Jacob Redmond
Well-Known Member
Whether voters in Ohio legalize recreational and medical marijuana on Tuesday, it's clear that how the state plans to legalize it is changing the game.
The proposal in Ohio would limit cultivating and selling pot to 10 pre-determined farms - in essence a marijuana monopoly. The constitutional amendment Ohioans are voting on Tuesday is funded almost exclusively by those who stand to benefit financially from it, many of whom have little-to-no background in previous legalization efforts.
What's happening in Ohio has divided the marijuana legalization movement; some are excited to potentially count a swing state like Ohio among their pro-pot allies, others are wary of how this private-sector-driven initiative could undermine their cause.
To break down what this could mean for the future of pot in America, we spoke with Ethan Nadelmann, the executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, a nonprofit organization that advocates drug policy reform, including marijuana legalization. Our conversation has been edited lightly for clarity and brevity.
Fix: You wrote in a recent op-ed for CNN.com that this Ohio model is problematic, the sort of overreach that makes both liberals and conservatives uneasy. And yet you're rooting for it to pass. Why?
Nadelmann: The notion of putting into the state constitution an oligopoly in perpetuity - it was just something that just seems wrong. I very much prefer that this not become a model for other states.
But if it does win today, the message coming out of his nationally would be "Ohio legalizes marijuana." For most observers, the oligopoly provision will be a footnote at best, and what will really hit people will be "Oh my god, Ohio? Ohio which is a key swing state in American presidential elections, Ohio which is currently dominated by the Republicans, Ohio which leans conservative in its political make up?" All those things suggest that a win in Ohio would be galvanizing for the national movement.
Fix: As is evidenced by Ohio, it seems as if the social movement toward legalizing marijuana is happening incredibly fast. Was this inevitable people would want to cash in on this?
Nadelmann: It's always been inevitable, whether it's illegal or legal, that people are going to try to make money off of it. We always knew that to the extent we were successful in legalizing marijuana that ultimately the industry would come to be dominated by people, most of whom had not participated in the illegal industry and probably not even participated in the medical marijuana industry.
With 2016, it's going to be a very interesting year. This will probably be the last year in which a majority of the funding is provided by people and organizations with no financial interest in a legal marijuana market.
When you look into the future - 2018 and beyond - the focus will shift increasingly toward people who are primarily in it for the money.
Fix: How could people's perceptions of marijuana change as the legalization effort becomes more about profit?
Nadelmann: The upside is it means that, in years to come, it will be one of the rare occasions where a movement for social justice, racial justice and personal freedom will be funded primarily by people pushing their own profit. That's quite unusual; I'm trying to think back when historically something like that happened.
On the other hand, there's a risk which is a lot of people are entering this industry who are driven by the urge to make a buck quickly and who are indifferent to whether or not this effort to legalize marijuana is ultimately a success nationally. And so the risk is that their carelessness and short-term perspective, their greed, could land up derailing the entire effort if people react negatively to their overreach.
Fix: Is there a connection between this social shift and the growing number of people who are in it for the money?
Nadelmann: I go back and forth on that. If you ask people if they know somebody who smokes marijuana or uses marijuana, that does not predict support for legalization. But if you ask do you know anybody who uses marijuana for medical purposes, it turn out if you say 'yes' to that, then that's the single biggest predictor of whether or not somebody will support legalizing marijuana more broadly.
So that's clearly helped shift the discussion in this country, and it may explain why public opinion in the U.S. on legalizing marijuana is ahead of almost every other country in the world.
Fix: Are we still in the wild west, experimental phase of legalization?
Nadelmann: Yes. It's very much analogous to what happened to the repeal of alcohol prohibition. When the 18th Amendment in 1933 came along, there was no national model. About 18 to 20 states required a state monopoly on hard liquor. You still had tens of thousands of towns and counties that remained dry. You had incredibly varied models all around the the country.
I think the same thing is going to be true and should be true with respect to legalization of marijuana.
Fix: Overall, are you bullish on marijuana's future in America?
Nadelmann: I think if you jump forward a generation from now, it's all going to sketch out. You'll have a mixture of market dynamics and political evolution. But over the next five to 10 years, it's going to be a bumpy road. But it seems to be headed in the right direction right now.
News Moderator: Jacob Redmond 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Here Are The Big Questions That Remain About Marijuana Legalization
Author: Amber Phillips
Contact: Contact Page
Photo Credit: FOX 8 News
Website: The Washington Post
The proposal in Ohio would limit cultivating and selling pot to 10 pre-determined farms - in essence a marijuana monopoly. The constitutional amendment Ohioans are voting on Tuesday is funded almost exclusively by those who stand to benefit financially from it, many of whom have little-to-no background in previous legalization efforts.
What's happening in Ohio has divided the marijuana legalization movement; some are excited to potentially count a swing state like Ohio among their pro-pot allies, others are wary of how this private-sector-driven initiative could undermine their cause.
To break down what this could mean for the future of pot in America, we spoke with Ethan Nadelmann, the executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, a nonprofit organization that advocates drug policy reform, including marijuana legalization. Our conversation has been edited lightly for clarity and brevity.
Fix: You wrote in a recent op-ed for CNN.com that this Ohio model is problematic, the sort of overreach that makes both liberals and conservatives uneasy. And yet you're rooting for it to pass. Why?
Nadelmann: The notion of putting into the state constitution an oligopoly in perpetuity - it was just something that just seems wrong. I very much prefer that this not become a model for other states.
But if it does win today, the message coming out of his nationally would be "Ohio legalizes marijuana." For most observers, the oligopoly provision will be a footnote at best, and what will really hit people will be "Oh my god, Ohio? Ohio which is a key swing state in American presidential elections, Ohio which is currently dominated by the Republicans, Ohio which leans conservative in its political make up?" All those things suggest that a win in Ohio would be galvanizing for the national movement.
Fix: As is evidenced by Ohio, it seems as if the social movement toward legalizing marijuana is happening incredibly fast. Was this inevitable people would want to cash in on this?
Nadelmann: It's always been inevitable, whether it's illegal or legal, that people are going to try to make money off of it. We always knew that to the extent we were successful in legalizing marijuana that ultimately the industry would come to be dominated by people, most of whom had not participated in the illegal industry and probably not even participated in the medical marijuana industry.
With 2016, it's going to be a very interesting year. This will probably be the last year in which a majority of the funding is provided by people and organizations with no financial interest in a legal marijuana market.
When you look into the future - 2018 and beyond - the focus will shift increasingly toward people who are primarily in it for the money.
Fix: How could people's perceptions of marijuana change as the legalization effort becomes more about profit?
Nadelmann: The upside is it means that, in years to come, it will be one of the rare occasions where a movement for social justice, racial justice and personal freedom will be funded primarily by people pushing their own profit. That's quite unusual; I'm trying to think back when historically something like that happened.
On the other hand, there's a risk which is a lot of people are entering this industry who are driven by the urge to make a buck quickly and who are indifferent to whether or not this effort to legalize marijuana is ultimately a success nationally. And so the risk is that their carelessness and short-term perspective, their greed, could land up derailing the entire effort if people react negatively to their overreach.
Fix: Is there a connection between this social shift and the growing number of people who are in it for the money?
Nadelmann: I go back and forth on that. If you ask people if they know somebody who smokes marijuana or uses marijuana, that does not predict support for legalization. But if you ask do you know anybody who uses marijuana for medical purposes, it turn out if you say 'yes' to that, then that's the single biggest predictor of whether or not somebody will support legalizing marijuana more broadly.
So that's clearly helped shift the discussion in this country, and it may explain why public opinion in the U.S. on legalizing marijuana is ahead of almost every other country in the world.
Fix: Are we still in the wild west, experimental phase of legalization?
Nadelmann: Yes. It's very much analogous to what happened to the repeal of alcohol prohibition. When the 18th Amendment in 1933 came along, there was no national model. About 18 to 20 states required a state monopoly on hard liquor. You still had tens of thousands of towns and counties that remained dry. You had incredibly varied models all around the the country.
I think the same thing is going to be true and should be true with respect to legalization of marijuana.
Fix: Overall, are you bullish on marijuana's future in America?
Nadelmann: I think if you jump forward a generation from now, it's all going to sketch out. You'll have a mixture of market dynamics and political evolution. But over the next five to 10 years, it's going to be a bumpy road. But it seems to be headed in the right direction right now.
News Moderator: Jacob Redmond 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Here Are The Big Questions That Remain About Marijuana Legalization
Author: Amber Phillips
Contact: Contact Page
Photo Credit: FOX 8 News
Website: The Washington Post
