Legalizing Marijuana? A tough question with good arguments for both sides

<figure id="attachment_9114" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-9114" style="width: 360px" class="wp-caption alignright"><a class="highslide" onclick="return vz.expand(this)" href="http://laprensa-sandiego.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/DSCF8489.jpg"><… loading="lazy" class="size-full wp-image-9114" title="DSCF8489" src="http://laprensa-sandiego.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/DSCF8489.jpg&qu…; alt="" width="360" height="360" srcset="https://dev-laprensa.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/DSCF848… 360w, https://dev-laprensa.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/DSCF848… 150w, https://dev-laprensa.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/DSCF848… 300w" sizes="(max-width: 360px) 100vw, 360px"></a><figcaption id="caption-attachment-9114" class="wp-caption-text">Mexican authorities seized 134 tons of marijuana in Tijuana, this week. The value of the seizure was estimated at $340 million.</figcaption></figure>
    Prop 19 seems to be the star on the upcoming November 2nd ballot. It has been in the public eye because if approved it would make California the first state to decriminalize the use and growth of marijuana for recreational purposes.
    The proposition would allow all adults 21 or older to posses, and transport up to an ounce of pot, considered for personal use, and allows for the growth of marijuana in a 25 feet lot per household.
    It leaves a wide margin for local governments to establish their own taxation system and doesn’t earmark revenue generated by taxation for drug use prevention or addiction treatment.
    If passed, Prop 19 would not alter current prohibition of drug possession in schools, consumption in public spaces or in the presence of minors, offering it to minors or driving under the influence of marijuana.
    Polls show a close race, with the yes vote ahead.
    Those who oppose the measure, —including California Sheriffs Association and the Coalition for a Drug Free California, claim the proposition has many flaws and goes against current federal policy which might result in the loss of Federal contracts for the state.
    The cost of enforcing the law regarding the sale or bartering of the marijuana surplus would also come at a high price.
    Roger Morgan, executive director of the Coalition finds himself deeply worried upon the possibility of a single person being able to grow up to 25 square feet of the drug, the equivalent to 6 thousand joints, much more than average consumption.
    “Studies have found THC to be dangerous to a developing brain” says Morgan, “but it is precisely that age group from 18 to 25 that consumes the most, followed closely by 17 year-olds; two of the most crucial brain growth periods — the brain doesn’t stop developing until age 25 — its use is linked to psychotic episodes, paranoia, depressions…”
    For those backing the proposal, —including Law Enforcement Against Prohibition LEAP, Prop 19 will free up valuable resources for a state in a deep financial crisis; increase tax revenue and avoid the futile prosecution of 80 thousand people a year, lowering jail overcrowding.
    They claim marijuana is less harmful than alcohol, tobacco or prescription drugs, —all legal, well regulated and taxed. It is not addictive, not toxic to the body and doesn’t prompt violent behavior, unlike some of the mentioned legal substances.
    Kathleen A. Staudt, political science professor at University of Texas, El Paso, points to pharmaceutical companies as the true drug pushers and claims marihuana use pales in comparison to the abuse of medication.
    “Educators and addiction experts have warned about a shift in drug consumption amongst Young people; they are moving away from marijuana to experiment with controlled substances” Staudt explains.
    “There seems to be a constant flow of this drugs and nobody seems to be paying much attention, there is a constant push for the use of controlled substances, push, push, push….they are the true drug-dealers”.
    Those already supporting Prop 19 cite the strict regulation for alcohol consumption in the US and the steady decline of tobacco use after a strong public health campaign.
    Alex Kreit, professor at Thomas Jefferson Law School, cites the fact that 44% of Americans have used pot, -including the last 3 US presidents, showing a growing acceptance of the use amongst the general public.
    Every year, California spends a billion dollars enforcing marijuana laws.
    “But in that same year we have 61 thousand felonies go unsolved; wouldn’t it be better to re-allocate those resources currently used to arrest casual marijuana users to investigate other types of crimes?” Kreit asks.
The effect on Mexico
    On top of the national debate, Prop 19 has been debated in relationship to a possible reduction in violence in Mexico by changing the current offer-demand scheme of international drug trafficking organizations.
    Mexican president Felipe Calderón has expressed his frustration with the possibility of Prop 19 passing, calling it “an example of the inconsistency in US Drug Policy.”
    In Baja California, State Prosecutor Rommel Moreno Manjarrez and Tijuana mayor Jorge Ramos, have said they are worried about the measure and probable repercussions in Tijuana, where many of the drugs are stashed and crossed across the border for the US market.
    “Legalization or not, any regulation on the matter should be made in coordination with the neighboring nation; otherwise it’s suicidal” said Rommel, whose job includes the investigation of hundreds of drug-related deaths throughout the state.
    A recent pair of studies by the RAND research group admits the demand of illicit drugs is a factor in the turf war held by rival drug trafficking organization, but questions how and if the legislation change in California impacts Mexico.
    Among the findings is the fact that Mexican drug traffickers earn no more than 2 billion dollars from California consumers and question the government officials that have stated pot sales represent 60% of the cartel´s revenue.
    RAND estimates that if passed, Prop 19 would actually result in a loss of revenue for Mexican cartels of just 2 to 4%.
    This means, if marijuana is decriminalized in California it would not have an immediate influence in Mexican drug cartel or the violence deriving from their activities.
    Unless California becomes a lead exporter of pot and takes Mexican pot off the market.
    If so, California grown marijuana sent to other states could in fact reduce the sale of Mexican marihuana by 65 to 85%. Only then would Mexican cartels in fact loose 20% of their profits.
    “But we have a proposed tax that would raise the price of pot 50% over the current street value; what would be the incentive to legalize an operation? There would still be room for a black market in California even with the law changing” says RAND researcher, Rosalie Pecula.
    Pecula also warns Prop 19 would allow cities to create their own taxation scheme and might lead to a race to the bottom.
    Staudt has followed Mexican narco closely, especially in Ciudad Juarez and admits decriminalization alone will not be a determining factor to stop it.
    Yet the University of Texas, El Paso researcher considers Prop 19 a valuable policy shift and an important step towards a more honest drug policy debate.
    “Decriminalization in the United States could have an effect on Mexico in the long run, but ultimately many other investments have to be made, such as well-paid job creation, education, and gender violence reduction…” she states.

Legalizing Marijuana? A tough question with good arguments for both sides

Tags