Ending the Debate on Marijuana Legalization
The debate over the legalization of marijuana has been going on for years now. The results from the most recent 2016 election was a “watershed moment for the movement to end marijuana prohibition” (Davies). Eight states in the U.S. passed new laws legalizing marijuana use. Four of those states legalized it recreationally, and the others legalized it for medical use only.
Among those states that passed recreational marijuana is: California- the nation’s largest state and the “world’s sixth largest economy” (Gilbert). California passed Proposition 64 which legalizes marijuana use under state law, by adults 21 and over. It has been six years since California last attempted to change the legal bounds around marijuana. An article in the San Francisco Chronicle explains how Proposition 19 was wisely rejected by voters due to its “nonsensical” elements such as: “a nondiscrimination clause that would have prevented employers from banning pot smoking during breaks, laws that would have established a right to grow 5-by-5 plots that could not be usurped by local ordinances and a provision that allowed passengers to smoke in a moving vehicle. It included no state taxation” (Chronicle). A lot has changed about the ideas of marijuana reform since this time. These requests seem almost ridiculous in comparison to where people stand with marijuana today. Proposition 64 brings discipline and oversight to the industry by licensing and establishing standards for marijuana products, and allowing local regulation and taxation (Proposition 64).
What Prop. 64 does (from The Chronicle):
Legalizes marijuana use for adults 21 and older.
Requires licensing for cultivation and sale.
Establishes state excise tax of retail sales and cultivation taxes by weight of the product, along with standard sales taxes- though Medical patients would be exempt from this.
Creates packaging, labeling, advertising and marketing standards.
Allows local governments to impose additional regulations and taxes on marijuana.
Provides consideration for resentence of prior marijuana convictions.
Leaves intact the medical marijuana system created by Prop. 215 in 1996.
What to expect:
An article by Brooke Edwards Staggs, from the Orange County Register, points out why Prop 64 is about more than just smoking marijuana. Its important to note that California’s economy is one of the top in the world; the prop essentially “asks [us] to weigh the future of a multibillion-dollar industry.” It won’t be until 2018 that retail sales will begin and California will see tax revenue start to roll in.
The following taxes will be implemented once recreational sales begin (from Business Insider):
· Cultivation tax: $9.25/oz. for “flowers” (buds) and $2.75/oz. for “leaves” (trimming from the marijuana plant that’s often used to produce derivative THC-based products).
· Retail tax: 15% tax on the retail price (with inflation adjustment starting in 2020).
It is estimated that these taxes should revenue about $1 billion annually, and the OC Register says: “industry experts predict that California’s legal weed market will reach $6.5 billion by 2020 and potentially spur legalization throughout the country.” Once you also consider the funds that will be saved from enforcement costs, California is making quite a profit from this new law.
Where is all this new money going?
New programs will be funded for things like like youth prevention and helping communities harmed by the war on drugs. It will go toward new marijuana research to continue to study the drug more as a medicine and to make important policy changes as needed. Also, well maybe not with Trump in office but, environmental agencies will receive money to help restore environments where marijuana cultivation may have caused damages. Funds will also go toward the CHP to train officers in detecting DUIs. An article in The Cannabists continues to explain that “starting in 2028, legislators could funnel revenue to other programs, but they could never reduce the dollar amount going to youth programs, environmental agencies or law enforcement.”
What could go wrong?
In an artcile from CNBC, Jane Wells states how many growers are unhappy with the prop. She dislikes that it limits possession and worries longtime locals will be put out of production once people with ‘big money’ come in and really try to take advantage of this opportunity. With Trump as president and the history of businesses in America, I too fear this movement could turn into a government profit scheme. Though, I don’t think this is something we should live in fear of as long as we are pushing to gain freedom and rights we deserve. There is also a common fear, at least between my friends and I, that by 2023 when “there would be no state cap on the size of marijuana farms” a lot of the current high grade marijuana grown in California will start being grown with GMOs and the quality of the weed will seriously change- and we could end up paying more for less quality (OC Register).
YES ON 64
Despite some concerns over quality and government intervention, when it comes down to it, Proposition 64 will be beneficial to our society. The prop legalizes the recreational use under many standards and regulations to keep people safe and bring in a great amount of revenue for the economy. People in this movement have been fighting for a long time for legalization, and they’ve finally won.
