Marijuana Tax Act of 1937
The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 was a pivotal piece of legislation in the United States that established federal control over the use, possession, and sale of marijuana through taxation. Introduced by Representative Robert L. Doughton and heavily influenced by Harry J. Anslinger, the first director of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, the Act marked a significant shift in the public perception and legal status of marijuana, previously known primarily for its industrial uses as hemp and its medicinal properties as cannabis. The term "marijuana" was used strategically to evoke associations with Mexican immigrants, reflecting the racial prejudices of the time and shaping public opinion against the plant.
The Act emerged in the context of increased marijuana use during the early 20th century, particularly as a result of changing social conditions and the preceding prohibition of alcohol. Instead of directly outlawing marijuana, the Act imposed a heavy tax burden that effectively criminalized its use and cultivation for those unable to comply with the tax requirements. Critics have noted that the motivations behind the Act were tainted by financial interests, particularly those of media mogul William Randolph Hearst and the wood-pulp industry.
As a consequence, the Marijuana Tax Act led to the rapid decline of the hemp industry, which had no intrinsic connection to narcotic issues, by making its production economically unviable. The legislation is widely regarded as a reflection of both societal biases and the manipulation of public sentiment, raising questions about the role of propaganda and economic interests in shaping drug policy.
On this Page
Marijuana Tax Act of 1937
The Law Federal law that imposed a tax on anyone who dealt in marijuana commercially
Also known as Marijuana Tax Act of 1937
Date Introduced August 2, 1937
The act shaped U.S. domestic and international drug policies and served as a precursor to the war on drugs that was ushered in during the Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush presidential administrations.
The Marihuana Tax Act probably never would have been written and passed if not for the efforts of Harry J. Anslinger, who served as the first director of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN), established by the U.S. Treasury in 1930.
Recreational use of marijuana was not evident in the United States until the first decade of the twentieth century. Marijuana appeared first in the United States along the Mexican border, brought into the country by migrant laborers. Coupled with the passage of the Eighteenth Amendment, which made the sale, manufacture, or transportation of alcohol illegal, the use and popularity of marijuana mushroomed as it spread across the land.
When Anslinger became the director of the FBN, marijuana was not even known by that name; it was referred to as hemp or cannabis. Anslinger may have borrowed the term marijuana, the Spanish Mexican word for cannabis, in order to give cannabis an association with Mexicans, tapping into the racial prejudice of the people in the United States to gain public support for laws against the drug. In addition, by using the term “marihuana” in the language of the bill, the plant’s legitimate uses in medicine may have been diminished, in which it was commonly known as cannabis, and in the fiber industry, in which it was referred to as hemp.
Because drugs could not be outlawed at the federal level, federal taxes became the mechanism to control the use, possession, and sale of marijuana. If they were not taxed, they represented a loss of revenue for the government. Thereafter, those who failed to comply with the law found themselves in trouble with the U.S. Treasury.
By most accounts, Anslinger passed the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 by rather questionable means, using yellow journalism, which involved sensationalized and distorted stories to stimulate public opinion. Anslinger’s efforts were supported by William Randolph Hearst, who owned a chain of newspapers and had a number of self-serving interests for making marijuana illegal. Besides Hearst’s interests, the FBN seems to have used propaganda to demonize marijuana in order to protect government and private investment in the wood-pulp industry. Therefore, the prohibition of marijuana did not occur because of a true problem with the drug: The FBN did not produce any evidence of a crisis with marijuana, but relied instead on Anslinger’s “Gore File,” which consisted mainly of exaggerated claims of murder and mayhem taken from articles in Hearst-owned newspapers.
Impact
Seemingly, Anslinger and Hearst were motivated by money and prejudice. The end result was that the hemp (the fiber from the cannabis plant) industry one completely unrelated to narcotics production, was wiped out within a few years, as the act rendered hemp almost worthless because it was taxed out of existence.
Bibliography
Abel, Ernest. Marihuana: The First Twelve Thousand Years. New York: Plenum Press, 1980.
Bonnie, Richard J., and Charles H. Whitebread II. The Marihuana Conviction: A History of Marihuana Prohibition in the United States. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1974.
Booth, Martin. Cannabis: A History. New York: Thomas Dunne Books/St. Martin’s Press, 2004.
Gray, Michael. Drug Crazy: How We Got into This Mess and How We Can Get Out. New York: Random House, 1998.
Grinspoon, L. Marijuana Reconsidered. 3d ed. Oakland, Calif.: Quick American Archives, 1994.
Herer, Jack. Hemp and the Marihuana Conspiracy: The Emperor Wears No Clothes. Van Nuys, Calif.: Hemp, 1991.
Inciardi, James A. The War on Drugs: Heroin, Cocaine, Crime, and Public Policy. Palo Alto, Calif.: Mayfield, 1986.
Slaughter, James B. “Marijuana Prohibition in the United States: History and Analysis of a Failed Policy.” Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems 21, no. 4 (1988): 417-474.