Is it time to rethink California's (America's) Marijuana Policy? (symptoms of Prop. 13)
A Brief History...
I still have my residence in the Golden State (I will never leave for good) but it is not socially the place that I have grown to be most comfortable in. It is "the wild wild west", free and progressive in many ways and on many issues. But my love of that state, especially the Bay Area has definitely shaped who I am. A tolerant conservative, a moderate, now I do fault in some ways the pitifully waged war on drugs started by the former "B" movie actor, Governor of California and 40th President (God rest his soul) Ronald Regan (the Gipper). With his wife Nancy's (Regan) "Just Say No" campaign and Howard Jarvis author of Prop. 13 in 1978 ( "People's Initiative to Limit Property Taxation"),which had a disproportionate affect on the Bay Area and Los Angeles it opened the border to Mexico for cheap labor and cheaper drugs.
Present Day...
The great state, the "Golden State" now leads the nation in unemployment(updated 2/27/09 10.1%), the public schools now rank 48th out of 50 states and they have recently had a $42 billion budget deficit. A bill from Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco -- where else?) would tax marijuana sales. It would, first, decriminalize the possession and sale of marijuana under state law, and, second, set up a system for regulating and taxing it. The sales and taxation part only happens, though, if the federal government decriminalizes marijuana too, or at least allows states to make their own decisions about the drug. It puts the "legalization of drugs" on the table in possibly the most liberal government that has occupied Washington D.C. since JFK and LBJ. So we have come full circle back to the 30% tax reduction that was Prop. 13 to be replaced with another tax increase. Better off the backs of California homeowners and on the butts of the blunts and the bowl of the bongs. Ammiano and his supporters argue that the state is losing out on more than $1 billion a year in tax revenues because its biggest cash crop, marijuana, is illegal and therefore not taxable.
The Future...
A myriad of health related issues will consume the California heath system related to the increase in smoking. Bronchitis, asthma, lung cancer; a number of studies have shown an association between chronic marijuana use and increased rates of anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and schizophrenia (sounds like growing up in the 'hood). In one study, heavy marijuana abusers reported that the drug impaired several important measures of life achievement including physical and mental health, cognitive abilities, social life, and career status. Several studies associate workers’ marijuana smoking with increased absences, tardiness, accidents, workers’ compensation claims, and job turnover. So the future of California's marijuana policy will have little change on the current state of affairs (sad but true) it (pot smoking) will not stop.
The Remedy...
It is time to surrender and be prudent about the lost revenue (I am a fiscal conservative). Maybe the coalition against Prop. 8 will be too "high" to mount an effective campaign (a much more important social issue) because the war on marijuana is moot. It (legalization) has the possibility of creating thousands of jobs related to the cultivation, processing, sale and monitoring of the product. Also one of the most prized jobs of all "quality control"second only to that of "profiteer". It could reinvigorate the once and much ballyhooed agricultural industry of California that has given way to dot com start-ups and bio-tech innovation of the nineties.
Yours truly, but I never inhaled ;-)
Bycha Buxton
Comments
Perhaps the movement against Marijuana is actually a movement against those might want to take their senses into their own hands. The PTB might see the pervasiveness of marijuana 'abuse' as a challenge against authority, and not really an anti-social hazard in itself. Perhaps the former is the reason why it is frowned upon.
But then again, while alcoholism could be detected by, say the smell of one's breath, marijuana would not be as obvious till the consequences are done.
Perhaps marijuana-induced 'tardiness, absences, etc', according to the studies you mentioned may have preexisting-cum-exacerbating causes such as the class location of the person. If so, getting rid of the class system might be a good start toward legalising this particular drug.
Perhaps, compared to alcohol, marijuana promotes too much of a 'sense of self'. Whilst booze might help one lighten up after a burdensome week under the boot of a boss, marijuana might incite another identity altogether....and we can't have that can we.
ed
Singapore, barbarically, hangs people for possessing it - half an ounce of heroin or 17ounces for marijuana. Paradoxically killing people to protect their idea of the value of life. Sick people.
ed
You're right. The capitalist and aptly suffixed 'pig' would indeed find a way to use the funds accrued to fund yet another war for markets overseas and within. In Singapore, the government just lives off addiction by taxing relevant products at high prices and giving the masses nothing in return. The masses(chinese) in turn do that which they have been trained to do for 2000 years by failing to address an oppressive and greedy government and just get grossly opportunistic with each other.
Thankfully, america has enough cultural difference to spawn a people without too much of a herd mentality. I say 'without too much of a herd mentality' as any country which sees itself as the central land culturally and economically will tend to compromise its own ability to produce true pluralism. In this america is perspectival cousins of china - which, by the way, means 'central land' when the chinese characters for china is translated into english. But i digress.
I would like to see how this issue which you are now facing is resolved. The arguments for and against legislation would be most interesting as people here only tend to argue about which noodle dish is better in which locality;) Hope you'll keep us updated with developments ByCha.
ed
Is Tom Amiano smoking?
Very informative...how does this plan help our schools? and once it is legalized what will stop people from growing their own. It not like cigarettes. Is It? I can't help but wonder about the social and health implications. You mentioned that marijuana use already causes problems in society why not just legalize it. Do you think that legalizing a highly addictive, mind altering substance will create even more marijuana users and compound issues? What about all of the medical claims and rehab stays and SSI/Disability payments that we already pay for because of the illegal substance?
Will legalizing this drug will cause even more bills to eat at our new found profits or will those bills will be paid from another budget.
Hey, I do not know this may work. Maybe the government can add something to marijuana to make it more desirable like the cigarette companies do, put a filter on it and tax the hell out of it...just like cigarettes, then we will have a nation of legal drug addicts. And maybe the government can come up with another bill that gives money to social service agencies to educate peole about the dangers of pot abuse, thereby creating new jobs, and with less people able to pass a drug test these jobs will go to those who really need them.
This idea is probably not a slippery slope; this could be a win win...
Now I know the question has been raised upon whether or not we can afford another legal drug (again, as it was legal once upon a time), that is, is it worth the cost to society in addiction and detriment to health? Yet if it were regulated like alcohol, I think curbing its potency would well be a possibility, just as alcohol content presently is controlled. I understand also that there is a debate on whether or not it is a gateway drug to harder substances, but I think for the most part it would be better to distinguish it from such. We'd also likely be wasting a lot less time prosecuting addicts, especially under three-strikes laws that often wind up imposing punishments that really do not fit the crime.