[ShiningSkull]

State debates legalizing marijuana

Wyatt Buchanan, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau

Thursday, October 29, 2009

(10-29) 04:00 PDT Sacramento - --

California can legalize and regulate recreational marijuana use under state law, but doing so would not change the drug's illicit status under federal law, proponents and opponents agreed at a hearing Wednesday at the state Capitol on a measure to legalize marijuana.

State financial experts testified that imposing taxes and regulations could bring in hundreds of millions to more than a billion dollars to state coffers, but several law enforcement officials also told the Assembly Public Safety Committee that legalizing marijuana under state law likely would lead to an increase in violence.

AB390 would allow possession, sale and cultivation of marijuana for people 21 years and older. The bill, introduced by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, says the state would wait for the repeal of the decades-old federal ban on marijuana to create a regulatory system and impose a $50-an-ounce sales tax on marijuana, much like taxes on tobacco and alcohol.

Several ballot measures to legalize adult recreational marijuana use under state law are circulating in California and several recent polls show support amongst a majority of state voters. Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has endorsed a public debate on the idea, although he said he personally opposes it.

Ammiano, who chairs the committee that heard the proposal, said the issue has "really developed a set of legs" since he introduced it in February.

"We feel that this issue in many ways in the past has been somewhat trivialized, but we're sensing ... there's a gravitas to this issue that probably it is going to be inevitable that there is some change in the way marijuana is viewed legally," Ammiano said at a news conference before the hearing.

Legal experts testified that nothing in the U.S. Constitution prohibits California from removing state penalties for marijuana use and predicted a law doing that would not be automatically struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.

"If California decides to legalize, nothing in the Constitution stands in its way," said Tamar Todd, a staff attorney for the Drug Policy Alliance Network.

Marty Mayer, attorney for the California Peace Officers' Association, said he agreed with that assessment, though with one big caveat.

"The state of California cannot unequivocally legalize marijuana," he said, noting that removing state penalties would not alter any federal laws.

Use, possession, sale and harvesting of marijuana is illegal under federal law, even for medical use. But U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said last week that federal authorities would refrain from arresting or prosecuting people who are complying with their state's medical marijuana laws.

One major argument made by supporters is the benefits regulation would have on the state's finances. Financial experts cautioned that their estimates were based on a number of assumptions - as real numbers for how many people in the state use marijuana and how much they use do not exist - but said using models for estimating revenues for alcohol and tobacco shows significant gains for regulating the drug.

The State Board of Equalization estimated that excise, sales and income taxes combined would bring in $1 billion to $1.4 billion, while the Legislative Analyst's Office said generally it would bring in a few hundred million dollars annually.

But John Standish, president of the California Peace Officers' Association, predicted those revenues would be offset by the cost of drug abuse treatment, the costs of people who drive under the influence of the drug or commit other crimes and other social and environmental impacts.

"In 30 years of law enforcement in California, I have seen nothing good come" of marijuana use, Standish said.

And an official with the state attorney general's office said there was a real possibility that legalization would empower Mexican cartels and drug trafficking operations in the state.

"We may experience a spike in violence," said Sara Simpson, acting assisting chief of the Attorney General's Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement.

More policy hearings on the issue likely will occur after the Legislature reconvenes in December.

E-mail Wyatt Buchanan at wbuchanan@sfchronicle.com.


Read more: State debates legalizing marijuana

*****************

California marijuana legalization debate at Capitol

By Josh Richman
Contra Costa Times
Posted: 10/28/2009 12:00:00 AM PDT
Updated: 10/29/2009 06:46:16 AM PDT

SACRAMENTO — Marijuana legalization advocates and law enforcement officials duked it out in a three-hour legislative hearing Wednesday on whether making the drug legal under state law would be good public policy.

Advocates said legalization and regulation could bring as much as $1.4 billion in state and local excise and sales tax revenue per year; control the drug's potency; do more to keep it out of children's hands; and end a centurylong double standard in which alcohol and tobacco — which they say are more harmful — are legal while marijuana isn't, leading to a war on drugs particularly destructive to people of color.

Law enforcement officials testified the harms caused by marijuana legalization would far outweigh whatever tax revenue it might bring — more, not less, use by children; more people driving under the influence, causing more injuries and deaths; decreased worker productivity that could hurt the economy; and a still-thriving black market.

The hearing was convened by Assembly Public Safety Committee Chairman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, who earlier this year introduced a bill to legalize and tax marijuana under a system not unlike that used for alcohol. Even as several proposed ballot measures for legalization seek to qualify for next year's ballot, Ammiano is rewriting his bill to bring it forward again in January, and Wednesday's hearing was supposed to help him gather input for that revamp.

First
Advertisement
up Wednesday were the Legislative Analyst's Office, which said state and local law enforcement could save "several tens of millions of dollars each year" by no longer pursuing marijuana cases, and the Board of Equalization, which has estimated $1.4 billion in annual revenue from taxes on legalized marijuana.

Then came the lawyers. Drug Policy Alliance staff attorney Tamar Todd and American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Allen Hopper testified California is free to criminalize or not criminalize whatever it wants, and can and should chart its own course as a laboratory for new social and economic policy.

But Martin Mayer, general counsel to the California Peace Officers' Association and the California Police Chiefs Association, underscored there would be no protection from federal law enforcement agencies arresting, charging and prosecuting Californians for violating the federal marijuana ban.

California Peace Officers' Association President John Standish said there's "no way marijuana legalization could protect or promote society — in fact, it radically diminishes it" by impairing educational ability, worker productivity, traffic safety and drug-related crime rates.

Ammiano asked whether police resources now used to fight marijuana would be better spent fighting harder, more harmful drugs such as methamphetamine.

"That's like, 'When did you stop beating your wife?'"‰" Standish replied, calling marijuana and methamphetamine "both equally critical problems our society needs to address."

Sara Simpson, acting assistant chief of the state Justice Department's Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement, said much of California's major marijuana cultivation is run by Mexican drug cartels on remote public lands, and she recited a litany of violent and deadly clashes with armed guards at such sites. Such growing operations also are environmentally devastating, she said, and produce marijuana far more potent than that used just years ago. There's no reason to believe the cartels would adhere to state laws on cultivation, potency and taxation any more than they adhere to prohibition now, she said.

Rosalie Pacula, co-director of the Drug Policy Research Center at renowned think-tank RAND Corp., said prohibition has kept marijuana prices high, and legalization with heavy taxation that elevates marijuana's price far above the cost of its production will lead to a thriving black market.

But Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice Executive Director Dan Macallair said arrest statistics from the past 20 years show California law enforcement is far more focused on prosecuting simple possession and use than cultivation and sales. Various counties are more or less tolerant of marijuana use, he said, a lack of consistency and continuity that could be solved by regulation.

And retired Orange County Superior Court Judge Jim Gray said the state can allow and regulate marijuana without condoning its use just like alcohol and tobacco, but any legalization legislation must ban advertising lest marijuana use become glamorized.

California marijuana legalization debate at Capitol - San Jose Mercury News

******************

Calif. lawmaker holds hearing on legalizing pot

By MARCUS WOHLSEN (AP) – 4 hours ago

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — No tie-dye was on display at a standing-room only hearing held by a California lawmaker on Wednesday in a bid to get his marijuana legalization bill taken seriously.

Instead, suits and sober discussion were the rule at the state Capitol as Assemblyman Tom Ammiano presided over what his office said was the first legislative consideration of the issue since California banned the drug in 1913.

Both sides of the debate were heard, but Ammiano has long had his mind made up.

Before the hearing, the San Francisco Democrat and former comedian called the criminalization of marijuana a failed policy that denies the state significant revenue. He said the bill could put the state in a position to set the national agenda on pot.

"I think we have a real shot at it, particularly in the context of it being in some ways bigger than California," Ammiano said.

His bill would tax and regulate marijuana in the state much like alcohol. Adults 21 and older could legally possess, grow and sell marijuana. The state would charge a $50-per-ounce fee and a 9 percent tax on retail sales.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has said he does not support legalization but caused a stir in May when he said he was open to debate on the issue.

At least one poll showed a slight majority of Californians would support a tax-and-regulate scheme for pot, but the bill's chances remain unclear. Skeptics have questioned whether the state could truly enforce a tax on marijuana and whether users and sellers would want to expose themselves to possible federal prosecution.

"You're going to create a record of some sort," said Assemblyman Curt Hagman, a San Bernardino County Republican. "You can't force me to self-incriminate myself."

Supporters of Ammiano's bill noted the state already collects taxes from medical marijuana dispensaries with little federal interference.

Legal experts on both sides also agreed at the informational hearing that nothing in current federal law can prevent California from stripping criminal penalties for marijuana from its own books.

"If California decides to legalize marijuana, there's nothing in the Constitution that stands in its way," said Tamar Todd, a staff attorney for the pro-legalization Drug Policy Alliance.

Speakers at the hearing argued a number of issues, including whether legalization would increase or decrease crime and help or hurt children.

State tax collectors presented an estimate that Ammiano's bill could generate nearly $1.4 billion in tax revenue. They cautioned, however, that the figure depended on several untested assumptions about how rates of use and prices would change following possible legalization.

Rosalie Pacula, director of drug policy research at the nonpartisan Rand Corp., said data on the economics of marijuana were "insufficient on which to base any sound policy."

Pacula said a failed effort in Canada to increase taxes on cigarettes showed that unless taxes had a minimal effect on prevailing prices, "you create the economic incentive for the black market to remain."

As the legalization movement has gained momentum, organized opposition outside law enforcement groups has been sparse. Still, several anti-pot protesters spoke passionately during and after the hearing.

Marijuana use is commonplace among young people in his Sacramento neighborhood, said Bishop Ron Allen, president of the International Faith Based Coalition, an anti-drug religious group.

Legalizing marijuana to tax it would help fill state coffers at the expense of its kids, he said.

"It's blood money, that's it," he said.

The Associated Press: Calif. lawmaker holds hearing on legalizing pot

*******************

California Marijuana Ban Gets
Legislative Review After 96 Years

By Ryan Flinn and Michael Marois

Oct. 28 (Bloomberg) -- California’s Assembly will consider lifting its 96-year-old ban on marijuana, decriminalizing the drug and taxing it like alcohol, as the state seeks ways out of its worst financial crisis since World War II.

The Assembly’s Public Safety Committee will discuss the social, fiscal and legal implications of legalizing and regulating marijuana in Sacramento today, said Quintin Mecke, a spokesman for Assemblyman Tom Ammiano.

It would be the first time the issue has been considered by the Legislature since the ban on marijuana use went into effect in 1913, according to a statement from the San Francisco Democrat.

“It is time to take our heads out of the sand and start to regulate this $14 billion industry,” Ammiano said in the statement. “By doing so, we can enact smart public policy that will bring much-needed revenue into the state and improve public safety by utilizing our limited law enforcement resources more wisely. The move toward regulation is simply common sense.”

Ammiano introduced Assembly Bill 390 in February. If passed, it would add $1.34 billion to California’s annual revenue based on sales tax and a $50-an-ounce excise levy, according to the state’s tax administrator, the Board of Equalization.

The bill will have its first policy hearing in January, Mecke said. The $14 billion figure cited by Ammiano is his estimated value of both illegal and medical marijuana, he said.

Budget Deficit

Since February, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and lawmakers have cut $32 billion from spending, raised taxes by $12.5 billion and covered $6 billion more with accounting maneuvers to close a budget deficit that threatened the largest U.S. state with insolvency. State officials predict a total of $38 billion in deficits in the next three fiscal years.

A Field Poll conducted in April showed that 56 percent of registered voters in California supported legalizing and taxing marijuana. Voter initiatives are under way to have legalization measures on next year’s election ballot.

Schwarzenegger is personally opposed to legalizing marijuana, said Aaron McLear, a spokesman, though he’s not against today’s hearings.

“If it’s something that people think there should be a robust discussion about, then it’s something we should do,” McLear said yesterday to reporters in Sacramento.

Paul Chabot, founder of the Coalition for a Drug Free California, said the proposal “just sends the wrong message.”

‘Enough Problems’

“We have enough problems with alcohol and prescription drug abuse throughout California and the nation,” Chabot said in an interview yesterday. “The last thing we need to do is legitimize one more thing which is already responsible for sending more users to drug rehab than any other drug combined.”

Chabot, 35, who is running for the state Assembly, said the issue is a personal one for him, as he entered rehab for marijuana use at age 12. He said the potential revenue from taxing marijuana would be offset by increased health and law enforcement costs to communities.

The bill would also extend taxation to medical marijuana. California is one of 14 states allowing some marijuana use for health reasons, according to a U.S. Justice Department statement, and in July, Oakland voters approved a measure making their city the first in the U.S. to tax it.

On Oct. 19, President Barack Obama’s Justice Department told federal prosecutors not to seek criminal charges against those who use or supply the drug for medical purposes in accordance with state laws, reversing the previous Bush administration approach.

Focus for Feds

The federal guidelines don’t legalize marijuana. The Justice Department will focus its resources on “serious drug traffickers while taking into account state and local laws,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement.

The Bush administration had said it would pursue charges in medical marijuana cases, even in those states.

Marijuana, produced from the cannabis plant, can be smoked or ingested. Its recreational use is illegal in the U.S. Advocates of medical use say marijuana can ease cancer patients’ nausea from chemotherapy, help treat glaucoma, stimulate AIDS patients’ appetites and ease pain for multiple sclerosis sufferers.

To contact the reporters on this story: Ryan Flinn in San Francisco at rflinn@bloomberg.net; Michael B. Marois in Sacramento at mmarois@bloomberg.net

California Marijuana Ban Gets Legislative Review After 96 Years - Bloomberg.com

[~Chronic420~]

WOW is all I can say. It has been gaining popularity in the last few years but this is awesome info. Thanks!

[ShiningSkull]

Pot legalization? Oh, no! But what about the drawbacks?!?!?

Pot legalization at center of Calif. talks

Published: Oct. 29, 2009 at 3:48 PM


SACRAMENTO, Oct. 29 (UPI) -- Law enforcement officials said during a legislative hearing in Sacramento that legalizing marijuana in California could have significant drawbacks.

The Contra Costa Times of Walnut City, Calif., said Thursday that law enforcement officials argued Wednesday that legalizing marijuana statewide could lead to increased pot use among children as well as decreased worker productivity.

Sara Simpson, acting assistant chief of the state Justice Department's Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement, said Mexican drug cartels currently operating marijuana cultivation in California would likely not respect any laws accompanying marijuana legalization.

California Peace Officers' Association President John Standish said marijuana and methamphetamine are "both equally critical problems our society needs to address."

Meanwhile, advocates for marijuana legalization argued legalization would generate additional revenue for local and state governments, while also providing ways to control the potency of the drug.

The Times said California state Assembly Public Safety Committee Chairman Tom Ammiano convened Wednesday's three-hour hearing.


Pot legalization at center of Calif. talks - UPI.com

********************

So, just to re-cap, the drawbacks of mj legalization are:
• increased mj use in children
• decreased worker productivity
• Mexican cartels won't respect legalization law
• Marijuana equals methamphetamine as critical problem

Who's lackey is UPI?

[BrattonBasher]

I'm pissed! I was hoping to start a Medical Meth Movement and that darn cop Homer Simpson went off and told the lawmakers that pot and meth are equally dangerous. Now all my tweaker buddies like Andre Aggasi have to live with the stigma of using a substance as dangerous as pot!

[ShiningSkull]

Originally Posted by BrattonBasher

I'm pissed! I was hoping to start a Medical Meth Movement and that darn cop Homer Simpson went off and told the lawmakers that pot and meth are equally dangerous. Now all my tweaker buddies like Andre Aggasi have to live with the stigma of using a substance as dangerous as pot!

Medical Meth Movement - LOL

[zbestwun2001]

I don't know if this has been posted today?


Putting a lid on pot sales in L.A.

Weeding out illegitimate medical marijuana dispensaries is a job for the cops, not the City Council.


For-profit medical marijuana dispensers beware: The city of Los Angeles is focusing its finest legal and political minds on putting you out of business. And if you want to see what happens when you run afoul of this crack team of nuisance abaters, just look at the fate of those trying to put up illegal billboards all over town.

Oops, bad example. L.A. has been trying for years to limit billboards, only to violate its own ordinance by carving out exceptions and see its ban overturned in court. That doesn't mean city officials couldn't do a better job with marijuana, but their record doesn't inspire confidence.

The City Council has been trying unsuccessfully for two years to stop the spread of dispensaries, issuing a moratorium in 2007 but then failing to enforce it and allowing anyone who claimed "hardship" status to open a new storefront. That moratorium was voided last week in court, prompting the council to push forward plans for a vote on a new city ordinance placing heavy restrictions on where and how marijuana clinics can operate. But the ordinance, now in its fourth draft, was too tough for some members, so it's headed back for a fifth draft.

Here's a thought for the council: The next time a marijuana ordinance appears, just say no. The city doesn't need one.

Medical marijuana has become a serious nuisance in L.A. Hundreds of stores have cropped up in recent years, many concentrated in downtrodden neighborhoods and bringing a criminal element with them. There are legitimate marijuana cooperatives serving genuinely ill patients, yet there are also storefronts pushing pot to recreational users and raking in illicit profits while getting their supply from criminal cartels in Mexico and Northern California. The city doesn't need a new ordinance to get rid of the latter. It could just start enforcing state law.

In August 2008, Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown released a set of guidelines on possession, cultivation and use of medical marijuana. To operate legally, distributors must be nonprofit cooperatives or collectives. The former are democratically controlled operations in which profits are shared by their members, who are also their patrons. The latter facilitate transactions between members who are legally entitled to grow their own marijuana. A later ruling by the California Supreme Court decreed that medical marijuana distributors must be their clients' "primary caregivers," meaning someone who has consistently assumed responsibility for their housing, health or safety. That rules out a dispensary owner selling trippy buds behind a counter.

A problem caused by a failure to enforce the law won't be solved by passing a new law. It's time to call in the cops, not the council members.

[ShiningSkull]

Originally Posted by zbestwun2001

I don't know if this has been posted today?


Putting a lid on pot sales in L.A.

Weeding out illegitimate medical marijuana dispensaries is a job for the cops, not the City Council.

Yeah, but that's ok, zb1, I was so mad I gave it its own thread...

LATimes Editorial: Get cops to close mmj shops

[zbestwun2001]

Originally Posted by ShiningSkull

Yeah, but that's ok, zb1, I was so mad I gave it its own thread...

LATimes Editorial: Get cops to close mmj shops

There is no name.. am I suppose to take that to mean this is the stance that the LA Times takes on this?

I guess so...... as they all go and have their drinks at lunch.

[ShiningSkull]

Originally Posted by zbestwun2001

there is no name.. Am i suppose to take that to mean this is the stance that the la times takes on this?

I guess so...... As they all go and have their drinks at lunch.

exactly.

[Sir smokes-A-Lot]

They said in one of the stories that more people are sent to rehab for marijuana then any other drug combined? I dont know about that but most of the people who go to rehab for marijuana are ordered by the court to. 56.9% being ordered by the court to go to rehab compared to 14.8% who go on their own is what I read when I looked this up.

[pryd]

These have been on the front pages of our local newspaper too. Thank you for the posting!

[jonnyb123]

Lets hope these pass, we need legalization!!!! Thanks for the post.