Jim Finnel
Fallen Cannabis Warrior & Ex News Moderator
The debate over marijuana could get hotter in the Inland region.
As local governments throughout Riverside and San Bernardino counties continue pondering how to regulate medical-marijuana dispensaries, groups of San Francisco Bay Area activists are seeking to legalize the drug for all uses in California.
The move, supporters say, would save money in reduced law-enforcement costs and allow the state to tax marijuana and collect more than $1 billion in revenue.
"Once folks become better informed about how marijuana affects people, about the truths, I think they will be less opposed to the idea," said Scott Bledsoe, of Crestline, who sued San Bernardino County for balking at issuing medical-marijuana identification cards.
But not everyone is excited about the prospect of legalized pot. Law enforcement officials oppose the plan, as do many local elected leaders. And even if marijuana were legalized in California, federal law still would prohibit its possession and use, although it remains unclear how aggressively authorities would enforce those laws.
"The recreational use of marijuana; I am not sure it is something the government should be encouraging," San Bernardino County Supervisor Brad Mitzelfelt said. "Smoking any substance can be harmful to people's lungs."
In July, Oakland became the first American city to tax medical-marijuana sales. Officials said the tax should earn the city about $1 million annually.
Beyond Medicine
California voters soon could be asked to legalize and tax the drug for more than just medical uses.
Last week, supporters of one of two proposed marijuana legalization ballot measures were cleared to begin gathering signatures to put the measure on the November 2010 ballot. They have until Feb. 5 to collect almost 434,000 valid voter signatures.
A similar proposal is scheduled to begin the process later this month.
Besides decriminalizing the sale and distribution of marijuana, the initiatives would let the Legislature tax the crop.
It would mark the latest attempt by activists to legalize the drug in California. The first came in 1972, when 66 percent of voters rejected Prop. 19, according to the UC Hastings College of Law, which maintains a database of all California propositions since 1911.
In 1996, voters approved the drug's use for medical purposes with Prop. 215.
Joe Rogoway, a criminal-defense attorney who helped write one of the new initiatives, said it would reduce crime, save money for law enforcement and raise much-needed revenue for the state.
"This is a crime-reduction issue," said Rogoway, who practices in the San Francisco area. "If it's legalized, the black market would disappear. As we know from what happened during Prohibition, the ban of marijuana gives rise to organized crime." Alcohol was banned during Prohibition.
Revenue for State
The state Board of Equalization estimated that legalizing marijuana and imposing a $50-per-ounce levy on the drug's retail sales, combined with regular sales taxes, could generate $1.4 billion per year in revenue for the state. The analysis was part of a review of a bill to decriminalize marijuana.
The measure would reduce law-enforcement spending by $981 million, Rogoway said, citing an estimate by the Marijuana Policy Project, which supports legalization.
The idea could find voter support. A Field Poll survey in late April found that 56 percent of California voters back legalizing marijuana and taxing the proceeds.
Lanny Swerdlow, a nurse and activist who opened a medical-marijuana clinic in Riverside last year, said he believes support is growing in the Inland area.
"Not only do I think California needs to have this debate, the entire nation needs to have this debate," he said.
But the initiative is certain to face strong opposition from law-enforcement groups, which contend legal marijuana is a gateway drug to other illegal narcotics. And there has been strong resistance to medical marijuana among officials in Riverside and San Bernardino counties.
John Lovell, a lobbyist for law-enforcement groups, said he thinks the Field Poll survey overstated public support for legalizing marijuana.
"I think once the public understands that there's no earthly reason to make another mind-altering substance, particularly one that's carcinogenic, more available to people," a marijuana-legalization initiative would lose handily, Lovell said.
San Bernardino County sheriff's Lt. Rick Ells said legalizing another "intoxicant is probably a bad idea."
"The fact is we almost have pseudo-legalization with the medical-marijuana program," Ells said. "It seems almost anyone who wants a physician's recommendation can get one."
Potential Problems
The drug's entire legalization could present a host of problems, including crime and the potential that the drug could be improperly marketed to children, Ells said.
He said medical marijuana dispensaries in Los Angeles have already seen armed robberies.
Meanwhile, many Inland cities have banned or imposed moratoriums on medical-marijuana dispensaries. Most recently, San Bernardino County instituted a one-year moratorium on dispensaries in unincorporated areas as supervisors decide how to regulate them.
Earlier, San Bernardino County challenged the state over the requirement that it issue medical-marijuana identification cards, arguing that federal drug laws supersede state rules.
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear San Bernardino County's legal challenge, which has been upheld by lower court rulings. For more than three years, San Bernardino and San Diego counties challenged the state law.
If marijuana activists succeed in getting the latest measure passed, it would still run up against federal laws banning the commercial sale and distribution of marijuana.
How federal authorities would react is uncertain. California voters' approval of medical-marijuana use in 1996 led to federal raids on dispensaries, but U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has since told authorities to back off.
Mitzelfelt said users still would put themselves at risk with federal authorities.
"There will be casualties," he said. "Those will be people who will be in violation of federal law because they believe they are protected by contrary state law. A lot of people will be arrested and prosecuted. That is not the way to go about lawmaking."
Mitzelfelt said he doesn't buy the argument about legalizing and taxing marijuana. Typically, government taxes a substance, such as tobacco, to discourage its use, he said.
"I am loath to use my position as an elected official to enable people to violate federal law and advance the cause of legalizing pot for recreational use," Mitzelfelt wrote in a recent opinion piece published on his campaign blog.
NewsHawk: User: 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: Press-Enterprise (Riverside, CA)
Copyright: 2009 The Press-Enterprise Company
Contact: Opinion | PE.com | Southern California News | News for Inland Southern California
Website: PE.com | Southern California News | News for Inland Southern California
Author: Duane W. Gang and Jim Miller
As local governments throughout Riverside and San Bernardino counties continue pondering how to regulate medical-marijuana dispensaries, groups of San Francisco Bay Area activists are seeking to legalize the drug for all uses in California.
The move, supporters say, would save money in reduced law-enforcement costs and allow the state to tax marijuana and collect more than $1 billion in revenue.
"Once folks become better informed about how marijuana affects people, about the truths, I think they will be less opposed to the idea," said Scott Bledsoe, of Crestline, who sued San Bernardino County for balking at issuing medical-marijuana identification cards.
But not everyone is excited about the prospect of legalized pot. Law enforcement officials oppose the plan, as do many local elected leaders. And even if marijuana were legalized in California, federal law still would prohibit its possession and use, although it remains unclear how aggressively authorities would enforce those laws.
"The recreational use of marijuana; I am not sure it is something the government should be encouraging," San Bernardino County Supervisor Brad Mitzelfelt said. "Smoking any substance can be harmful to people's lungs."
In July, Oakland became the first American city to tax medical-marijuana sales. Officials said the tax should earn the city about $1 million annually.
Beyond Medicine
California voters soon could be asked to legalize and tax the drug for more than just medical uses.
Last week, supporters of one of two proposed marijuana legalization ballot measures were cleared to begin gathering signatures to put the measure on the November 2010 ballot. They have until Feb. 5 to collect almost 434,000 valid voter signatures.
A similar proposal is scheduled to begin the process later this month.
Besides decriminalizing the sale and distribution of marijuana, the initiatives would let the Legislature tax the crop.
It would mark the latest attempt by activists to legalize the drug in California. The first came in 1972, when 66 percent of voters rejected Prop. 19, according to the UC Hastings College of Law, which maintains a database of all California propositions since 1911.
In 1996, voters approved the drug's use for medical purposes with Prop. 215.
Joe Rogoway, a criminal-defense attorney who helped write one of the new initiatives, said it would reduce crime, save money for law enforcement and raise much-needed revenue for the state.
"This is a crime-reduction issue," said Rogoway, who practices in the San Francisco area. "If it's legalized, the black market would disappear. As we know from what happened during Prohibition, the ban of marijuana gives rise to organized crime." Alcohol was banned during Prohibition.
Revenue for State
The state Board of Equalization estimated that legalizing marijuana and imposing a $50-per-ounce levy on the drug's retail sales, combined with regular sales taxes, could generate $1.4 billion per year in revenue for the state. The analysis was part of a review of a bill to decriminalize marijuana.
The measure would reduce law-enforcement spending by $981 million, Rogoway said, citing an estimate by the Marijuana Policy Project, which supports legalization.
The idea could find voter support. A Field Poll survey in late April found that 56 percent of California voters back legalizing marijuana and taxing the proceeds.
Lanny Swerdlow, a nurse and activist who opened a medical-marijuana clinic in Riverside last year, said he believes support is growing in the Inland area.
"Not only do I think California needs to have this debate, the entire nation needs to have this debate," he said.
But the initiative is certain to face strong opposition from law-enforcement groups, which contend legal marijuana is a gateway drug to other illegal narcotics. And there has been strong resistance to medical marijuana among officials in Riverside and San Bernardino counties.
John Lovell, a lobbyist for law-enforcement groups, said he thinks the Field Poll survey overstated public support for legalizing marijuana.
"I think once the public understands that there's no earthly reason to make another mind-altering substance, particularly one that's carcinogenic, more available to people," a marijuana-legalization initiative would lose handily, Lovell said.
San Bernardino County sheriff's Lt. Rick Ells said legalizing another "intoxicant is probably a bad idea."
"The fact is we almost have pseudo-legalization with the medical-marijuana program," Ells said. "It seems almost anyone who wants a physician's recommendation can get one."
Potential Problems
The drug's entire legalization could present a host of problems, including crime and the potential that the drug could be improperly marketed to children, Ells said.
He said medical marijuana dispensaries in Los Angeles have already seen armed robberies.
Meanwhile, many Inland cities have banned or imposed moratoriums on medical-marijuana dispensaries. Most recently, San Bernardino County instituted a one-year moratorium on dispensaries in unincorporated areas as supervisors decide how to regulate them.
Earlier, San Bernardino County challenged the state over the requirement that it issue medical-marijuana identification cards, arguing that federal drug laws supersede state rules.
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear San Bernardino County's legal challenge, which has been upheld by lower court rulings. For more than three years, San Bernardino and San Diego counties challenged the state law.
If marijuana activists succeed in getting the latest measure passed, it would still run up against federal laws banning the commercial sale and distribution of marijuana.
How federal authorities would react is uncertain. California voters' approval of medical-marijuana use in 1996 led to federal raids on dispensaries, but U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has since told authorities to back off.
Mitzelfelt said users still would put themselves at risk with federal authorities.
"There will be casualties," he said. "Those will be people who will be in violation of federal law because they believe they are protected by contrary state law. A lot of people will be arrested and prosecuted. That is not the way to go about lawmaking."
Mitzelfelt said he doesn't buy the argument about legalizing and taxing marijuana. Typically, government taxes a substance, such as tobacco, to discourage its use, he said.
"I am loath to use my position as an elected official to enable people to violate federal law and advance the cause of legalizing pot for recreational use," Mitzelfelt wrote in a recent opinion piece published on his campaign blog.
NewsHawk: User: 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: Press-Enterprise (Riverside, CA)
Copyright: 2009 The Press-Enterprise Company
Contact: Opinion | PE.com | Southern California News | News for Inland Southern California
Website: PE.com | Southern California News | News for Inland Southern California
Author: Duane W. Gang and Jim Miller
