Will California Legalize Marijuana?

In November of 2010, California voters who turn out for the general election will have the opportunity to decide whether their state will become the first to legalize the general possession and sale of marijuana.

The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 is a ballot initiative that legalizes the possession of up to an ounce of marijuana by adults over the age of 21, and allows for personal grows of up to 25 square feet. Though the passing of the act would legalize marijuana throughout the state, local municipalities would have the right to vote to opt out of legalization and maintain their current marijuana laws.

The ballot initiative was largely funded by Richard Lee, a cannabis club owner from Oakland, and made it onto the election ballot by virtue of a statewide signature drive that ended up capturing 140,000 names, nearly 100,000 more than are required. Signature validity checks by the state verified that about 80% of the signatures were valid.

California pioneered the use of medical marijuana in 1996 with the passage of Proposition 215. This proposition allowed municipalities to have marijuana dispensaries, more commonly known as "cannabis clubs", who can legally dispense small amounts of marijuana to patients with a valid doctor's recommendation. While this has led to a sort of "de facto" legalization in certain municipalities that have a strongly liberal population and lots of pro-marijuana doctors, such as San Francisco and Los Angeles, there are still relatively few municipalities in the state that have a dispensary system. The dispensaries currently do not make marijuana accessible on nearly the level that a legalization act would. If the November ballot initiative is passed, municipalities that choose to "keep it legal" could see pre-rolled joints being sold at convenience stores next to cigarettes and Budweiser.

Both supporters and opponents are getting very loud and very public with their arguments, as they have been since last year when Governor Schwarzenegger stated that "there should be a discussion" about the issue. Proponents point to the estimated $1 billion in annual tax revenues that legalization and taxation would generate, a very tempting sum for a state that is slashing education and health care programs to the bone in its fiscal desperation. The state also makes about 75,000 arrests per year on marijuana possession and sale charges, which represents 75,000 less annual cases putting a drain on the justice system and prisons. Opponents say the finances aren't worth the potential social damage, and there are some big voices amongst the opposition, including all of the candidates for state Attorney General.

Opponents also point out the conflict with federal law. Licensed growers and dispensaries who are currently legal in the state under Prop. 215 can be (and have been) arrested by federal agents in California. The passage of the new act would not change this state of affairs. Thus far there has been something of a "gentleman's agreement" between the Feds and state growers; less than 1% of marijuana arrests in California since Prop. 215 passed have been made by federal authorities, and it's very rare to see them get involved unless they are after something other than marijuana. State growers and cannabis clubs are also relatively small-time businesses, however; growing operations and distribution are expected to explode in size if legalization happens, and thus present much more interesting targets for the Feds. However, they would also lose their ability to legally compel California police to assist them in marijuana-related investigations in the state. Opponents are most interested in how federal law will affect the collection of taxes, however. If growers and sellers have to declare their source of income in order for taxes to be collected, that basically gives the Feds a "we can arrest you whenever we want" card to play against them whenever they care to. How many large-scale players will be willing to proceed with that sort of an arrangement?

Several early polls have been taken that show differing results. An April poll taken by CBS 5 in San Francisco, which interviewed 500 random adults from across the state, found 56% supported it to 42% opposed. Support was strongest among the 18 to 34 age group, who were 75% in favor of it. A poll taken just a month later by the Public Policy Institute of California found only 49% support to 48% opposed, however. The second poll took a larger sample from across the state, with 1,168 respondents, and found that lines are drawn sharply by demographics. Supporters are mostly younger than age 54, registered as democrats or independents, white and college-educated. Registered Republicans, Latinos and senior citizens heavily oppose the measure. The SF Bay Area leads the state in voter support, with voters sharply split in the Los Angeles area, and most strongly opposed in Orange County and San Diego.

The act clearly has a long road to passage, but even if it makes it there, there's a question of which municipalities in the state will actually choose to legalize. It's safe to assume that Oakland, where the city council voted unanimously to approve the measure, will have a noticeably skunky odor to it the day after the act is passed. And it's pretty safe to assume it will be the same with strongly liberal cities with an established medical dispensary system, such as San Francisco, Los Angeles, Santa Cruz and most of Marin County. Though California has gained a reputation as the home of hippies, it is actually strongly conservative these days outside the biggest coastal cities. In effect, even if the measure is passed, the same places where weed is already dispensed medically and laxly policed may end up being the only ones where it is sold over the counter.