State wants to do it for extra tax revenue, less money to spend on enforcement. But feds aren't happpy _________________________________________________________________ Voters in California could set the precedent for the rest of the country Nov. 2 as they go to the polls for a ballot measure that would make California the first state in the country to fully legalize mar1juana. Proposition 19 would allow people 21 and older to cultivate up to 25 square feet of mar1juana and carry up to 1 ounce of mar1juana for personal use at nonpublic locations. The state would regulate businesses selling mar1juana and collect fees and taxes the way it does for cigarettes and alcohol. Support for the controversial measure is gaining steam, polls show. But it remains to be seen whether young voters, the main demographic group that supports Proposition 19, will come to the polls Nov. 2. A Public Policy Institute of California survey released last month found that 52 percent of Californians favored the measure, while 41 percent were against it and 7 percent were undecided. A SurveyUSA poll released earlier this month found similar results, with 48-41 percent in favor of the measure. A majority of the backing comes from young voters, while those 65 and older are mostly against the measure, polls show. That could pose a problem for Proposition 19 supporters. Young adults aren't as reliable in turnouts, and are much less likely to be registered to vote. An ABC News/Washington Post poll released earlier this month found that 58 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds were registered, compared with 89 percent of their elders. Those young people who said they were registered were much less apt to say they're certain to vote next month. Even if Proposition 19 passes in California, it's unlikely to get a pass from the federal government. Recreational use of mar1juana is still illegal under federal law, and Attorney General Eric Holder made it clear last week that the Justice Department would enforce the federal law even if Proposition 19 passes. "We will vigorously enforce the CSA [Controlled Substances Act] against those individuals and organizations that possess, manufacture or distribute mar1juana for recreational use, even if such activities are permitted under state law," Holder said in a letter to former chiefs of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. Holder added that Proposition 19's passage would be a "significant impediment" to the government's efforts to target drug traffickers, a concern echoed by Mexican President Felipe Calderon. Proponents of the measure, however, argue that it would not only help California's sizable budget deficit but would in turn reduce crime by shifting law enforcement's focus to harder substances and targeting only serious offenders. mar1juana is California's biggest cash crop, worth $14 billion in sales, nearly double the state's second biggest revenue generator, dairy. The California government projected that at an excise tax of $50 per ounce, the new law would bring in about $1.4 billion in additional revenues. It would save the state $960 million a year in enforcement costs, according to the Cato Institute. Proposition 19 has earned the endorsement of several influential groups, such as California's NAACP, Latino Voters League and unions like Service Employees International Union and the United Food and Commercial Workers. Several members of Congress, such as Reps. Pete Stark, Barbara Lee and George Miller -- who represent heavily liberal districts -- have also been outspoken supporters. Former U.S. Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders defended the measure on CNN Sunday, saying that much more harmful substances, such as tobacco and alcohol, are legal, and mar1juana should be no different. "I don't think much could be worse than the present situation that we have, when we have the highest number of people in the world being criminalized [for] many nonviolent crimes relating to mar1juana," she said. "mar1juana has not caused anybody directly to die. It's not a toxic substance that would cause people to die and ... we can use our resources so much better." But politically, mar1juana remains a potent issue. The California Democratic Party hasn't taken any position on Proposition 19, and virtually all heavy hitters are opposed to it, including Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Sen. Barbara Boxer, and both gubernatorial candidates. This is not the first time that a state has dabbled in such a measure. Earlier this year, a mar1juana-legalization bill was introduced in Washington, but it was struck down by the state legislature. But California has been known to lead the country in mar1juana laws. It was the first state to legalize medical mar1juana, and over time, the state has relaxed its laws governing mar1juana. Last week, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a law reducing the charges for 1 ounce or less of mar1juana possession to a misdemeanor from an infraction, essentially saying that those found in possession wouldn't face arrest, a court appearance and a criminal record. While legalizing mar1juana remains a hot-button issue, Americans' views toward medical mar1juana have softened in recent years, and more states are paving the way for legal use of mar1juana for medicinal purposes. Currently, medical mar1juana is legal in 14 states and Washington, D.C., and similar initiatives will be up for a vote in three states http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/vote...r1juana-legalization-ballot/story?id=11906253
The proposition was leading in the polls for a long time, but now it looks like it's a coin flip to win, which is too bad. It's apparently not the best written law, and I'm not sure much will become of it if it is passed anyway, but it's still a referendum on whether mar1juana should be legal and as such I really do hope it passes.
If you're even slightly educated on the issue, it's really hard to argue against the legalization of mar1juana.
be cool if it passes...but still screwy that the rational is economic. More of a drug dealer's foundation then a civil liberties one. It would also be odd that in a place where it's illegal to light a cigarette on a beach, it would be OK to toke up. And, regardless of what happens, the DEA won't let it be. Though many of the Prop 8 and legalize MJ activist will have to switch playbooks on whether the Feds have the power to invoke their will over a state proposition.
If you can justify it with MONEY it goes down better . . .. people care about MONEY more than liberties. Rocket River
Tax, regulate, educate. Legalize. Christ I hope this passes and spreads across the country. The misinformation and disinformation about drugs is f***ing ridiculous.
I think Portugal decriminalized it, but didn't legalize it. I think there's a difference, though I could easily be wrong.
this is where our constitution is getting stepped on. the states have rights to do what they want. you can't use the commerce clause to justify regulating drug control in a particular state. if it can still be legal to transfer the drugs across state lines, but California and any state for that matter should be able to do whatever it wants. I hope the people of Cali come out to vote, if you wan't something, you gotta change it.
I'll never get why so many people are against it. Its not like if I go to my backyard and smoke a little bit of weed, anyone would be hurt by that. Even if it hurt ME (Which it really wouldn't much at all), why does it matter to others? It would be my choice. No one is forcing me to do it except myself. Sure, there should be laws against driving and stuff, but it would be the same with alcohol, and we aren't going to be ban alcohol any time soon. And it'd generate a lot of revenue. If you tax it, it could be another cash source for the government. Hope this passes, even if the feds don't allow it. Theres no reason for it to be illegal. its all people having a ton of wrong information and being brainwashed by tv and school programs, and the government not wanting to admit they were wrong.
Because it's competition. I don't think it's going to pass in Cali. Maybe in 2012, Colorado, Washington, or Oregon can pick up the fallen baton and get it across the line.
I think its good move for California. They need the revenues to keep up with their wacky governmental policies that have made California one of the worst places to do business. Legalize it, tax the hell out of it and enjoy. I don't understand what the government is doing deciding how free citizens live their lives and what they decide to inhale.
They aren't really decriminalizing it, or legalizing it, for that matter. Look at the restrictions. The state of California wants to get their grubby hand into their number one cash crop. If they can put legal limitations on the market supply, they can essentially control the market like drug cartels have done. That doesn't help the average person. It just keeps prices artificially high, while stifling quality improvements that come along with competition. However, it is a first step. Maybe once the state of California gives their citizens the privilege to buy, sell, and use mar1juana, we can have a serious debate on this very un-free system that California intends to establish on it's mar1juana market. I'm also curious to see how the federal government responds. They've done a good job of shifting demand for mar1juana to domestic markets. mar1juana imported from Mexico is going up in price and down in quality because of the government's efforts to harass trade. Smugglers are having to destroy the product's quality (by keeping it too compressed) in order to get it across the border. I'm wondering exactly how Congress intends to harass trade between California and other states, given that the Constitution limits their scope to keeping trade uniform between states. Very interesting indeed.
