Resolved: The Federal Government can legalize medical marijuana and/or industrialized hemp

Because my opponent keeps jumping around the topics, and has ignored the case I have made, I will address his points one by one (or try to): "So realistically he must prove that both can be legalized, or else I win this round." -Indeed I have shown in both R1 and R2 arguments that the Federal government can legalize either or both. I have shown the Federal Government can legalize industrial hemp by defining it as strains of cannabis containing less than 1% THC, and by specifying it's difference from the drug cannabis, as international law so differentiates. I have shown that medical marijuana can be legalized for prescription by rescheduling as a Schedule II controlled substance. I have shown that the Supreme Court can rule in favor of petitions presented before the court determining that the prohibition of marijuana is unconstitutional, legalizing both. I have shown that Congress can pass bills (like HR 5843 and others) legalizing marijuana for personal use. I have provided many references in so doing. "To sustain it's legitimacy, the United States government must place the protection of its citizens above all else." -My opponent completely ignores my contention that the legalization of alcohol and tobacco violates his stipulation, as both substances are not only harmful, but cause more annual deaths than marijuana- which causes none. (http://www.webmd.com...) "In the current U.S. medical practices, nowhere is the use of tobacco or alcohol implemented to ensure patient care." -Your argument for governmental legitimacy was not bound to medicine. Indeed alcohol and nicotine are drugs, yet provide no medical benefit, and much more harm than marijuana (I have already provided sources). And if it was bound to medicine, I also mentioned the Schedule II drugs cocaine, morphine, and methamphetamines- all drugs proven to be much more harmful than marijuana. "Additionally, morphine, does not carry better-known carcinogens than tobacco, and is not notorious for it's effects on the short-term memory and the reproductive system, as marijuana is." -Morphine is much more harmful than marijuana, causing sever side effects, including death. Morphine causes chemical dependence, which marijuana does not.(http://www.pain-relief-medication.info...) Morphine is an opioid like heroin, and in some cases is more dangerous than heroin. (http://opioids.com...) "i would really like to see the source that indicates cocaine is used regularly in contemporary medical practice, if you could provide that it would be great" -I didn't say cocaine was used regularly, rather that it is a Schedule II controlled substance which makes it legal to prescribe. (http://www.usdoj.gov...) It has a much higher disposition for abuse than marijuana, causes many more side effects, and has a much more terrible effect on our society. (http://www.emedicine.com...) "My Opponent concedes the fact that marijuana has a high potential for abuse, which is one of the criteria classifying it as a substance 1 drug, as he stated in his first speech." -I did not concede this point. I merely did not argue this point as it is irrelevant to rescheduling to Schedule II, which also lists this as a criteria, and it is irrelevant to the other points I made. "does not once negate or even address the fact that marijuana has dangerous carcinogens that have been proven to lead to an unexpectedly high number of users among patients with cancers of the head and neck region, including the mouth, tongue, throat, and larynx." -If the readers wish, they can research my opponents sources and see that they discredit his own argument.(http://books.google.com...) -From his own source: "No association was found between marijuana use, and any other type of cancer, including cancers normally linked to tobacco smoking". I did not initially argue this point because the debate is not about the dangers of marijuana, rather whether or not the Federal Government can legalize medical marijuana and/or industrialized hemp. "how is the government fulfilling its obligations to protect its citizens when it allows doctor's to prescribe cancer-causing medications?" - Marijuana has not been proven to cause cancer, but other medicines and medical procedures can cause cancer. The most commonly used treatment for cancer, chemotherapy, can cause cancer (http://www.medicinenet.com...) as it is a form of ionizing radiation, as well as x-rays. "marijuana is severely dangerous" -First, my opponent has not proves this. His own sources state otherwise. -Second, this is irrelevant to the question "can the Federal government legalize medical marijuana and/or industrialized hemp". "Nowhere in the constitution does it state that the legalization of marijuana is not constitutional, nor does it connote it." -Nowhere in the constitution does it state that the legalization of tobacco is not constitutional, yet it is legal. Marijuana became illegal in the United States in 1970 under the Controlled Substances Act. It was previously regulated under the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, but until then it was completely legal. The Federal Government indeed has the power to legalize medical marijuana and industrialized hemp. It has already rescheduled Marinol, or synthetic THC (Tetra-hydro-cannabinol, the active chemical found in marijuana), as Schedule III (http://www.erowid.org...). Under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, Federal law in the United States preempts conflicting state and local laws. Because the possession and use of drugs is not codified in the US Constitution, laws prohibiting the possession, use, and sale of drugs fall under the US Code of Federal Regulations. The FDA, DEA, and the Controlled Substances Act fall under Title 21 of the US Code of Federal Regulations. The US Code of Federal Regulations is sometimes referred to as Administrative Law. Under the Administrative Procedure Act, the different Federal agencies are permitted to promulgate detailed rules and regulations through a public "rulemaking" process where the public is allowed to comment, known as public information. After a period of time, the rules and regulations are usually published in the Federal Register.(http://www.law.fsu.edu..., http://www.gpoaccess.gov..., http://www.whitehouse.gov...)(http://usgovinfo.about.com...) HR 5842 is a House Resolution that proposes the rescheduling of marijuana under the CSA (http://www.govtrack.us...) HR 5843 would remove Federal penalties for the personal use of marijuana, and would limit state penalties to a $100 fine under the Controlled Substances Act (http://www.govtrack.us...). The Federal government has criminalized marijuana under the Interstate Commerce Clause, which gives the Federal Government the power to regulate the channels of commerce, the instrumentalities of commerce, and actions that substantially affect interstate commerce. Additionally, under the Supremacy Clause, any state law in conflict with federal law is not valid. The United States Code, under Section 811 of Title 21, sets out a process by which cannabis could be administratively transferred to a less-restrictive category or removed from Controlled Substances Act regulation altogether. (I've provided several links for this title). Because it is the Controlled Substances Act enacted by USFG that illegalized marijuana, the USFG most definitely has the power to legalize medical marijuana and/or industrial