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.

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.

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.