It's the land of hippies, Humboldt County and Cheech and Chong. But in the state more closely associated with marijuana than any other, the ballot measure to legalize pot has exposed California's conflicted relationship with the drug.
Pot growers have opposed it. Some police have favored it. Polls show the public is deeply divided. Only politicians have lined up as expected: Nearly all major party candidates oppose the measure.
Meanwhile, hanging over the whole debate: the federal law banning marijuana, which the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled still applies regardless of how Californians vote.
As the Nov. 2 election nears, Proposition 19 has become about much more than the pros and cons of the drug itself. The campaigns for and against have framed the vote as a referendum on everything from jobs and taxes to crime and the environment.
The measure gained ground in a Field Poll released Sunday, pulling ahead 49 percent to 42 percent among likely voters. The poll also found that Californians have become steadily more permissive toward the drug since pollsters began quizzing state residents about their attitudes 40 years ago.
Proponents of say the measure is a way for the struggling state and its cities to raise badly needed funds. A legal pot industry, they say, would create jobs while undercutting violent criminals who profit off the illegal trade in the drug.
"I think it's a golden opportunity for California voters to strike a real blow against the (Mexican) drug cartels and drug gangs," said Joseph McNamara, who served as San Jose's police chief for about 15 years. "... That would be a greater blow than we ever struck during my 35 years in law enforcement."
Supporters, including a group of former and current law enforcement officials, have called attention to the failure of the so-called "War on Drugs" to put a dent in pot production in California, and they say police need to pursue more dangerous crimes.
To pull ahead, opponents will have to convince voters that legalized marijuana will create a greater public safety threat than keeping it illegal.
"If the price drops, more people are going to buy it. Low income people are going to buy marijuana instead of buying food, which happens with substance abusers," said Pleasant Hill police Chief Pete Dunbar, who also speaks for the California Police Chiefs' Association, one of many law enforcement groups against the measure.
As a result, he said, legalizing marijuana would only encourage the cycle of theft and violence driven by people who need money to buy drugs. They argue that the wording of the proposed law would compromise public safety by gutting restrictions on driving and going to work while high.
The state district attorneys' group has come out publicly against Proposition 19, as have many county governments, the editorial boards of the state's biggest newspapers and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who said the law would make California a "laughingstock."
Under the proposed law, adults 21 and older could possess up to an ounce of marijuana for personal use and grow gardens up to 25 square feet.
The proposal would allow cities and governments to decide for themselves whether to tax and allow pot sales. Opponents say a vague, disorganized patchwork of regulations would ensue and lead to chaos for police and courts.
Proposition 19 is the brainchild of Richard Lee, an Oakland medical marijuana entrepreneur who spent more than $1 million to get the measure on the ballot. Also the founder of a trade school for aspiring marijuana growers and retailers, Lee has pushed legal marijuana as a boon to the state's economy and an important source of tax revenue to help close the state's massive budget deficit. The Service Employees International Union, the state's biggest union, has endorsed the measure as an economic booster.
But analysts have said the economic consequences of a legalized pot trade are difficult to predict. The state Board of Equalization last year said a marijuana legalization measure proposed in the state legislature could have brought California up to $1.4 billion in tax revenue. On Friday, the agency said Proposition 19, which leaves marijuana taxing decisions to local governments, contained too many unknowns for its analysts to estimate how much the measure might generate.
In July, the nonpartisan RAND Drug Policy Research Center forecast that legalizing marijuana could send prices plunging by as much as 90 percent. Lower prices could mean less tax revenue even as pot consumption rose, the group said.
The potential price drop has brought unexpected opposition, or at least suspicion, from rural pot farmers who fear the loss of their traditional, though legally risky, way of life.
Marijuana has become so crucial to rural economies along the state's North Coast that even some local government officials are working on plans for coping with a pot downturn.
The state's medical marijuana economy is thriving as hundreds of retail dispensaries across California sell pot to hundreds of thousands of qualified patients. And some medical marijuana supporters have said Proposition 19 could undermine the credibility of the drug as a medical treatment.
"I'm just against the whole concept of the recreational use of marijuana," said Dennis Peron, the San Francisco activist who was the driving force behind the 1996 ballot measure that legalized medical marijuana.
Pot growers have opposed it. Some police have favored it. Polls show the public is deeply divided. Only politicians have lined up as expected: Nearly all major party candidates oppose the measure.
Meanwhile, hanging over the whole debate: the federal law banning marijuana, which the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled still applies regardless of how Californians vote.
As the Nov. 2 election nears, Proposition 19 has become about much more than the pros and cons of the drug itself. The campaigns for and against have framed the vote as a referendum on everything from jobs and taxes to crime and the environment.
The measure gained ground in a Field Poll released Sunday, pulling ahead 49 percent to 42 percent among likely voters. The poll also found that Californians have become steadily more permissive toward the drug since pollsters began quizzing state residents about their attitudes 40 years ago.
Proponents of say the measure is a way for the struggling state and its cities to raise badly needed funds. A legal pot industry, they say, would create jobs while undercutting violent criminals who profit off the illegal trade in the drug.
"I think it's a golden opportunity for California voters to strike a real blow against the (Mexican) drug cartels and drug gangs," said Joseph McNamara, who served as San Jose's police chief for about 15 years. "... That would be a greater blow than we ever struck during my 35 years in law enforcement."
Supporters, including a group of former and current law enforcement officials, have called attention to the failure of the so-called "War on Drugs" to put a dent in pot production in California, and they say police need to pursue more dangerous crimes.
To pull ahead, opponents will have to convince voters that legalized marijuana will create a greater public safety threat than keeping it illegal.
"If the price drops, more people are going to buy it. Low income people are going to buy marijuana instead of buying food, which happens with substance abusers," said Pleasant Hill police Chief Pete Dunbar, who also speaks for the California Police Chiefs' Association, one of many law enforcement groups against the measure.
As a result, he said, legalizing marijuana would only encourage the cycle of theft and violence driven by people who need money to buy drugs. They argue that the wording of the proposed law would compromise public safety by gutting restrictions on driving and going to work while high.
The state district attorneys' group has come out publicly against Proposition 19, as have many county governments, the editorial boards of the state's biggest newspapers and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who said the law would make California a "laughingstock."
Under the proposed law, adults 21 and older could possess up to an ounce of marijuana for personal use and grow gardens up to 25 square feet.
The proposal would allow cities and governments to decide for themselves whether to tax and allow pot sales. Opponents say a vague, disorganized patchwork of regulations would ensue and lead to chaos for police and courts.
Proposition 19 is the brainchild of Richard Lee, an Oakland medical marijuana entrepreneur who spent more than $1 million to get the measure on the ballot. Also the founder of a trade school for aspiring marijuana growers and retailers, Lee has pushed legal marijuana as a boon to the state's economy and an important source of tax revenue to help close the state's massive budget deficit. The Service Employees International Union, the state's biggest union, has endorsed the measure as an economic booster.
But analysts have said the economic consequences of a legalized pot trade are difficult to predict. The state Board of Equalization last year said a marijuana legalization measure proposed in the state legislature could have brought California up to $1.4 billion in tax revenue. On Friday, the agency said Proposition 19, which leaves marijuana taxing decisions to local governments, contained too many unknowns for its analysts to estimate how much the measure might generate.
In July, the nonpartisan RAND Drug Policy Research Center forecast that legalizing marijuana could send prices plunging by as much as 90 percent. Lower prices could mean less tax revenue even as pot consumption rose, the group said.
The potential price drop has brought unexpected opposition, or at least suspicion, from rural pot farmers who fear the loss of their traditional, though legally risky, way of life.
Marijuana has become so crucial to rural economies along the state's North Coast that even some local government officials are working on plans for coping with a pot downturn.
The state's medical marijuana economy is thriving as hundreds of retail dispensaries across California sell pot to hundreds of thousands of qualified patients. And some medical marijuana supporters have said Proposition 19 could undermine the credibility of the drug as a medical treatment.
"I'm just against the whole concept of the recreational use of marijuana," said Dennis Peron, the San Francisco activist who was the driving force behind the 1996 ballot measure that legalized medical marijuana.
14 comments:
Whats wrong with this bill they wanna pass they are doing this in a responsible manner. they said it would be for ADULTS that were 21 or OLDER. they also have a good point about the mexican drug trade, if the state is selling the pot then well, the drug lords are just broke messkins. Its like the shiners during the abolition period, once the government passed the twenty-first amendment they lost the business. the other big deal is why is TOBACCO legal when it has NO I repeat NO medicinal properties, while MARIJUANA has MANY properties. i think that one day we should switch all the tobacco in the cigarette plants with weed see who fights the bill the.It could be the first step to WORLD PEACE, just sit the president in a room with different world leaders and just smoke marijuana whil listening to the song "WHY CAN'T WE BE FRIENDS". BOOYA!!! WORLD PEACE!!! :D
ok so this is stupid. everyone knows that marijuana has absolutly no use for medical purposes what so ever. and not only that but i doubt that they will benefit from this because like petet dunbar said people would use all of their money for that an nothing else and an economy cannot survive on that alone. i cant believe that california is even considering this.
This whole situation is quite tricky. One one end, you could have a catastrophic outcome(simply put, people abusing the drug), and on the other you could actually drive the Mexican drug cartels out of business. The idea of not having drugs or alcohol banned seems to work in countries such as Europe, but with our country switching would probably lead to less successful results. Many people abuse the drug already, when you make it available to the public there would probably be know control.
Anthony, thats an amazing plan! And gosh, I'm actually torn on this one, it most differently has major pros and cons. Yes it would be awesome to be able to hurt the drug trade, especially with such dramatic proportions. But on the other hand yes tobacco is legal and does not have any medical help, but (I could be wrong) when you abuse tobacco it doesn't make you high and extremely dangerous with a car or big machinery like pot does. Plus I don't think anyone actually needs pot for medical purposes. But then I go back to the drug cartel and the economy, but then normal people would be able to go down to wally world and destroy their lives at the same time they are buying eggs. So I guess what it all comes down to is what’s more important, taking down the drug cartel or peoples well being.
I believe that marijuana would have a positive effect on the economy and well being of the U.S. Not only does it provide medical purposes from anywhere between migraines, high blood pressure, and menstrual cramps, but the government could tax it per ounce. The only downside is there is no way of knowing just exactly how potent the weed is until it is smoked, so the price factor would be hard to determine. Should we pay $5 per ounce? or $50? There may not be one sure way to tell.
As for the "criminals" associated with the drug trade, most of them you hear about on the news or in articles are just your average joe. They aren't involved with massive gang shootings or robberies. They are too busy trying to munch on some Doritos and watch the Matrix, yet they are being locked in jail for life, simply for getting high! It's ridiculous!
If medical research says that marijuana can help you out, then by all means use it for that purpose, but if it can be bought throughout the U.S on any street corner then we will have a problem. Some people argue that there are more deaths because of Alcohol than Marijuana every year and that would be true, but because of the fact that it's available on every street corner. If marijuana was available on every corner, then the death rates will increase in marijuana as well. And, personally, I think that marijuana is a gateway drug. If your addicted to alcohol, then you're stuck with it, but if you're addicted to marijuana, which by 'research' is less addictive, there's illegal things to choose from. But I guess the plus side of it would be that it would shut up all of the 'HARDCORE' kids who smoke weed and always talk about how 'AWESOME' they are that they smoke weed.
Legalizing marijuana would definitely boost California's economy. Though prices would drop due to its easier accessibility, like any other popular product, there would be high state or federal taxes on it, which eventually could make it even more expensive than before. Like cigarettes for example, they started off cheap, but today they're pretty pricey, and yet people who are already hooked will pay just about anything. The same thing for marijuana, people who want it badly, which I'm sure after they've used it for a while, will be willing to pay the increased taxes on it. So I think the state will make money off of this, but other issues will inevitably arise with the public safety. However, alcohol definitely affects that as well and yet it's still legal. They're worried about people driving high or going to work high, when we already have people driving drunk and going to work drunk. Which is worse?
The only people against this bill are illegal farmers and idiots. It's quite obvious that the violence along the borders and in Mexico are caused by Marijuana drug trade. Look back only to your political friend, history. Prohibition Acts = severe violence and millions/billions of dollars in unaccounted transaction. Not just California, but many other states could fix so many issues with the amount of tax money generated by legalization. Marijuana is clinically proven to be safer than Tobacco and Alcohol. Why not?
If California does end up legalizing the selling and recreational use of marijuana, their whole economy will improve. Like the article said, there will be more jobs and less people being sent to jail for marijuana related charges and their horribly low budget will rise. I lived in San Diego recently for 3 years and the bad effects of the low budget is insane. School's have almost nothing, an extreme amount of people are being let go or denied job after job. If marijuana was legalized they could tax it like crazy and it would help get them out of their rut and will stop the wasting of their tax money on nonviolent criminals being put in jail for having marijuana. The credibility of medical marijuana will not be compromised and having the same laws put on it as alcohol laws will provide safe use of the drug, just like anything else.
I'm still undecided about the bill. I really don't know how to feel, both sides have a good argument. My first thought is to say no, this is a horrible idea. people say that, "well alcohol is legal, why shouldn't pot be legal". I think being drunk or high is not ok and is unhealthy, and unsafe. You can have a drink and and not be drunk, but you can't smoke pot and not be high. But on the other hand something has to be done about the drug wars, and if this is the best or only way to help put an end to it, then well maybe.
I think Proposition 19 is a bad idea. It is too vague and leaves too much room for the negative aspects like people "driving and going to work while high." If they pass this proposition crime may decrease slightly but there would be a whole new set of problems for California to deal with while trying to regulate and restrict the proposition. On the matter of the price of marijuana; the math is simple. If everyon can legally grow or possess marijuana the demand will obviousl go up and with that the prices will go down. So as stated in the article even if some areas and governments do decide to collect taxes the revenue will be insignificant. There is also the fact that there is still a federal law banning marijuana so until that is changed I think any effort to legalize marijuana is pointless and futile.
As entertaining as this all is when it comes down to it marijuana is still banned by federal law. Now with that out of the way I do think that it would be quite interesting to see how true legalization of the drug would effect the state, its like a huge testing ground very interesting.....
Although there are many negative aspects to Proposition 19, they are outweighed by the positive sides. This article makes some very good points about the illegal drug market and the civil war in Mexico. I don't believe that it will substantially increase the number of people addicted to it because if they were addicted, they would have found a way, legal or illegal to get it. For those who don't use it medically, it will make it easier and safer for them and everyone else. I definitely believe that making marijuana legal is a step in ending the violence. Also, California could definitely use the income.
People are going to continue to purchase the drugs whether or not they are legalized. However, allowing narcotics to be legal will stimulate the disasterous economy by bringing in revenue as well as providing numerous jobs to the vast majority of the unemployed. The crime rate is also predicted to decline due to the unnecessay use of drug dealers. By both stipulating and regulating the trade of narcotics to ensure the safety of Americans, the drug trade can be successful.
Post a Comment