Will California go to pot?
With the gray areas surrounding medical marijuana yet to be squared away nearly 15 years after voters approved Proposition 215, legalization of recreational use is on the table—a decision with potentially greater and even murkier ramifications.
These facts are clear: If voters decide to pass the Regulate, Control, and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 on Nov. 2, all Californians aged 21 and older would be allowed to lawfully possess up to an ounce of marijuana and cultivate 5-foot-by-5-foot plots of the plant for personal use. Local cities and counties would also have the option to add taxes on sales at storefront locations.
Richard Lee, a medical marijuana proponent and founder of Oakland’s Oaksterdam University—a “cannabis college” providing training in the medical marijuana industry—sponsored the initiative. Oaksterdam’s former Advocacy 101 instructor Matthew Witemyre said legalizing marijuana is an idea whose time has come.
This is a new world that we’re moving into, and frankly, if you’re not paying attention, everything changes,” he said. “Instead of looking at cannabis like it’s analogous to cocaine or methamphetamines, look at it as analogous to alcohol and tobacco. And frankly, it’s significantly safer than both of those two legal drugs.”
Witemyre, who currently heads a medical marijuana supplier called Medi-Cone, sees the measure as a monumental step toward ending arrests of nonviolent cannabis users and eliminating drug cartels.
“As long as there’s a criminal market, somebody is going to supply it,” he said. “So let’s take it out of the criminal market and put it in a regulated market and put the bad guys out of business. It’s as simple as that.”
Opponents of the initiative don’t agree ending marijuana prohibition is quite that simple. Public Safety First—a “No on Prop. 19” coalition including the California Police Chiefs Association, the state’s League of Cities, and Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein—calls it a “jumbled legal nightmare.”
In short, organization spokesman Roger Salazar said, Proposition 19 would do everything but what its title implies.
“It doesn’t control, it doesn’t regulate, it doesn’t even tax it to the extent that proponents say it will,” Salazar said. “It’s going to cost the state billions of dollars in federal funding. It’s going to create a free-for-all with marijuana just being un-regulatable, and according to a few studies, the revenue is extremely uncertain.”
Salazar cited a July report by the RAND Corporation’s Drug Policy Research Center, documenting the effect of Proposition 19 on budgets and marijuana consumption. The study concluded legalization would create a shift in illegal operations from smuggling to tax evasion, increase use of marijuana overall, and potentially drop pot prices by up to 80 percent.
With regulation left up to local levels of government, Salazar said, confusion would reign.
“It creates chaos and uncertainty, when it purports to do the opposite,” Salazar said. “They say it would regulate marijuana like they do alcohol, but alcohol is state regulated, as opposed to this one, which would be a patchwork of all these local rules and laws.”
Backers of the initiative—including the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the American Civil Liberties Union, and California Young Democrats—support it for various reasons. The state’s Democratic Party has decided to remain neutral on the issue; the California Libertarian Party, however, has aligned in favor.
Mark Hinkle, Libertarian Party national chairman and candidate for the state’s 15th State Senate District, has never used marijuana, but said he supports the initiative purely on principle.
“We own our own bodies,” Hinkle said. “It’s ours to do with it as we see fit, which includes putting substances in our body that may or may not be helpful to us. That’s an individual choice and an individual responsibility.”
Hinkle said legalization would dramatically reduce the cost of prisons and hamper the ability of drug cartels to make a profit. Drug criminalization, he said, has earned the United States the highest per capita prison population in the world, and made drugs more enticing to young people.
“Prohibitions just don’t work,” he said. “The drug war, like the prohibition of alcohol, is a monumental failure. It has not led to reduced drug use, but it’s instead increased drug use.”
‘A risk to public safety’ or reefer madness?
If passed, Proposition 19 would prohibit adults from possessing marijuana on school grounds, smoking it while minors are present, or providing it to anyone younger than 21. Supporters say regulating marijuana like alcohol will make it more difficult for children to get; however, according to Santa Barbara County District Attorney Joyce Dudley, legalization would have the opposite effect.
“Oh, kids will get it,” Dudley said. “If you legalize marijuana, then there will be more marijuana, because then it will be legal. There are some people who just aren’t smoking it and aren’t getting it because they don’t want to do something illegal.”
Dudley said passing Proposition 19 would send the wrong message to children and result in increased risk of use by young people. For similar reasons, the Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) opposes the measure. The two major candidates for the state’s Attorney General’s office—Kamala Harris and Steve Cooley—as well as District Attorneys across California have also lined up against the initiative.
As the county’s top law enforcement officer, Dudley opposes Proposition 19, and said the negative effects of the drug on society would counteract any revenue the state might receive from taxation.
“I view it as a risk to public safety,” she said. “We’ve got alcohol, we’ve got pharmaceuticals, and you add marijuana to the mix and I think you’ll have an increase in danger to the public.”
Drug cartels wouldn’t be put out of business as supporters claim, Dudley said, and legalization would bring in a criminal element similar to those found around dispensaries, including increased theft, drug dealing, and trafficking.
“In my experience, prosecuting cases of people with THC in their system leads me to believe there would be an increase in crime,” she said, referencing the psychoactive chemical that gives marijuana its notoriety. “Plus, I think if you legalize it there will be an increase in cartels because I think we’ll see people wanting to buy marijuana cheaper.”
Dudley pointed to a case she prosecuted in 2009, in which a 21-year-old man with marijuana and alcohol in his system drove through the county at speeds topping 100 miles per hour, eventually colliding with a female driver who was thrown from her car and killed.
“I was surprised because I then began to understand the high levels of THC that are in marijuana today, and my understanding now is that it’s five times what it used to be back in the ’80s,” Dudley said. “The marijuana that people think of that makes you mellow, makes you hungry, isn’t the marijuana we have out there.”
If passed, Proposition 19 would maintain current prohibitions against driving while impaired. However, according to MADD California Executive Director Gail Butler, the increased availability of the drug would lead to more people driving under the influence.
“MADD opposes any and all forms of impaired driving and anything that makes for impaired driving,” Butler said. “It’s been proven that even small doses of marijuana will impair a driver’s ability to operate a motor vehicle, so by legalizing marijuana, it stands to reason impaired driving would rise through use of that drug.”
Butler added with no road tests to determine marijuana impairment, police would have a tougher time enforcing DUI laws.
“Widespread testing by police for marijuana in motorists would not only be difficult, but costly to California,” she said. “The last thing we need in this economy are more costs that could be avoided.”
Not all law enforcement officers oppose marijuana legalization. Jeff Studdard, a former Los Angeles County deputy reserve sheriff, campaigns in favor of Proposition 19 for Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), a group comprised of 30,000 current and retired police officers, judges, and prosecutors who seek the decriminalization of drugs for personal use.
“I understand 100 percent why [police oppose it], but it’s not 100 percent of them who are standing up to it,” Studdard said. “The local sheriff’s department might say they’re against it, but they don’t speak for all the law officers.”
After breaking his back in an accident and being forced to retire, Studdard was confined to a wheelchair for more than a year. Having been raised in a law enforcement family, Studdard reluctantly tried medical marijuana to combat the resulting excruciating pain and nausea. He credits cannabis with weaning him off of painkillers, bringing him out of depression, and giving him his appetite back.
Today, Studdard supports legalization because of its potential to benefit patients like him.
“I don’t want to commit a violation,” Studdard said. “When I come to a place that doesn’t have access to a dispensary, what am I supposed to do? That scares me. I don’t want to commit a crime, but I do need it. And I’m not the only person like me.”
From a law enforcement perspective, Studdard said legalization would take marijuana out of the hands of cartels and ease the workload on police.
“They’re going to be able to prioritize their calls better instead of dealing with cannabis,” he said. “They’ll be able to concentrate more on other crimes, and I think that they’ll agree with it in time. It will be a transition process for them as well.”
Could legalization save California’s economy?
The precise impact of Proposition 19 on California’s economy is ripe for debate. A July 21 report by the non-partisan California Legislative Analyst’s Office estimated the state could stand to collect hundreds of millions of dollars annually in revenues, depending on how many local governments choose to tax the drug, usage, and price.
According to Public Safety First’s Salazar, since the initiative would allow adults to grow their own marijuana, the state won’t receive the tax revenue proponents claim.
“The more people who figure out that they can avoid paying taxes altogether by just growing it themselves, the less likely you’ll see those revenues—which will supposedly be generated—materialize, ” he said.
The initiative could turn into a boom for small business owners. If Proposition 19 passes, in certain communities, pot would be commercially grown and cannabis would be sold at stores like cigarettes and alcohol. Whether big tobacco would want to risk getting into the budding marijuana industry is anyone’s guess, but some entrepreneurs are worried about the potential “Walmarting” of cannabis.
Edward Brooks, a baker for Chronically Delicious, an edible marijuana company in Solano County, is worried if pot is legalized, big corporations will move in and stomp out local growers and collectives.
“How legal is legal? That’s what scares me,” Brooks said. “Are they really going to try to take over? That’s what I see. If they really open it up, I think that might happen.”
On a positive side for him, Brooks thinks it’s possible he could sell his THC-infused food in storefront shops if Proposition 19 passes.
“I think in the United States it might seem radical because once it was legal, and now it’s not because of the power of the few,” he said. “It should be everywhere. It can be regulated. It should be your choice.”
The initiative could have ripple effects for other types of businesses. Nick Landvogt, owner of The Smokers Hut, a smoke shop in Nipomo, said he’s unsure how his sales would be affected by legalization, but is anticipating expanding his store if Proposition 19 passes.
“It could go either way,” he said. “I would want to at least get another storefront just for a legal dispensary and keep this place separate. If it does become legal, there’s a good chance it could become illegal again. This is going to be a long fight, I believe.”
Feds v. California revisited
Even if voters approve the initiative, marijuana production would bring California into direct conflict with federal law, leading to speculation on possible ramifications.
Charles Lynch, a former Morro Bay dispensary owner whose business was raided by DEA agents in 2007—leading to his arrest on federal drug charges—knows about the conflict all too well.
“The problem with law enforcement is they’re going to do anything and everything they can to keep their war against us intact. for numerous reasons. As long as marijuana’s a Schedule I,” he said, referencing the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration’s classification of the drug, “the DEA is going to destroy people. They’ll be selective on who they destroy and when they come down on you, they’ll do anything and everything to disgrace you.”
The July RAND study warns of the potential for lawsuits against the state by the federal government, the withholding of federal funds, and the allocation of more law enforcement to prosecute Californians for violating federal marijuana laws.
If Proposition 19 passes, according to the Libertarian Party’s Hinkle, there would be nothing to stop the federal government from arresting Californians for marijuana use—except public opinion.
“If they step up the war on drugs, frankly that’s actually going to be good for our side,” he said. “Draconian methods to stamp out pot here will actually backlash against them and will increase support for drug re-legalization.”
Medical marijuana advocates have also raised concerns the initiative would disrupt access for patients because of the discrepancy in the amount allowed for recreational use.
In California, medical marijuana patients are allowed to possess eight ounces or more depending on their medical condition. Edible forms of marijuana, or “Medibles,” are popular for patients undergoing chemotherapy. However, creating the concentrate required for cooking takes a greater amount of plant substance than ingestion though smoking.
Americans for Safe Access, which advocates on behalf of medical marijuana patients, isn’t taking a stance on Proposition 19. However, Rich Donald, chairman for San Luis Obispo chapter of the group, said he personally supports the initiative.
“We’ve got an $18 billion a year industry going on here that’s untaxed, and more serious than that, unregulated. Nobody’s making sure that the stuff going out is safe,” Donald said. “I don’t think there’s such thing as a perfect piece of legislation, but I really do think this is the best chance we’ve got of helping the economy and making sure that people who are medicating, even medicinally, don’t get in trouble with the law.”
Medi-Cone’s Witemyre, who calls the current medical marijuana situation “untenable,” said concerns of a negative impact on patients are a result of a misinformation campaign by the opposition. If Proposition 19 passes, he said, patients would have the same access to their medication as before, with higher limits than recreational users.
“Prop. 19 doesn’t touch medical. What it does is create a new protected class of citizens to legally use cannabis, which includes every adult aged 21 and over in the state of California,” Witemyre said.
“We don’t know what’s going to happen after this initiative passes,” he added. “Unfortunately, both the opponents and proponents of this campaign seem to think they can see the future.”
Staff Writer Jeremy Thomas can be contacted at jthomas@santamariasun.com.
This article appears in Aug 5-12, 2010.
