[420 Girl]

California may soon vote on an initiative which implements a tax, regulation, and control marijuana, or as Richard Lee says, "...a reverse-tax revolt." California has recently gathered 680,000 signatures of which only 433,971 are actually signatures required to place this proposal on the state ballot. What does this mean? Well, even though there are still a lot of road bumps along the way, California may soon benefit from a new industry to help pull it out of a debilitating economic state.

FEDERAL-STATE DISJUNCTION

Marijuana is illegal at the federal level. In the past, federal and state officers have worked in conjunction to handle marijuana cases. Just last year, federal officers were involved in about 847,000 cases. Imagine what our national security would be like if we had those federal officers focusing on actual national security issues.

California can pass the initiative. This would mean our state law enforcement would not have to enforce the federal law, enabling our federal and state officers to focus on issues of greater concern. Even though the federal initiative can be upheld in California, the alleged social implications of legalizing marijuana usage are what delay our approval.

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EQUILIBRIUM

Richard Lee and state legislator Tom Ammiano have been important elements in the fight for the legalization of marijuana. They remain critical leaders in demonstrating the merits of the economic efficiency behind legalizing marijuana.

First, both Tom Ammiano, in the state legislature, and Richard Lee, at Oaksterdam University, have worked to prove that the costs compared to currently legal substances such as alcohol are far greater than that of marijuana. 56% of California agrees with Lee’s and Ammiano’s sentiment, but this by no means gives marijuana supporters and leaders the assurance it will pass. As for the costs, alcohol has a net health-related cost to society of $0.26 and accident costs of $0.93. As for marijuana it holds net health costs of $0.01 to $0.02 and accident costs of $.040 to $o.93. Therefore, marijuana costs on society are much less than alcohol.

This is aside from the fact that the industry will introduce $6.4 billion in excise taxes, $1.3 billion in sales taxes and save our state 9 billion in enforcement. This would make the marijuana trade worth at least $10 billion. Potential marijuana revenues may not solve all of California’s educational, housing, or health care problems, but it can definitely help create revenue in an limping economy.

The fate of this initiative is still questionable, but the facts are evident: marijuana can help California. The current debate consists of arguments regarding the costs of legalizing marijuana: are the external costs (i.e. second-hand smoke, accidents) actually greater in than what Ammiano and Lee have calculated?

PROBLEMS AHEAD

Already, marijuana supports have seen resistance. Yes, marijuana can bring in revenue to solve some of our issues, but some ask if it is morally a justifiable means to the end. In June of 2009, three major TV stations refused to air pro-marijuana ads in California. Some people are afraid that once marijuana is legalized the government will have less control over the production and use of it. Regardless of the worries people may have, marijuana is a revenue-generating industry with explicit costs that make it a very lucrative product. California and the fate of the marijuana industry is left to be decided in 2010, when Californians can decide whether implicit “moral” costs justify further deterrence of healing the economy and concentrating resources where they are needed.

http://www.420magazine.com/forums/in...etter-end.html