SF Politics Meetup

This House Supports California's 'Tax Cannabis 2010' Measure When: Tuesday, June 8, 2010 7:00 PM Where: Commonwealth Club, 595 Market St, San Francisco, CA 94105 A new law to ease restrictions on Marijuana usage is going to be voted on this November in California. Proponents have submitted well in excess of the 433,971 signatures needed to get it on the ballot. Here is a summary of what the law would do: "The initiative would decriminalize marijuana at the state level, while giving local county and city governments the power to legalize, tax and regulate production and sales if they see fit. In particular, the initiative would make it legal for adults 21 and older to possess one ounce of marijuana in the privacy of their homes and to cultivate up to 25 square feet of garden space for personal use. It would prohibit possession on school grounds, use in public, smoking while minors are present, or providing to anyone under 21, as well as driving under the influence. Current medical marijuana laws would not be affected, so patients could still grow and possess as much as necessary for their medical needs. Local governments (state or county) would be able to regulate, license, and authorize commercial cultivation, sale, and transport for adults over 21." Supporters argue that the ability to tax the drug would be a fiscal gold mine for a State mired in a massive deficit, would set a national precedent and encourage stricter States to follow in a similar direction and hence shift law enforcement away from small offenders, and would increase treatment and reduce the threat of arrests: even though current marijuana laws in California currently only give possessing 1 ounce or less with a $100 fine, it can still be argued, even with this amount, that the user had an intent to sell. Opponents say that drug usage, of marijuana and in general, would rise, and that the associated health problems, along driving accidents and fatalities, would increase with this change in the law. They also argue that it would set a national precedent, and worry that a liberalized national drug culture could lead to even greater drug related crime and addiction rates. Also, importantly, the California law would clash with the federal law outlawing possession of narcotics, and this would effect such things as banks being able to interact with local dealers. Should marijuana be further decriminalised? Should local governments be given the choice to fully legalise and tax it? Does punishing drug usage work to curb the number of recreational users? Should recreational use even be curbed? Is it simply immoral for a State to accept drug usage as normal? Does the law make sense, given that different local governments could potentially clash? Is the change in law necessary, or is California's current leniency enough? What do you think? References: California's Marijuana Laws (California Norml) Breaking News (California Norml) Marijuana legalization will be on California ballot (Reuters) Measure to legalize marijuana will be on California's November ballot (LA Times) Marijuana Clinics Get Boost From Frank Lawmakers (Business Week) In Favor: Tax Cannabis 2010 Initiative Headed for November Ballot (California Norml) California Marijuana Laws: Pot Legalization Measures in 2010 (Right Pundits) Against: DEA Speaks Out Against Legalization (US Drug Enforcement Administration) Stop the Legalization of Marijuana (The Petition Site) Precedent example (wholesale decriminalisation in Portugal): Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work? (Time) 5 Years After: Portugal's Drug Decriminalization Policy Shows Positive Results (Scientific American)

Sorta Fun