for medical purposes if supported by their physician.

The lowest pro-medical marijuana percentages – the only ones under 50% – belong to two questions, one about voting and one about cultivation. The poll, which took aim at candidate support, asked if respondents were more or less likely to vote for candidates who championed medicinal cannabis. The Maryland Poll (#52) of 2002 found that 37% of respondents would be more likely to vote for pro-medical cannabis candidates while only 18% were less likely. This poll is believed to be responsible for over fifty Maryland State legislators stepping forward to sponsor a medical marijuana bill.

The other least favorable survey percentage belongs to a December 1998, Eastern Montana College study (#21) that asked if respondents favored or opposed the medical cultivation of marijuana. Seventy-three percent opposed while only 21% supported. A similar question in the March 2002 Ten State Poll, of which Montana (#60) was a part, queried respondents concerning whether or not they would support an initiative to allow clinics or non profit agencies to purchase marijuana from farmers and sell it to seriously ill patients. This study found 65% now favor the medical cultivation of marijuana.

Trendable Questions

The first involves two studies: one in March 2001 by the Princeton Research Associates for the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (#38) and the other in March 1997 by Chilton Research for ABC News and Discovery News (#3). In both surveys, the same question was asked, "Regardless of what you think about the personal non-medical use of marijuana, do you think doctors should or should not be allowed to prescribe marijuana for medical purposes to treat their patients?" Seventy-three percent in the former survey stated that it "should be allowed, versus 70% in the latter. Though this slight upward shift is not greater than the margin of error (+/-4.5%), the downward movement in those who said it "should not be allowed" from 27% in 1997 to 21% in 2001 is a significant 6%.

The second trendable question comes from the Virginia Quality of Life Survey conducted by the Virginia Tech Center for Survey Research (#46, 32, 28,14, and 4). This study has reviewed the attitudes of Virginians annually since 1992 and, for trending purposes, frequently asks the same question year after year. Since 1997, the percentage of those who "Strongly agree" or "Somewhat agree" that "doctors should be legally allowed to prescribe marijuana for medical use" has risen from 69% to its 2001 level of 75%. Because this gain of six points exceeds the +/- 3.4 to 4.4% margins of error for the studies, this gain in favorable public opinion toward medicinal cannabis is significant.

Wording of Questions

The 2001 Maryland Poll (#44) shows how sophisticated questioning can reveal an issue’s nuances. The first part of the question makes statements about the suffering of cancer and AIDS patients. The question’s second part articulates the concerns some have about undermining the "War on Drugs" or sending the wrong message to children. After these two statements, respondents were asked to choose between allowing physicians to prescribe marijuana for AIDS and cancer patients or maintaining possession of marijuana as a criminal offense in all cases. As predicted, favorable percentages for some demographic groups like women (62%) were lower than those for men (70%) showing that public opinion on medical marijuana can be affected by underlying concerns particularly about children.

Another question asked shortly after passage of Proposition 215 uses a qualifier to ascertain the level of public support for medicinal cannabis even though it lacks regulatory approval. In February 1997, a Lake Research study conducted for the Lindesmith Center (#2) queried, "Conclusive tests on the possible medical uses of marijuana have not been completed. Would you favor or oppose making marijuana legally available for medical uses, even though testing has not been completed?" Sixty percent of registered voters favored its use without complete testing, while 30% opposed.

Two polling organizations appear to have qualified survey questions in order to elicit the responses they wanted. With the purpose of defeating proposed drug policy reform legislation in New Mexico, Protect New Mexico hired the Republican polling firm, McLaughlin and Associates (#48), to query likely New Mexico voters. When told that a federal study showed drug use among teens increased in states where marijuana penalties have been eased – a statement of questionable truth – 67% of the respondents opposed the decriminalization of marijuana and 39% said they would be less likely to vote for candidates who favor medical marijuana bills. Unfortunately, the goal of defeating this legislation was achieved.

The conservative Family Research Council (#5) used similar tactics in 1997 with the hope that voters would reject medical marijuana initiatives, which none did. While finding that almost three out of four people surveyed claimed to be open to the use of marijuana as a medicine if patients believed it would relieve their condition, the poll’s sponsor suggested that support dropped "as respondents were given information about potential uses for pot." As the sponsor stated, "When told that marijuana would be available for virtually any condition (as California's Proposition 215 would allow), 69 percent of those surveyed would be less likely to support legalization for medical use. When told about the availability of other, legal therapies, 55 percent became more likely to oppose marijuana as medicine. Seventy-three percent of adults were either concerned or outraged that much of the push for legalizing the use of marijuana as 'medicine' comes from organizations devoted to pushing outright legalization of the drug."

Another interesting aspect of this study was the inclusion of 200 adolescent respondents. According to the sponsor, the teens polled in this survey appeared more wary of marijuana as medicine than adults, saying "more than half (52 percent) of adolescents polled fear that allowing the medical use of marijuana will encourage more illicit recreational use, while only 37 percent of adults aged 33-49 have similar concerns."

Voter Support

This line of questioning first appeared in the February 2001 survey of Bernadillo County, New Mexico, residents (#37) by Delta-9. Thirty-five percent of respondents indicated that medical cannabis, along with hemp and general marijuana possession penalties, represented important factors in how they vote. Similar percentages appeared one year later in the Maryland Poll (#52).

More recent surveys, even though only months apart, have seen this percentage rise sharply. Respondents to the Ten State Poll (#56-65) were asked, "If your own state legislators or members of Congress vote for a bill to allow seriously ill patients to use medical marijuana with the approval of their physician, would you be more likely or less likely to vote for these elected officials in a November general election?" An astounding 68% cumulatively answered "More likely," with only 23.2% saying "Less likely." If no other finding in this review piques the interest of lawmakers, this one should. Fewer than one in four voters will more likely cast their ballot for a candidate that supports the current prohibition of medicinal cannabis. As many as two thirds of the voting populace will reward candidates who embrace this issue.

Medicinal Value

With so much of the public agreeing on the fundamental core of the medical marijuana argument – marijuana does have medicinal value – lawmakers should be the focus to engender a policy shift on this issue. Further, as one of America’s premiere test markets, Columbus, Ohio, is considered by many to be a bellwether for the State of Ohio and even the U.S. because its demographics closely mirror both geographic regions as a whole. This poll reveals the core belief that bolsters the overwhelmingly favorable percentages seen in so many other studies.

Paying Attention