(Photo: Rusty Blazenhoff / Flickr)Alaska state election officials have confirmed that proponents of a statewide ballot measure to regulate the production and sale of marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol has enough signatures to qualify for the 2014 ballot. Voters in Oregon – and possibly California – will have the opportunity this year to decide on similar ballot measures. Recently published statewide and national polling data indicate that some, if not all, of these initiatives are likely to meet voter approval. Voters in Colorado and Washington already have.
Voters in Colorado and Washington already have. In Washington, the possession of marijuana by an adult is no longer a criminal or civil offense. In Colorado, the possession and cultivation of pot by an adult is now without penalty, as is the commercially licensed production and retail sale of cannabis. For decades, public officials have warned that regulating cannabis production, sales and consumption was a practical impossibility and that any significant change in marijuana policy would send “the wrong message” or cause the sky to fall. Yet the initial experience in Colorado, which began taxing and tracking retail marijuana sales January 1, 2014, has shown these beliefs to be misplaced. State officials can regulate cannabis in a manner that satisfies the seller, the consumer and the taxman. This common-sense regulatory framework, otherwise known as legalization, is preferable to cannabis criminalization, a doomed-to-fail public policy that financially burdens taxpayers, encroaches upon civil liberties, engenders disrespect for the law and disproportionately affects lower-income classes and ethnic minorities, who bear the brunt of cannabis arrests and prosecutions.
The time has come to replace marijuana prohibition with public policies that properly regulate the cannabis market and that allow for pot’s private consumption by adults in a manner similar to alcohol and tobacco. Criminalization is a disproportionate public policy response to what is, at worst, a public health concern, not a criminal justice issue.
Regulations such as age restrictions for consumers and licensing requirements for commercial producers and merchants, are effective and proven alternatives to prohibition. For example, the public’s overall consumption of alcohol and tobacco, and young people’s use in particular, now stand at near-historic lows. (According to the latest federal government figures, alcohol consumption among young people has declined from 75 percent of 12th-graders in the late 1970s to 40 percent today. Tobacco use among 12th-graders has fallen similarly, from 28 percent in the 1990s to just 16 percent today.) These results have been achieved not by imposing blanket criminalization upon society but by legalization, regulation and public education.
Colorado lawmakers are – and those in Washington soon will be – applying these tried-and-true principles to cannabis. Public officials should welcome bringing these necessary and long-overdue controls to the cannabis market.
Of course, those of us who advocate for a regulated, above-ground cannabis market agree that marijuana use by adults is not without concern. Where we disagree is on the matter of what is the best public policy: one of regulation or one of continued prohibition.
In short, concerns regarding cannabis’ abuse potential do not validate the substance’s continued criminalization – a policy that results in the arrest of some 750,000 Americans annually, 90 percent of which are for possession only. Just the opposite is true. There are numerous adverse health consequences associated with alcohol, tobacco and prescription pharmaceuticals – all of which are far more dangerous and costlier to society than cannabis. It’s precisely because of these consequences that these products are regulated and their use is restricted to particular consumers and specific settings. Why would society not benefit from the imposition of similar regulations upon marijuana?
Cannabis prohibition is typified by an absence of any regulatory framework or legal controls. Prohibition drives markets underground and abdicates control of these markets to those who typically operate outside the boundaries of law. By contrast, legalization allows for lawmakers to establish legal parameters regarding where, when and how an adult cannabis market may operate. Legalization also provides oversight regarding who may legally operate in said markets and provides guidelines so that those who do can engage in best practices. Such oversight benefits not only the consumer but also society overall. Ultimately, only criminals and cartels benefit from the ongoing imposition of cannabis prohibition. The majority of the American public now recognizes this fact; when will the majority of their elected officials?
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
Last week, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy