Proposition 19 Myths is moving!

We hope to have auto-redirect up for old posts sometime this week. In the meantime, please continue to follow me at our new domain, http://blog.voteprop19.com.

You can also follow me on Twitter, network me on Delicious, and friend me on Facebook. I look forward to hearing from you!

Paul Armentano counters Feinstein's misguided opposition to marijuana legalization

From the LA Times:

Democrat Dianne Feinstein, California's senior U.S. senator, has thrown her weight behind the effort to defeat Proposition 19, the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Initiative of 2010. Apparently Feinstein believes that California's present pot prohibition, which was initially enacted in 1913 yet has done nothing to reduce the plant's availability or use, is worth keeping.

Legislative Analyst’s Office Issues Report on Prop 19

From Tax Cannabis 2010:

(Sacramento, CA) The California Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO), which provides non-partisan fiscal and policy advice, yesterday [July 20, 2010] released a report on Proposition 19, the initiative to control and tax cannabis in California. The report found that Proposition 19 would enable California to steer police resources toward more pressing matters, generate hundreds of millions in revenue to fund vital services, and protect children, roadways, and workplaces.

Breaking - Oakland votes to permit large marijuana farms

From Associated Press/MSNBC (via BreakingNews on Twitter):

"The Oakland City Council voted 5-2 with one abstention late Tuesday in favor of a plan to license four production plants where marijuana would be grown, packaged and processed."

"One of the co-sponsors of the ordinance, Rebecca Kaplan, said the ordinance would not take effect until January, giving the council time to come up with a plan for medium-sized growers."

"The measure will go before the council one more time for a final vote, but the outcome isn't expected to change."

I'm hearing a lot of worries that this is a sign of things to come, that this pushing out of small growers is exactly what we can expect if Prop 19 passes in the fall.  I admit the possibility, but I don't believe it.  A few things to keep in mind:

Yes, Professor Kleiman, California Can End Cannabis Prohibition

A couple weeks ago, I talked a little about why it's important to pass this ballot initiative even if it doesn't affect federal law.  Recently, an opinion piece by UCLA professor of public policy Mark A.R. Kleiman appeared in the Los Angeles Times with the rather presumptuous headline, "California can't legalize marijuana." I've seen this article get a lot of attention, and some Prop 19 supporters start to look worried.  I'd like to try to set your minds at ease.

Breaking - Former U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Joycelyn Elders Endorses Proposition 19

From The New York Times (via @TaxCannabis on Twitter):

Last week, proponents secured what they view as a major endorsement, that of Dr. Joycelyn Elders, the former United States surgeon general and the first black to hold that position.

In a statement to be published in a voter guide, Dr. Elders said the legalization bill would help divert law enforcement resources to more serious threats. “We can let police prevent violent crime, or we can accept the status quo, and keep wasting resources sending tens of thousands of nonviolent marijuana consumers — a disproportionate number who are minorities — to jail,” Dr. Elders wrote.

Dr. Elders has never been afraid to speak up for the truth over "conventional wisdom," propaganda, and politics.

It's a shame that, even after hearing arguments from Assemblyman Ammiano and Alice Huffman of the California NAACP, the California Democratic Party couldn't follow Ammiano, Huffman, and Dr. Elders's courageous example and endorse this historic ballot initiative.  They better hope, politically, that the Republicans don't have their finger on the pulse of California better than they do this time.

Marc Emery Agrees: Marijuana Activists Who Oppose Prop 19 Are Wrong

From Cannabis Culture Magazine:

But first, let me explain that opponents of Richard Lee's initiative fall into three groups. The first group is the police and prison industry, represented by their unions and spokespeople...The second group includes the cartels, thugs, street gangs, large commercial growers, commercial medical marijuana growers and their dependents that make exploitative profits taking full advantage of prohibition-inflated prices...The third group is the so-called old guard of the cannabis or medical marijuana movement. The wonderful Proposition-215 pioneer Denis Peron is one, but there are many others.

A brilliantly articulated defense of Proposition 19, he takes on the "marijuana activists" and "professional stoners" who claim to be insiders but have the most to lose by a change in the status quo.  If a pro-cannabis individual you know has bought into any of these myths, please show him or her this article.  We have a chance to make history in November.  It will be a sad day indeed if we are defeated not by the law enforcement special interests or the puritanical moralists but by the greed and selfishness of our own.

Response to the "Vote Know On Prop 19" Campaign - Proposition 19 Is Only The First Step

Opposition Myth #1: The initiative will end the War on Drugs and substantially reduce marijuana arrests, saving millions in prison costs.

First of all, please point me at anyone who is seriously saying that passing Proposition 19 will single-handedly and immediately "end the War on Drugs."  It would be a huge victory, though.  One of the anti-cannabis opposition's biggest fears is that we pass this thing, not because they they believe (as an organization) it will actually be a massive public health and safety nightmare, but because they know it will not be.  And how do they continue fighting their "war on drugs" when anyone can point to California and say, "Yeah, so what about them?"

"Stoners Against Tax Cannabis Initiative" Misguided

This afternoon, I was made aware of a new source of opposition to Proposition 19, a blog written by a self-described "professional stoner".  She identifies and addresses some eighteen "myths" that Proposition 19 supporters believe.  I firmly believe one of the biggest threats to the successful passage of this initiative in November is this kind of paranoid mistrust gone rampant.  I will be addressing her concerns one by one, and, if Miss Dragonfly would like to respond, I would welcome an honest dialogue that educates everyone more about both current marijuana laws and Proposition 19.

Proposition 19 Makes Us All Safer

Opponents of Proposition 19 like to claim that it will cause crime to increase, put a heavier strain on law enforcement, and be a general public safety nightmare.  As I touched on in my comments on why Senator Feinstein is wrong for opposing Prop 19, the facts just don't support this.

CBS Poll Puts Prop 19 Support Ahead 10% From Opposition

From CBS 5:

Proposition 19, which would legalize marijuana, and allow marijuana to be regulated and taxed in California, is supported among those likely voters surveyed by 50% to 40%, although 11% remained uncertain how they would vote on the issue.

The poll found younger voters support the measure, while older voters oppose it. Democrats and Independents tended to support pot legalization, while Republicans generally opposed the idea.

The CBS 5 poll of 614 likely California voters was conducted by the polling firm SurveyUSA from July 8 through July 11 and has a four-point margin of error.

Feinstein supports campaign to defeat marijuana legalization measure

From the LA Times:

California's senior U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein has endorsed "No on Prop 19," the main opposition campaign to Proposition 19.  She issued a statement today calling the measure "a jumbled legal nightmare that will make our highways, our workplaces and our communities less safe."

Dale Sky Clare, a spokeswoman for Tax Cannabis 2010, responded that she was not surprised by the lack of support from Feinstein and other top officials. "I'm just not putting a lot of faith in politicians to lead," she said. "The voters have always led on this issue."

California voters, please take a moment and contact Senator Feinstein.  Ask her if she is aware that:

1. Regarding highways: Proposition 19 specifically states, "nothing in this Act shall permit cannabis consumption by the operator of any vehicle, boat or aircraft while it is being operated, or that impairs the operator;" (proposed Health and Safety Code, Article 5, Chapter 5, Division 10, Section 11300(c)(iii)).
2. Regarding workplaces: "No person shall be punished, fined, discriminated against, or be denied any right or privilege for lawfully engaging in any conduct permitted by this Act or authorized pursuant to Section 11301 of this Act. Provided however, that the existing right of an employer to address consumption that actually impairs job performance by an employee shall not be affected" (proposed Health and Safety Code, Article 5, Chapter 5, Division 10, Section 11304(c)). [Emphasis added.]
3. Regarding our communities -- detailed studies (such as this one, this one, or this one) have shown that drugs are not a major cause of crime.  In 2001, Portugal decriminalized all drugs and the results, both on public health and safety, have been largely positive-- certainly better than the status quo in America.

Voting No On Prop 19 Is Voting Yes For Shady Dealers and Gangs

The opposition is attempting to scare mothers into voting against Proposition 19 on the grounds that ending prohibition will make cannabis more accessible to their children, and send the wrong message to youth, condoning or even encouraging underage usage.

Say it with me: dealers don't card; licensed proprietors of shops or bars do.

Does your neighborhood pot dealer ask someone's age before selling?  Most dealers are not Nancy Botwin from Showtime's "Weeds" (first season, anyway); kids make easy targets with extra cash.  A dealer is already operating outside the law; he has nothing to lose by selling to children.

High times with legalized pot? It all depends

From The San Francisco Chronicle:

Foes of the ballot measure say legalizing casual cannabis use will lead to pot farms everywhere, rampant drug use and dangerous dopers on the highway. Proponents say cannabis is no more dangerous than alcohol, and that bringing California's biggest cash crop - an estimated $14 billion a year - out of the shadows of illegality will create jobs and inject millions of dollars into governmental coffers.

Well written and balanced, this article also calls attention to the highly speculative nature of the RAND study's figures.

There's just one question we need to be asking: does the damage done by using cannabis, to individuals or society, outweigh the damage of our current prohibition?  All evidence points to a clear and decisive NO.

Marijuana, Accutane, and the Suspension of Science By the Cultural Left

From Townhall.com

Townhall columnist Hugh Hewitt attempts to argue against Proposition 19 by painting Prop 19 proponents as ignorant, and the younger demographic that tends to support it as impulsive risk-takers.  I'll more fully explore the health risks and benefits of cannabis in another post, but for now, I'll just point out that, as he says, "Anyone with a bookmark to Google can quickly access the studies that detail the known long term and serious side-effects of chronic marijuana use," but they can also see all the counter studies that show no greater mortality for cannabis users, and that cannabis (even smoked) does not cause cancer.

DEA Flouts Mendocino Medical Marijuana Ordinance by Raiding First Grow Permit Applicant

On July 7, the DEA conducted an armed raid on the Mendocino County property of Joy Greenfield, 68, the first applicant under the Mendocino County sheriff's new cultivation permit program. Sheriff Allman has been highly supportive of efforts to bring local growers into the permit program, and confirms Ms. Greenfield was in full compliance with local law.

Despite Obama's pledge to end raids on individuals who are acting in accordance with local medical marijuana laws, when Ms. Greenfield informed the DEA agent in charge that she was a legal cultivator under the sheriff's program, the agent's comment was "I don't care what the sheriff says."

Ms. Greenfield called the raid a "slap in the face of Mendocino's government." I think it's a slap in the face to law and liberty everywhere.

From California NORML News

"Autotune The News" Autotunes the Prop 19 Debate

The Gregory Brothers, of "Autotune The News" fame, take on Proposition 19 discussion and debate in their latest release.

Check it out:

The Politics of Cannabis and Color

Norm Stamper, a 34-year veteran police officer and former chief of police in Seattle, speaks out in support of Alice Huffman, leader of the California NAACP, after she came under attack from Bishop Ron Allen and other California African-American leaders for endorsing Proposition 19.

From The Huffington Post

Steven Greenhut: Can GOP quit weed whacking?

Very well written opinion piece from the director of the Pacific Research Institute's CalWatchdog Center and former Orange County Register coumnist Steven Greenhut.  He makes excellent arguments why true small-government conservatives and classic Republicans should be supporting Proposition 19 (and why the lack of support from gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman and the California Republican Party may be a tactical error).

From the Orange County Register

Opposition to pot measure gains slightly in poll

In contrast to earlier results, 48% of likely voters are now against Proposition 19, survey finds.

Disappointing news from a Field Poll which shows that support for Prop 19 has slipped to 44%.  Similar polls in May showed a slight majority favored the initiative.

"The poll found a very high level of awareness of the initiative with more than three-quarters of likely voters saying that they have heard about it. Those voters back it 48% to 44%. But likely voters who had not heard about the measure until they were told about it by the poll takers oppose it by 2 to 1."

In other words, the more people know about Proposition 19, the more they are for it.  Many people's first reaction is skepticism and negativity.  Talk to people, explain the measure, and correct misconceptions.

From Los Angeles Times

Deconstructing the Opposition's Claims About the RAND Taxation Analysis

One of the issues in the recent study by the RAND Corporation that has been seized by opponents of Proposition 19 is that the tax revenue from ending cannabis prohibition will not be as great as projected. Roger Salazar, spokesman for "No on Prop 19" claims the RAND study shows, "...even the local tax revenues could be dramatically lower than the claims made by the proponents. In fact, RAND said there would be a greater financial reward to evade new local taxes on a pound of marijuana than there would be to smuggle a pound of marijuana from Mexico to California."

Of course, what the disingenuous Mr. Salazar is not mentioning are two major problems with the RAND analysis being applied to Proposition 19 that I pointed out in my last post, among other numerous caveats made by the authors of the study themselves and conveniently left out of Mr. Salazar's list of "findings," taken primarily from their page two summaries.

RAND Study Should Not Be Taken As Gospel

Anyone citing to the recent RAND Corporation paper, "Altered State? Assessing How Marijuana Legalization in California Could Influence Marijuana Consumption and Public Budgets" should note two things especially:

First, the study targets not just the Regulate, Control, and Tax Cannabis Act (also known as Proposition 19) but California Assembly Bill 2254 (also known as the Ammiano bill). There are important differences. Proposition 19 is a ballot initiative directly voted on by California residents in November. The Ammiano bill is a state congressional bill which would need to pass both the state Assembly and Senate, and then receive the Governor's signature. Both end cannabis prohibition in California, but they have different provisions (for example, a $50/ounce state tax in the bill, a local tax by county and/or city, amount to be decided by locality for the ballot measure). The study appears to separate the two, but many news articles and various opposition groups do not.

What does it matter? It will still be illegal to the feds.

One of the more discouraging arguments from pro-cannabis individuals on why they don't support and/or don't care about Proposition 19 is that it doesn't matter if we end cannabis prohibition in California, because California law has no effect on federal law or policy.

It's true that passing Proposition 19 won't directly change federal law. But that doesn't mean it won't have an effect. Obviously everything is pure speculation at this point, but here are some points worth considering.

What will this Proposition let me do?

I hear a lot of people expressing concerns and questions about what Proposition 19 has to say about growing your own marijuana. Can you grow it? Can you keep it? Can you consume it, transport it, sell it?

Can I grow my own?

Let's start with cultivation. Section 3 of Proposition 19 clearly states that, for anyone over 21, it shall be "lawful and shall not be a public offense" to

Cultivate, on private property by the owner, lawful occupant, or other lawful resident or guest of the private property owner or lawful occupant, cannabis plants for personal consumption only, in an area of not more than twenty-five square feet per private residence or, in the absence of any residence, the parcel. Cultivation on leased or rented property may be subject to approval from the owner of the property. Provided that, nothing in this section shall permit unlawful or unlicensed cultivation of cannabis on any public lands (Section 11300(a)(ii)).

In plain English: anyone over 21 can grow as much as they want in a 25-square-foot area for personal consumption, on your own private property, rented or owned, provided, if rented, it's okay with your landlord.