Marijuana Legalization Bridges Ideology

by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright October 6, 2010
All Rights Reserved.                                

            Bridging political ideology, California’s Prop 19—the marijuana legalization ballot initiative—shows broad support from both sides of the political aisle.  With the governor’s race grabbing the headlines, Prop 19 has slipped under the radar with recent polls showing the nation’s first marijuana legalization measure passing without too much spending or publicity.  Unlike the Prop 8 [Marriage Protection Act] where Christian and Mormon opponents raised over $45 million in 2008, Prop 19 advocates have raised only $2.1 million, detractors on $210,000.  ‘People tend to look at it as say, ‘Of course it’s going to lose, whose going to vote for that?’’ said Roger Salazar, spokesman for “No” on Prop. 19.  Since passing Prop 215 [medical marijuana] Nov. 5, 1996, marijuana has been so accepted, so a part of the California culture, that there’s virtually no coherent opposition.

             Fourteen-years of medical marijuana has proved that marijuana has virtually no adverse effects on society.  All the phony scare tactics from the government’s 1938 propaganda film “Reefer Madness” hasn’t discouraged marijuana users from partaking, regardless of organized opposition largely from law enforcement.  Law enforcement and the prison system stands to lose millions—if not billions—in funding for arrests, prosecutions, convictions and incarcerations from marijuana-related offenses.  California’s legislative analyst expects the state to generate millions in tax revenue and save comparable sums reducing the burden on county and state prison systems.  “There’s no economic interest there,” said John Matsusaka, president of the Initiative and Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California, failing to see the profound fiscal impact on the state’s budget.

             Of all the recent ballot measures in California, only Prop 19 promises to cut the deficit, generate tax revenue and save the state millions in wasted expenses from incarcerating marijuana-related offenders.  Even Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger took draconic steps Oct. 1, decriminalizing marijuana in California.  He anticipates passage of Prop 19, robbing the state of revenue from marijuana-related prosecutions and convictions.  Decriminalization allows the state to generate potentially millions in fines, now $100 for possessing under one ounce.  With additional state assessments, that $100 penalty could actually cost around $500 per violation. Prop 8 would undermine the state’s attempt to make up lost revenue from losing marijuana-related prosecutions, convictions and incarcerations.  Losses to the criminal defense industry could be substantial.

             California has a strong economic interest in passing Prop 19.  No rational person believes that spending $100,000 a year per marijuana-related inmate is sustainable.  With all the adverse publicity about the state’s desperate financial state, Prop 19 has attracted otherwise skeptical voters.  An Oct. 4 SurveyUSA poll showed Prop 19 winning 48% to 41% among likely voters, a stunning result when considering many seniors vote in midterm elections.  There’s some evidence that Prop 19 is drawing in young voters, something dreaded by former Ebay CEO and gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman.  She hoped Democrats would stay home during the midterm elections.  Despite the lack of high profile spending or publicity on Prop. 19, a recent Field Poll indicated that 84% of California voters have heard of Prop 19, as opposed to 40% for other measures on the Nov. 2 ballot.

             Most of the organized opposition for Prop 19 stems from Northern California’s medical marijuana growers, fearing a loss of business from legalization.  Under legalization, individuals would be allowed to possess up to one ounce of marijuana, robbing the state of its $100 per infraction ticketing.  Northern California’s growers stand to lose big if users go to their local 7/11s, drug stores or supermarkets.  ‘It just undermines what we’ve done so far,” said Lanette Davies, manager of CannaCare medical marijuana dispensary in Sacramento, worried that commercial growers would cut into boutique growers’ business.  While the same fears are voiced by the beverage industry, the last 14 years of medical marijuana have proved that marijuana smoking remains relatively constant, not cutting into beer, wine or hard liquor sales.  Fans of medical marijuana aren’t likely to change products.

             Lack of coherent opposition to Prop 19 stems from the fact that marijuana users cut across the political spectrum.  California’s 14-year experiment with medical marijuana has only increased the acceptance of marijuana use, proving, if nothing else, that the state hasn’t gone to pot because of cannabis. When voters consider state’s weakened financial position, potential tax revenues and savings from less marijuana-related incarcerations, California only stands to gain from legalization.  Opposition from the law enforcement community no longer has the same sway, now that voters have seen firsthand that there’s no downside to marijuana use.  “You can vastly outspend your opponent on the pro side and still lose,” said Matsusaka, conceding that Prop 19 is an idea whose time has come.  On no other issue in recent years have liberals and conservatives showed some much agreement.

About the Author  

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.