Earlier this month, Maine voters approved a medical marijuana amendment that will create a private database of approved patients, expand the number of medical conditions that can be approved for cannabis use, and allow for state licensed nonprofit cooperatives to distribute Marijuana to registered patients. This was a big step for the Maine medical initiative and essentially makes their system the same as ours here in California.
According to NORML, the Maine voters fall in favor of cannabis reform every time they can vote on a an initiative. They also explain that, even though the poles consistently show support for reform, the elected officials are still hesitant to take a stance on the issue and generally default the decision to the people. It was also said that the only organized opposition to the amendment was from Maine law enforcement.
This development has several implications for the medical initiative as a whole. First of all, this is a fresh start for a medical dispensary system not unlike the one here in California. Hopefully the state government will impose regulations and supervise the new system so that many of the problems that occurred in California can be avoided. A second possible effect of this legislation is that, with the states attention and supervision, a more developed and sophisticated medical system can be made. If this is done correctly, Maine's cannabis system may eventually become an example of a well run, beneficial program that other states could eventually try to employ. In order for any of this to happen however, the Maine officials need to look to California and recognize that the they must quickly take a clear stance on the regulations of the amendment, and insure that these regulations are upheld consistently throughout the state. This will help to avoid the issues in California's system that occurred due to the governments hesitation to take a stance or regulate the market.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Prohibition On the Prison System
The U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world by a substantial amount. Overcrowding, especially in California, has been a significant issue in the past 30 years. The prison capacity exceeds 170,000—a value indicative that California’s state prison system is significantly overbooked. We do not have the facilities to provide effective treatment, which often results in high rates of recidivism, or second or third-time offenders. Thus, many inmates cycle into and out of prison system. One of the major problems with overcrowding is that current laws are far too retributive or punishing, especially in regards to the illegality of marijuana. Policies, such as the three-strikes law which doubles time for a second offense and gives a 35-year to life term for the third, are a direct response to regulate the recreational use of drugs. By legalizing cannabis at large we could also help fight the issue of prison overcrowding.
Of all criminal subtypes, drug offenders account for a majority of prison population. Substance abusers also have the highest recidivism rates, primarily because they violate the terms of their parole or probation. Because of the substantially large proportion and high recidivism of drug-related inmates, legalizing drugs, such as marijuana, would resolve the issue of overcrowding. Especially considering the fact that weed-related arrests made up half (49.8%) of the total incarcerations in 2008 (http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/53). From this data there is substantial evidence to conclude that legalizing marijuana would help resolve prison overcrowding; a majority of inmates are drug offenders, most of whose charges were associated with cannabis.
Marijuana should also be legalized to help alleviate the issue of prison overcrowding because users do not pose as big of a threat to society as other legal drugs. Marijuana research reveals users are not prone to violent or aggressive behavior while those intoxicated from alcohol are. Studies indicate that up to 1/3 of all convicted offenders guilty of violent crimes consumed alcohol at the time of the offense, a higher ratio than any other explicit drugs. This depicts an inconsistency within the legal system. If marijuana—a drug that’s effects are not closely linked to violent or criminal behavior—is the number one criminalized substance, why does it constitute such harsh judicial penalty for repeat offenders? Simply, marijuana should not.
Perhaps, legalizing marijuana could be the keystone with which to legalize other drugs. The prohibition of drugs has been historically linked with negative effects—drugs become more dangerous and less regulated, use increases, and crime becomes more prevalent. The potency effect explains how increased regulation is associated with more dangerous drug products. People became sick after smoking marijuana that has been sprayed with the chemical paraquat; the U.S. had persuaded Mexico to spray their plants with herbicide. Similarly during the prohibition of alcohol, poisonous wood alcohol was illegally manufactured and sold. After marijuana was outlawed in Controlled Substances Act in 1970, statistics reveal that its use actually increased, contrary to desired results. This was also indicative in the alcohol Prohibition; while use declined in the first few years, once the black market was established, use increased by 60 percent. Furthermore, drugs lead to higher crime rates because of the subsequent formation of the black market. Drug dealers are unable to use the legal system to solve issues involving fraud, theft, and other corrupt exchanges so they resort to violence. In addition violence increases because the illegality of the trade warrants a higher price on the substance—people are forced to steal, murder, and partake in other illicit acts to fund their addiction or protect their profits. If the funds saved from law enforcement were redirected into drug education and and awareness, then there should be no reason to assume that overall usage will increase. Especially when considering that there is no evidence that the current prohibition system has had any effect on the most severe usage. By legalizing marijuana we may be able convince society of the benefits of having a drug-regulated market across all drugs.
Of all criminal subtypes, drug offenders account for a majority of prison population. Substance abusers also have the highest recidivism rates, primarily because they violate the terms of their parole or probation. Because of the substantially large proportion and high recidivism of drug-related inmates, legalizing drugs, such as marijuana, would resolve the issue of overcrowding. Especially considering the fact that weed-related arrests made up half (49.8%) of the total incarcerations in 2008 (http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/53). From this data there is substantial evidence to conclude that legalizing marijuana would help resolve prison overcrowding; a majority of inmates are drug offenders, most of whose charges were associated with cannabis.
Marijuana should also be legalized to help alleviate the issue of prison overcrowding because users do not pose as big of a threat to society as other legal drugs. Marijuana research reveals users are not prone to violent or aggressive behavior while those intoxicated from alcohol are. Studies indicate that up to 1/3 of all convicted offenders guilty of violent crimes consumed alcohol at the time of the offense, a higher ratio than any other explicit drugs. This depicts an inconsistency within the legal system. If marijuana—a drug that’s effects are not closely linked to violent or criminal behavior—is the number one criminalized substance, why does it constitute such harsh judicial penalty for repeat offenders? Simply, marijuana should not.
Perhaps, legalizing marijuana could be the keystone with which to legalize other drugs. The prohibition of drugs has been historically linked with negative effects—drugs become more dangerous and less regulated, use increases, and crime becomes more prevalent. The potency effect explains how increased regulation is associated with more dangerous drug products. People became sick after smoking marijuana that has been sprayed with the chemical paraquat; the U.S. had persuaded Mexico to spray their plants with herbicide. Similarly during the prohibition of alcohol, poisonous wood alcohol was illegally manufactured and sold. After marijuana was outlawed in Controlled Substances Act in 1970, statistics reveal that its use actually increased, contrary to desired results. This was also indicative in the alcohol Prohibition; while use declined in the first few years, once the black market was established, use increased by 60 percent. Furthermore, drugs lead to higher crime rates because of the subsequent formation of the black market. Drug dealers are unable to use the legal system to solve issues involving fraud, theft, and other corrupt exchanges so they resort to violence. In addition violence increases because the illegality of the trade warrants a higher price on the substance—people are forced to steal, murder, and partake in other illicit acts to fund their addiction or protect their profits. If the funds saved from law enforcement were redirected into drug education and and awareness, then there should be no reason to assume that overall usage will increase. Especially when considering that there is no evidence that the current prohibition system has had any effect on the most severe usage. By legalizing marijuana we may be able convince society of the benefits of having a drug-regulated market across all drugs.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Critical Superior Court Ruling Goes Under The Radar
I just came across an article in the Los Angeles Times that was overshadowed by the media coverage of Obama's new statement on Medical Marijuana. On the same day as the written statement from the President, a California Superior Judge ruled that the city of Los Angeles' ban on new medical cannabis dispensaries is invalid. By ruling that one new dispensary does not need to follow the ban, the city recognized that this would make future efforts to enforce the ban nearly impossible. Los Angeles District Steve Cooley did not retreat from his position that most of the clubs in the LA area were still in violation of state law by taking in a profit.
The Los Angeles DA is still not able to see how these shops might help generate revenue for the state, or that the people of his city are in favor of them. He reportedly responded to the ruling by stating that,
How can the state government let someone who is clearly against the medical program determine the legal status of all of the coopratives in one of the most populated, and medicated, districts?
Hopefully the continued opposition and illegitimate allegations by public officials and law enforcement will not be seen by federal agents as a way to continue assisting raids on the medical industry. While the court ruling may help the current situation, it still seems as if the few remaining opponents to medical marijuana will not be persuaded by arguments, or follow the guidelines set forth by those who support cannabis for medicinal purposes.
The Los Angeles DA is still not able to see how these shops might help generate revenue for the state, or that the people of his city are in favor of them. He reportedly responded to the ruling by stating that,
A collaboration of numerous agencies, including federal, state and local police agencies, county and city prosecutors, will combat the proliferation of illegal medical marijuana dispensaries in Los Angeles City and County,This is the same Steve Cooley who recently announced that nearly 100% of the collectives in Los Angeles are operating illegally because of an interpretive loophole he found in the Compassionate Use Act that was passed by voters 13 years ago.
How can the state government let someone who is clearly against the medical program determine the legal status of all of the coopratives in one of the most populated, and medicated, districts?
Hopefully the continued opposition and illegitimate allegations by public officials and law enforcement will not be seen by federal agents as a way to continue assisting raids on the medical industry. While the court ruling may help the current situation, it still seems as if the few remaining opponents to medical marijuana will not be persuaded by arguments, or follow the guidelines set forth by those who support cannabis for medicinal purposes.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
More Political Inaction?
Recently, there has been a plethora of media coverage on the marijuana debate, and particularly President Obama's written statement to the DEA outlining the new federal position on states that allow medical marijuana. In the memo, President Obama tells U.S. Attorneys that they should avoid prosecuting people that use or distribute medical cannabis as long as they are in accordance with state laws. While this sounds like a major victory for the medical community, in reality this does not change much.
The "new" policy that has been written out by Obama is really just a reiteration of what federal policy has been ever sense he arrived in office. Obama has been interviewed on the subject many times previous to this written statement, and in all of these discussions he has stated that he does not want to waste federal resources trying to circumvent state laws on the issue. While the policy sounds good, unfortunately the DEA has felt it not necessary to follow. Sense Obama has taken office, there have been at least 22 raids on medical dispensaries in California that have been organized by, or assisted by, federal agents. One of the clubs raided by the DEA in San Francisco was shut down because of what the DEA called "irregularities in the collection of state sales tax." This has nothing to do with violations of state drug laws. When was the last time a bank or pharmacy was raided by federal agents at gun point for irregularities in their state tax forms? Maybe this is why the President now feels it necessary to provide the policy to federal law enforcement in writing.
Unfortunately even this written statement holds little weight with the DEA, particularly in California. Because of the language of the policy, federal agents can still raid medical dispensaries that they feel are out of accordance with state laws. Where this becomes a problem is when officials with opposing views on the subject interpret state laws differently for different districts. This visibly true in the Los Angeles area and San Diego.
The DA of San Diego has been against the medical movement from the get go and continues to shut down San Diego dispensaries with the help of the DEA. In addition, the District Attorney of Los Angeles Steve Cooley has recently published an opinion that, in his mind, renders 99% of the over 800 dispensaries in the LA area illegal because they all use over the counter sales. This would leave legal room for the DEA to assist in raiding all of these Los Angeles clubs because the DA of that area deems them illegal by state law. However, this legal interpretation that Steve Cooley has made public, does not follow the guidelines that California Attorney General Jerry Brown issued in March that clearly state that collectives can charge for cannabis sativa as long as they only take in enough revenue to cover overhead and operating expenses.
All of this media hype and mixed messages from officials are leaving the actual picture of the cannabis sativa debate very divided for those involved, and even more clouded and unsure for the people observing. A clearer picture needs to be drawn about the legal stature and enforcement of cannabis for both the people onlooking the debate and the people debating if any sort of workable solution is going to be formed for the either the legalization or medical use of marijuana.
Until next time,
The Cann Ban Man
The "new" policy that has been written out by Obama is really just a reiteration of what federal policy has been ever sense he arrived in office. Obama has been interviewed on the subject many times previous to this written statement, and in all of these discussions he has stated that he does not want to waste federal resources trying to circumvent state laws on the issue. While the policy sounds good, unfortunately the DEA has felt it not necessary to follow. Sense Obama has taken office, there have been at least 22 raids on medical dispensaries in California that have been organized by, or assisted by, federal agents. One of the clubs raided by the DEA in San Francisco was shut down because of what the DEA called "irregularities in the collection of state sales tax." This has nothing to do with violations of state drug laws. When was the last time a bank or pharmacy was raided by federal agents at gun point for irregularities in their state tax forms? Maybe this is why the President now feels it necessary to provide the policy to federal law enforcement in writing.
Unfortunately even this written statement holds little weight with the DEA, particularly in California. Because of the language of the policy, federal agents can still raid medical dispensaries that they feel are out of accordance with state laws. Where this becomes a problem is when officials with opposing views on the subject interpret state laws differently for different districts. This visibly true in the Los Angeles area and San Diego.
The DA of San Diego has been against the medical movement from the get go and continues to shut down San Diego dispensaries with the help of the DEA. In addition, the District Attorney of Los Angeles Steve Cooley has recently published an opinion that, in his mind, renders 99% of the over 800 dispensaries in the LA area illegal because they all use over the counter sales. This would leave legal room for the DEA to assist in raiding all of these Los Angeles clubs because the DA of that area deems them illegal by state law. However, this legal interpretation that Steve Cooley has made public, does not follow the guidelines that California Attorney General Jerry Brown issued in March that clearly state that collectives can charge for cannabis sativa as long as they only take in enough revenue to cover overhead and operating expenses.
All of this media hype and mixed messages from officials are leaving the actual picture of the cannabis sativa debate very divided for those involved, and even more clouded and unsure for the people observing. A clearer picture needs to be drawn about the legal stature and enforcement of cannabis for both the people onlooking the debate and the people debating if any sort of workable solution is going to be formed for the either the legalization or medical use of marijuana.
Until next time,
The Cann Ban Man
Monday, October 19, 2009
NORML Agrees That Law Enforcement is Final Opposition
For many years, most people who have been in favor of, and somewhat in tune with, the discussion about medical and legal cannabis have wondered why it remains a debate. Some people are simply shocked that medical use even remains a discussion, and that normal use remains illegal. Because of the majority support of the citizens, and the obvious state revenue cannabis would generate, prohibition now just seems illogical in many minds.
Many of these concerned people have come to the conclusion that pharmaceutical companies, along with big tobacco and the alcohol companies, are behind the hold up. Some feel that these companies are brutally lobbying for, conspiring for, and financially supporting marijuana's current legal standing. Marijuana is either a perfect or close substitute for all three of these goods. While this may be the case, the active opposition, and the is probably the most true of the pharmaceutical companies. (Especially when there are rumors that Marlboro has already developed the packaging and marketing strategy for Marlboro Greens, just in case legalization goes through...) However the true opposition could be much more in the public eye than that.
NORML has recently concluded that,
Another shocking piece of evidence in favor of law enforcement's vendetta against legal cannabis is the California Narcotics Officers Association's paper entitled “California Police Chiefs Association Position Paper on the Decriminalization of Marijuana.” In this paper the officers association spits out un-backed claims about the cost of legalizing marijuana and many of the evidence they use is entirely contradiction with what studies on the topic have shown. They claim marijuana addicts will turn to crime to fuel there addiction and it will increase the rate of other drug use. Studies on both of these arguments have shown the opposite effects. Usage tends to increase only minimally and many people begin to use marijuana instead of other drugs.
Probably the scariest part about both of these pieces of evidence is that the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, reported that DA Steve Cooley was recently a guest a a convention held by the same California Narcotics Officers Association. The topic of this conference was the ‘eradication of medical-marijuana dispensaries in the city of Los Angeles and Los Angeles County,’
Many of these concerned people have come to the conclusion that pharmaceutical companies, along with big tobacco and the alcohol companies, are behind the hold up. Some feel that these companies are brutally lobbying for, conspiring for, and financially supporting marijuana's current legal standing. Marijuana is either a perfect or close substitute for all three of these goods. While this may be the case, the active opposition, and the is probably the most true of the pharmaceutical companies. (Especially when there are rumors that Marlboro has already developed the packaging and marketing strategy for Marlboro Greens, just in case legalization goes through...) However the true opposition could be much more in the public eye than that.
NORML has recently concluded that,
Law enforcement organizations — including cops, district attorneys, prosecutors, prison guard unions, sheriffs, and narcotics officers associations — remain the primary force working against sensible marijuana law reform.As evidence, they cite the Los Angeles Time's report on the DA's plan to prosecute nearly 100% of the dispensaries running in Los Angeles for non-compliance with state laws. The DA is claiming that any dispensary that has over-the counter-sales is operating illegally. This statement was not based of off any state court or government decision, and it remains the sole opinion of the Los Angeles DA. This cannot simply be one man's hatred and mistrust for marijuana, and seems like a big move to generate funds for the city's law enforcement. The people of LA have caused uproars about this decision, however the DA shows little acceptance or sympathy for the public's beliefs.
Another shocking piece of evidence in favor of law enforcement's vendetta against legal cannabis is the California Narcotics Officers Association's paper entitled “California Police Chiefs Association Position Paper on the Decriminalization of Marijuana.” In this paper the officers association spits out un-backed claims about the cost of legalizing marijuana and many of the evidence they use is entirely contradiction with what studies on the topic have shown. They claim marijuana addicts will turn to crime to fuel there addiction and it will increase the rate of other drug use. Studies on both of these arguments have shown the opposite effects. Usage tends to increase only minimally and many people begin to use marijuana instead of other drugs.
Probably the scariest part about both of these pieces of evidence is that the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, reported that DA Steve Cooley was recently a guest a a convention held by the same California Narcotics Officers Association. The topic of this conference was the ‘eradication of medical-marijuana dispensaries in the city of Los Angeles and Los Angeles County,’
Friday, October 9, 2009
Los Angeles DA Threatens Local Dispensories
On Saturday, the Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley stated that L.A. law enforcement is now of the opinion that almost all 900 dispensaries operating in Los Angeles are running illegally. According to a State Supreme Court Ruling, the 1996 medical law on the books legalizes the medical use and growth of cannabis. According to the DA, this does not legalize the over the counter sale of marijuana, which is currently how all dispensaries operate. Cooley stated to The Los Angeles Times that, "The vast, vast, vast majority, about 100%, of dispensaries in Los Angeles County and the city are operating illegally, they are dealing marijuana illegally, according to our theory,"
His plan is to first warn the clubs of their illegality in order to give them a chance to comply with law enforcement's interpretation of the law. Unfortunately, it would be impossible for any club to maintain its business without over-the-counter sales, and the DA's ultimate goal is to shut down all of the collectives in LA county. This is the largest threat to the medical cannabis industry sense the Obama administration's announcement that federal raids would stop on all dispensaries that were in accordance with state law.
The most confusing part of all of this is the motivation behind the announcement. Why does law enforcement want to crack down on cannabis? Are there not more serious and victimizing crimes that they could redirect their cannabis efforts toward? Or is cannabis enforcement just the most profitable avenue for the department? Can Cooley really justify stripping California for 18 million a year in tax revenue by finding a loop hole in the legislation and demanding that "It's the law!" Finally, if LA law enforcement is taking tax money from the state government, and they are trying to effectively nullify legislation that was voted in by the state's people over ten years ago, who are they working for?!
This is a major development in the legalization debate and it could have dramatic effects on how the medical market operates. I will keep updates on the issue as more information develops.
His plan is to first warn the clubs of their illegality in order to give them a chance to comply with law enforcement's interpretation of the law. Unfortunately, it would be impossible for any club to maintain its business without over-the-counter sales, and the DA's ultimate goal is to shut down all of the collectives in LA county. This is the largest threat to the medical cannabis industry sense the Obama administration's announcement that federal raids would stop on all dispensaries that were in accordance with state law.
The most confusing part of all of this is the motivation behind the announcement. Why does law enforcement want to crack down on cannabis? Are there not more serious and victimizing crimes that they could redirect their cannabis efforts toward? Or is cannabis enforcement just the most profitable avenue for the department? Can Cooley really justify stripping California for 18 million a year in tax revenue by finding a loop hole in the legislation and demanding that "It's the law!" Finally, if LA law enforcement is taking tax money from the state government, and they are trying to effectively nullify legislation that was voted in by the state's people over ten years ago, who are they working for?!
This is a major development in the legalization debate and it could have dramatic effects on how the medical market operates. I will keep updates on the issue as more information develops.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Cannabis Science Can Save Millions on Healthcare
Several blogs and some online media outlets have been covering a new study by a San Francisco based company on cannabinoids potential anti-bacterial qualities. Cannabis Science Inc. was asked to report on the progress of research relating to the use of cannabinoids to reduce the spread of drug resistant bacteria such as methicillin-resistant Staphyloccus aureus (MRSA).
MRSA and similar "superbugs" are hospital breed bacteria that are much more resistant current antibiotics. People with weakened immune systems and those with open wounds are also more susceptible to these bacteria, making hospitals excellent breading grounds for the bugs. These new parasites are becoming a major problem by extending patients normal hospital stays and risking long term patients, such as AIDS or cancer patients, to further infections. The annual death toll for MRSA alone is now in the tens of thousands.
Dr. Robert Melamede, PhD., Director and Chief Science Officer of Cannabis Science Inc. stated that,
University studies in both England and Italy support the company's findings by reporting that the five major cannabinoids found in marijuana showed exceptional antibacterial activity against two forms of MRSA that have been deemed epidemics in English hospitals. Unfortunately news of this new research is being downplayed in the UK because of the governments negative view toward using cannabis as a medicine.
Research into use of whole cannabis extracts and multi-cannabinoid compounds has provided the scientific rationale for medical marijuana’s efficacy in treating some of the most troubling diseases mankind now faces, including infectious diseases such as the flu and HIV, autoimmune diseases such as ALS (Lou Gehrig’s Disease), multiple sclerosis, arthritis, and diabetes, neurological conditions such as Alzheimer’s, stroke and brain injury, as well as numerous forms of cancer. One common element of these diseases is that patients often suffer extended hospital stays, risking development of various Staphyloccus infections including MRSA. A topical, whole-cannabis treatment for these infections is a functional complement to our cannabis extract-based lozenge.
The American Medical Association published in 2007 that MRSA infections caused 18,500 hospital-stay related deaths annually and directly increased healthcare costs by as much as $9.7 billion. Now, in order to gage California's contribution to these added costs, the simplest way would be to use the states percentage of the national population. In California this may even by a low estimation of its contribution due to the millions in added healthcare costs from unreported illegal residence. However, this may been seen by some as too inaccurate or too general of a measurement. So lets assume California's contribution to the national MRSA healthcare cost is only 6%, instead of it's relative population size to the county of 12%. This means that if the cannabinoid antibiotics are legalized in California and they eliminate the costs of MRSA infections, then California will save $582 million annually in healthcare costs.
This estimation also does not take into account the possibility that other states and nations, such as the UK, that have similar problems with antibiotic resistant bugs will take notice of the product's positive results. They may then legalize it for their own hospitals and populations, with a California based supplier ready to meet their demand.
Hopefully this is a good example of how much just one potential product from marijuana legalization can benefit the state economically, as well as an eye opening example of just how real, and potent, cannabis' medical potential is turning out to be.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Social Bookmarking About Marijuana Legalization.
While looking for more information to bring to the discussion of marijuana legalization, I decided to check out what other people are reading and discussing about the debate. After searching for "marijuana legalization in California" on delicious.com, I came across 17 articles relating to the debate about marijuana legalization. Delicious is a social bookmarking site that has more users than any of the others. I felt this would be the best sight for getting useful resources because it has the largest, and presumably most diverse, number of users to give input on the topic. The two most bookmarked articles actually made arguments for the national legalization of all drugs.
In the first story, CNN published a Harvard Economics Professor’s article about how the legalization of all drugs in the United States would greatly reduce violence in the country. Jeffrey A. Miron explains that prohibition actually causes this violence by forcing the markets underground. This prohibits the buyers and sellers of these products from settling their disputes with lawsuits or other legal avenues. Instead they must fall back on organized crime, fear, and violence.
His arguments shed more light on just how detrimental prohibition and the “war on drugs” have become. Because of prohibition, politicians and law enforcement are seen as threats to the profits of these illicit markets. This, in turn, pushes the producers and distributers of these products to threaten, bribe and terrorize these threats in order to protect profits. He argues that this never happens in legal industries.
One of his other points was that drug prohibition is bad for national security, By destroying opium and coca fields in countries such as Columbia and Afghanistan, Miron argues that we are fostering hatred for the United States. He also believes that interfering with trafficking endorses terrorism because many of these traffickers now hire terrorist organizations for protection services. Many if not all of Miron’s arguments could easily be applied to just the marijuana market of California.
Another interesting article I found while searching the delicious social bookmarks explained that the tax revenue predictions for the sales of marijuana have to be grossly overestimated. Michael Hiltzin argues that the estimate that California’s marijuana crop has an anal worth of 14 billion is based on an industry that does not provide financial statements and therefore cannot possibly be accurate. He also feels the mainstream media is buying too much into these guesstimations in the quest for ratings. This article has spurred me to look further into the estimations about weed revenue and really try to figure out what they are based on.
By turning to what sites other people have found interesting about the debate, I have been able to discover not only new things to discuss about legalization implications, but also new viewpoints on previous resources and arguments.
In the first story, CNN published a Harvard Economics Professor’s article about how the legalization of all drugs in the United States would greatly reduce violence in the country. Jeffrey A. Miron explains that prohibition actually causes this violence by forcing the markets underground. This prohibits the buyers and sellers of these products from settling their disputes with lawsuits or other legal avenues. Instead they must fall back on organized crime, fear, and violence.
His arguments shed more light on just how detrimental prohibition and the “war on drugs” have become. Because of prohibition, politicians and law enforcement are seen as threats to the profits of these illicit markets. This, in turn, pushes the producers and distributers of these products to threaten, bribe and terrorize these threats in order to protect profits. He argues that this never happens in legal industries.
One of his other points was that drug prohibition is bad for national security, By destroying opium and coca fields in countries such as Columbia and Afghanistan, Miron argues that we are fostering hatred for the United States. He also believes that interfering with trafficking endorses terrorism because many of these traffickers now hire terrorist organizations for protection services. Many if not all of Miron’s arguments could easily be applied to just the marijuana market of California.
Another interesting article I found while searching the delicious social bookmarks explained that the tax revenue predictions for the sales of marijuana have to be grossly overestimated. Michael Hiltzin argues that the estimate that California’s marijuana crop has an anal worth of 14 billion is based on an industry that does not provide financial statements and therefore cannot possibly be accurate. He also feels the mainstream media is buying too much into these guesstimations in the quest for ratings. This article has spurred me to look further into the estimations about weed revenue and really try to figure out what they are based on.
By turning to what sites other people have found interesting about the debate, I have been able to discover not only new things to discuss about legalization implications, but also new viewpoints on previous resources and arguments.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Maijuana Use By The Numbers
Great post by the people at NORML. Really liked how they used data collected by the government itself. Read the full article on NORML's blog.
I think it the most interesting and attention grabbing point that this post brings up is how one of the initial reason for beginning the war on drugs was to “protect our children” from harmful and gateway drugs. If throughout the nation, and especially California, marijuana is easier of minors to obtain than alcohol then clearly this mission was a failure. The anti-smoking adds have made weed just as popular as alcohol among minors, and keeping it illegal is exposing these teens to users and pushers of more dangerous drugs. If there is already a clear working model for how an age requirement on a substance nearly eliminates its black market availability for minors, and legalizing weed would remove its relation to and presence around other, more dangerous drugs. Then is it just me or is the war on marijuana just another way that the government likes to throw money at an issue while still exacerbating the problem? Making weed legal for those who were over 21 would provide sales tax revenue for the government, save the government money on enforcing marijuana laws, and reduce its availability to minors. Great post, it brings up many sound points for legalization, and it does it using the drug enforcement’s own survey. Arguments such as these can not be ignored by the legislators forever.
I think it the most interesting and attention grabbing point that this post brings up is how one of the initial reason for beginning the war on drugs was to “protect our children” from harmful and gateway drugs. If throughout the nation, and especially California, marijuana is easier of minors to obtain than alcohol then clearly this mission was a failure. The anti-smoking adds have made weed just as popular as alcohol among minors, and keeping it illegal is exposing these teens to users and pushers of more dangerous drugs. If there is already a clear working model for how an age requirement on a substance nearly eliminates its black market availability for minors, and legalizing weed would remove its relation to and presence around other, more dangerous drugs. Then is it just me or is the war on marijuana just another way that the government likes to throw money at an issue while still exacerbating the problem? Making weed legal for those who were over 21 would provide sales tax revenue for the government, save the government money on enforcing marijuana laws, and reduce its availability to minors. Great post, it brings up many sound points for legalization, and it does it using the drug enforcement’s own survey. Arguments such as these can not be ignored by the legislators forever.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Trifecta!
Hello World
Welcome!Currently, California is going through a serious economic crisis. There is a 26 billion dollar budget deficit, and the state government just pushed through legislation to make 15 billion in spending cuts in order to close the spending gap. 9 billion dollars of this cut is to come directly from education. The plan is said said to not even fix the crisis, there is still a rising 11.6% unemployment rate and foreclosing homes all over the state. Some economists feel that the spending cuts will actually hurt the economy by making the California recession longer and more severe than it normally would be.
Because of the widespread knowledge of the Cali economic crisis, and the widespread lack of solutions by the state government, Governer Schwarzenegger has decided to enlist the help and ideas of the state's residence. He has created a myidea4CA.com twitter page where normal people can tweet their ideas about how to help the crisis. The people's overwhelming plan?
Legalize Marijuana.
This blog addresses the effects that the people's plan would have on the state and its economy. As a student of economics, medical Marijuana user and fellow Californian, I have always wondered why the state government would not want to take full advantage of California's largest cash crop. For years Californians have been fighting for legalization, and unlike most Americans, these activists embrace taxation with open arms. So why then is the government still so hesitant? For many years the economy was not on as dire of straights as it is now, and the old federal administration was opposed to the idea and was willing to enforce the federal laws on marijuana throughout California. Now however, the state is squeezing cash from anywhere it can think of, and President Obama has already ended the DEA raids on Marijuana medical clinics. He has also hinted at a lack of federal opposition to a California Legalization movement.
The time for Marijuana activists seems to be coming, and not a moment too soon. They have been screaming for taxation for many years, and are now closer than ever to legalization. There is legislation in Sacramento set for 2010 that will put an alcohol-like legalization on pot. Only those 21 and over will be able to purchase Marijuana and only stores with the correct permits will be able to distribute it. The direct and indrect effects of such legislation would be immediate and outreaching. Hundreds of inmates would be granted their freedom on their non-violent marijuana charges, hemp products would immediately become re-legalized in California, and thousands of taxable jobs would be created by the newly legalized industry. An increase in health-care and medical treatment may result from an increase in Marijuana users but this has yet to be determined.
The overall goal of this blog is to fully explore all of the different sectors of the California state economy that would be effected by legalization and to summarize findings and overall effects that this act could have on the state's people and it's growing economic crisis. The purpose is not to push for legalization, but rather to weigh in all the effects a plan like this would have on California and make conclusions about its feasibility and effectiveness.
Welcome and feel free to provide any comments or insights you may have on the subject.
NORML Profile
While searching for blogs within my area I came across several that spoke on the topic. While most where somewhat dry and purely information based, the one I chose was able to draw an interesting connection between the "Beer Summit" recently held by President Obama intended for better race relations, and the building debate over marijuana legalization.In, "What This Country Needs Is a Marijuana Summit", Current (www.current.com) blogger David Bearman, M.D. discusses the need for a Marijuana summit intended to better the health of millions of Americans and generate millions in tax dollars.
Current is a user generated news web page and television station lead by former Vice President Al Gore. The news company films reports all over the world, and they generally have a slightly activist message behind them.
The most interesting thing about the blog to me was how the argument was posed as more of a calling by the American people to hold some form of public discussion on the topic of Marijuana. As opposed to another post reciting health studies and beneficial economic numbers based on legalization and taxation. It is becoming clear that these facts are being dismissed by politicians, either as lacking substantial backing, or are flat out being ignored. Rather than reciting numbers and studies that are already know, this author brings to light the fact that most Americans do know the dangers and benefits behind Marijuana, and are ready to accept them.
The federal government must concur with what we the people already know. In the Obama Transition Team’s own on-line poll, respondents overwhelmingly selected legalizing marijuana as our country’s number one priority. This May, even a Zogby poll commissioned by the conservative O’Leary Report, found 52 percent of American voters in favor and only 37 percent opposed to legalizing (and taxing) marijuana.
Bearman goes on to say that their should be a public discussion between director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, Gil Kerlikowske, and doctors and researchers on medical marijuana. Making such an event televised would not only show the public that the director of drug control policy is hearing all of the facts, but it would also let the public know expert opinions about the uses of medical marijuana directly from researchers in the field.
In all the blog was quite detailed and it made me think of new ways of looking at the topic rather than simply through health studies and econ figures. Persuading and using the voice of the people is equally as powerful as crunching numbers and reciting facts. Even if the economic benefits are blinding, the people need to scream at their politicians for change in order to see these benefits.
Voice Critique
The Marijuana Addict is a blog written by a self-proclaimed pot addict. While one person's struggles and experiences with marijuana may have little to do with the widespread economic effects on the state, it does bring several things into perspective. It shows some of the less documented psychological effects that long term marijuana use can have on the individual, and it also shows the amount of untaxed, unreported economic activity that one individual can contribute to this growing black market.The Addict claims to have been an avid smoker for over ten years and now he is using his blog to keep track of his progress and share his experiences and difficulties with others that feel addicted to Mary Jane. Throughout his posts, the addict seems to keep a fairly scientific and straightforward perspective on his progress and observations. However, you can notice a large difference in the tone and candor of his posts on days when his sobriety is going well, and the days when it is not.
In the authors's post entitled "How To Quit Smoking Marijuana", the author discribes what he believes are the three most important factors to being able to quit smoking weed for himself, and for his readers. He structures it well and takes a straight forward approach to explaining how each of the points helped him quit and how they can help others. He posts links to other stop smoking sights and makes sure to post important points in bold. He responds well to the discourse and comments that are developing on his sight by saying things such as,
Many people have discussed how hard it is to quit because that is all their friends do is smoke and drink. I had to step away from some friendships that were based on marijuana and nothing else.By responding to his readers and sharing his own experiences with people the author helps to foster a conversation with his readers and provide excellent material to comment on. In one of his first relapse posts, the addict describes his desire to not smoke, but also does a good job of pulling you into the situation so that the reader can see just how the relapse occurred.
It is in these moments of weakness and despair that you get a true sense of the readers voice and persona. The descriptions of these times are more detailed and stylistic, and they show the reader exactly how the author relapsed, as well as convey true sense of the Addict's enjoyment of marijuana.I slipped up again and smoked last night. This was the first relapse in a long time —-more than 3 weeks. Over the last week I had been drinking more than I normally do - well more than normal when I was smoking pot multiple times per day. I ended up having about 5 beers last night, then smoking a bowl.
I knew I didn’t *want* to smoke weed, but I decided to follow everyone out. I knew I didn’t want to smoke, but I joined the circle. I knew I didn’t want to smoke weed, but I lit up and took a puff, and held that smoke down for what felt like an eternity. The act of smoking was so a release, almost like peeing after holding it too long. For a few brief moments, I enjoyed myself.
Many of the posts on this blog are very clear cut and scientific. The Addict uses lists and proper sentence structure in order to most clearly convey the information and reasoning behind it.
However, the posts about his relapses (possibly written while high) have a much more poetic approach to them. He really wants to bring you into the mindset that he was in when he decided to smoke. Then, for a brief moment, he explains the enjoyment of the high, just before a lengthy description of his crushing guilt and week-long weed benders to follow the relapse. The writer is engaging, articulate, and really shows how to change the voice of the writer depending on the situation or the thoughts and emotions that they would like to evoke in the reader.
NORML Profile
While searching for blogs within my area I came across several that spoke on the topic. While most where somewhat dry and purely information based, the one I chose was able to draw an interesting connection between the "Beer Summit" recently held by President Obama intended for better race relations, and the building debate over marijuana legalization.
In, "What This Country Needs Is a Marijuana Summit", Current (www.current.com) blogger David Bearman, M.D. discusses the need for a Marijuana summit intended to better the health of millions of Americans and generate millions in tax dollars.
Current is a user generated news web page and television station lead by former Vice President Al Gore. The news company films reports all over the world, and they generally have a slightly activist message behind them.
The most interesting thing about the blog to me was how the argument was posed as more of a calling by the American people to hold some form of public discussion on the topic of Marijuana. As opposed to another post reciting health studies and beneficial economic numbers based on legalization and taxation. It is becoming clear that these facts are being dismissed by politicians, either as lacking substantial backing, or are flat out being ignored. Rather than reciting numbers and studies that are already know, this author brings to light the fact that most Americans do know the dangers and benefits behind Marijuana, and are ready to accept them.
If a nation can call on its government to re-legalize alcohol with all its known dangers and no possible health benefits, and the same nation can keep tobacco legal after decades of obvious corrilations to cancer and other negative side effects. Then why is there so much hesitation to openly discuss re-legalizing a substance that could improve the health and lives of millions as well as help to stimulate a weakening economy? With the growing need for strong markets and increasing unemployment, why wouldn't the government want to take full advantage of a multi-million dollar industry that is already in place within its borders? These are the types of questions that are citizens need to be asking their politicians. Dr. Bearman realizes that the people must demand that the politicians work for them. That if the majority of voters agree on a topic, than it is the responsibility of the nation's representatives to further that view. They should not need convincing by they people that they represent about weather the majority is truly correct in their opinion.
Bearman goes on to say that their should be a public discussion between director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, Gil Kerlikowske, and doctors and researchers on medical marijuana. Making such an event televised would not only show the public that the director of drug control policy is hearing all of the facts, but it would also let the public know expert opinions about the uses of medical marijuana directly from researchers in the field.
In all the blog was quite detailed and it made me think of new ways of looking at the topic rather than simply through health studies and econ figures. Persuading and using the voice of the people is equally as powerful as crunching numbers and reciting facts. Even if the economic benefits are blinding, the people need to scream at their politicians for change in order to see these benefits.
In, "What This Country Needs Is a Marijuana Summit", Current (www.current.com) blogger David Bearman, M.D. discusses the need for a Marijuana summit intended to better the health of millions of Americans and generate millions in tax dollars.
Current is a user generated news web page and television station lead by former Vice President Al Gore. The news company films reports all over the world, and they generally have a slightly activist message behind them.
The most interesting thing about the blog to me was how the argument was posed as more of a calling by the American people to hold some form of public discussion on the topic of Marijuana. As opposed to another post reciting health studies and beneficial economic numbers based on legalization and taxation. It is becoming clear that these facts are being dismissed by politicians, either as lacking substantial backing, or are flat out being ignored. Rather than reciting numbers and studies that are already know, this author brings to light the fact that most Americans do know the dangers and benefits behind Marijuana, and are ready to accept them.
The federal government must concur with what we the people already know. In the Obama Transition Team’s own on-line poll, respondents overwhelmingly selected legalizing marijuana as our country’s number one priority. This May, even a Zogby poll commissioned by the conservative O’Leary Report, found 52 percent of American voters in favor and only 37 percent opposed to legalizing (and taxing) marijuana.
Bearman goes on to say that their should be a public discussion between director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, Gil Kerlikowske, and doctors and researchers on medical marijuana. Making such an event televised would not only show the public that the director of drug control policy is hearing all of the facts, but it would also let the public know expert opinions about the uses of medical marijuana directly from researchers in the field.
In all the blog was quite detailed and it made me think of new ways of looking at the topic rather than simply through health studies and econ figures. Persuading and using the voice of the people is equally as powerful as crunching numbers and reciting facts. Even if the economic benefits are blinding, the people need to scream at their politicians for change in order to see these benefits.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
The People's Plan
First of all, I would like to say that for my first post fully exploring the effects of legalization, this one will be less technically based. The numbers and statistical analysis should eventually speak for themselves, but for now I would like to explore the legal history and social perceptions of marijuana in the country.
Did you know that just over one hundred years ago weed was totally legal in this country? It was looked at just as harmlessly as any other plant or vegetation one may possess. Or how about that the declaration of independence was written on hemp paper? Yes the views on weed certainly have changed in the past century, but when did Mary turn into the green monster that it is seen as today?
This first signs of legislation against cannabis began in a few states in the early 1900's. By the 1930's it was regulated in every state. This was due to a combination of racism against immigrants and Mexican workers who enjoyed to smoke reefer to relax after work, and hard lobbying by the paper industry for fear of hemp paper encroaching on its market share. Cannabis was still not seen as a silent killer that would destroy your children or cause them to abuse many other intoxicants. If fact, as we now know, marijuana is not an intoxicant at all. An intoxicant refutes to a substance that alters the state of mind through mild poisons, such as psychedelic mushrooms or even alcohol. THC alters the state of mind by replicating chemicals that are produced in the brain naturally in smaller levels.
So where did the switch happen? In truth the change was not that long ago. In 1970 under the Nixon administration, the Controlled Substances Act was enacted and the war on drugs was on. Cannabis was from then on seen as a gateway drug that would destroy the lives of millions of teens and lead to a widespread drug epidemic. The legislation classified it as having a high risk for abuse, no medicinal use, and that it was not safe to use even under medical supervision.
This smear campaign against cannabis is slowly getting reversed. Since the controlled substances act, almost 15 states have ratified some form of legal medical use for marijuana, and the general public's view on the substance has gradually softened. California already allows dispensaries for patients to go get their medication without visiting the doctor or filling out a prescription every time.
In fact, the NORML organization recently posted a study that says that nationally, 51% of adults believe weed is less dangerous than alcohol. Now if this percentage does not increase when it is restricted to Californians, then I might as well just stop blogging now... But, provided that the study's results are the same for California, that means that over half of the voters in the state believe this illegal substance is less dangerous than a legal substance. Even more is that only 19% of the adults nationally believe that pot is the more dangerous of the two. The NORML web sight also reported on the Government's official survey on drug usage. This survey is conducted by having Government officials inquire about normal citizens illicit drug use.
Can you see a problem with this method?!
The survey reports having a 30%-50% under reporting to the representatives on the actually amount of alcohol and cigarettes consumed. Now if this is how much people wanted to hide their usage of two legal substances, think about how much the numbers on cannabis usage were deflated. Even still, the Government reports that by age 25, 54% of Americans will have used Marijuana. Almost 20% today still use it at least annually and 10% reporting that they use it regularly. This same report claims that less than 15% of Americans have ever tried cocaine.
The weed propaganda is gradually being overturned and now people are starting to realize the minuscule dangers that come along with cannabis usage. If people already know the dangers of weed and agree that they are less than that of a legal substance, and over half of these people are going to use cannabis at some point weather it is legal or not, then I say why isn't it legalized for the people because the majority clearly want it to be? Isn't that how this whole representatives of the people thing works? I say there shouldn't have to be financial incentives or an economic crisis to spur the re-legalization of marijuana if it is clearly what the people want. But if you want to call me and idealist....then ill give you all the incentives and economic figures to back up the People's Plan in the coming weeks.
Did you know that just over one hundred years ago weed was totally legal in this country? It was looked at just as harmlessly as any other plant or vegetation one may possess. Or how about that the declaration of independence was written on hemp paper? Yes the views on weed certainly have changed in the past century, but when did Mary turn into the green monster that it is seen as today?
This first signs of legislation against cannabis began in a few states in the early 1900's. By the 1930's it was regulated in every state. This was due to a combination of racism against immigrants and Mexican workers who enjoyed to smoke reefer to relax after work, and hard lobbying by the paper industry for fear of hemp paper encroaching on its market share. Cannabis was still not seen as a silent killer that would destroy your children or cause them to abuse many other intoxicants. If fact, as we now know, marijuana is not an intoxicant at all. An intoxicant refutes to a substance that alters the state of mind through mild poisons, such as psychedelic mushrooms or even alcohol. THC alters the state of mind by replicating chemicals that are produced in the brain naturally in smaller levels.
So where did the switch happen? In truth the change was not that long ago. In 1970 under the Nixon administration, the Controlled Substances Act was enacted and the war on drugs was on. Cannabis was from then on seen as a gateway drug that would destroy the lives of millions of teens and lead to a widespread drug epidemic. The legislation classified it as having a high risk for abuse, no medicinal use, and that it was not safe to use even under medical supervision.
This smear campaign against cannabis is slowly getting reversed. Since the controlled substances act, almost 15 states have ratified some form of legal medical use for marijuana, and the general public's view on the substance has gradually softened. California already allows dispensaries for patients to go get their medication without visiting the doctor or filling out a prescription every time.
In fact, the NORML organization recently posted a study that says that nationally, 51% of adults believe weed is less dangerous than alcohol. Now if this percentage does not increase when it is restricted to Californians, then I might as well just stop blogging now... But, provided that the study's results are the same for California, that means that over half of the voters in the state believe this illegal substance is less dangerous than a legal substance. Even more is that only 19% of the adults nationally believe that pot is the more dangerous of the two. The NORML web sight also reported on the Government's official survey on drug usage. This survey is conducted by having Government officials inquire about normal citizens illicit drug use.
Can you see a problem with this method?!
The survey reports having a 30%-50% under reporting to the representatives on the actually amount of alcohol and cigarettes consumed. Now if this is how much people wanted to hide their usage of two legal substances, think about how much the numbers on cannabis usage were deflated. Even still, the Government reports that by age 25, 54% of Americans will have used Marijuana. Almost 20% today still use it at least annually and 10% reporting that they use it regularly. This same report claims that less than 15% of Americans have ever tried cocaine.
The weed propaganda is gradually being overturned and now people are starting to realize the minuscule dangers that come along with cannabis usage. If people already know the dangers of weed and agree that they are less than that of a legal substance, and over half of these people are going to use cannabis at some point weather it is legal or not, then I say why isn't it legalized for the people because the majority clearly want it to be? Isn't that how this whole representatives of the people thing works? I say there shouldn't have to be financial incentives or an economic crisis to spur the re-legalization of marijuana if it is clearly what the people want. But if you want to call me and idealist....then ill give you all the incentives and economic figures to back up the People's Plan in the coming weeks.
Voice Critique
The Marijuana Addict is a blog written by a self-proclaimed pot addict. While one person's struggles and experiences with marijuana may have little to do with the widespread economic effects on the state, it does bring several things into perspective. It shows some of the less documented psychological effects that long term marijuana use can have on the individual, and it also shows the amount of untaxed, unreported economic activity that one individual can contribute to this growing black market.
The Addict claims to have been an avid smoker for over ten years and now he is using his blog to keep track of his progress and share his experiences and difficulties with others that feel addicted to Mary Jane. Throughout his posts, the addict seems to keep a fairly scientific and straightforward perspective on his progress and observations. However, you can notice a large difference in the tone and candor of his posts on days when his sobriety is going well, and the days when it is not.
In the authors's post entitled "How To Quit Smoking Marijuana", the author discribes what he believes are the three most important factors to being able to quit smoking weed for himself, and for his readers. He structures it well and takes a straight forward approach to explaining how each of the points helped him quit and how they can help others. He posts links to other stop smoking sights and makes sure to post important points in bold. He responds well to the discourse and comments that are developing on his sight by saying things such as,
Many of the posts on this blog are very clear cut and scientific. The Addict uses lists and proper sentence structure in order to most clearly convey the information and reasoning behind it.
However, the posts about his relapses (possibly written while high) have a much more poetic approach to them. He really wants to bring you into the mindset that he was in when he decided to smoke. Then, for a brief moment, he explains the enjoyment of the high, just before a lengthy description of his crushing guilt and week-long weed benders to follow the relapse. The writer is engaging, articulate, and really shows how to change the voice of the writer depending on the situation or the thoughts and emotions that they would like to evoke in the reader.
The Addict claims to have been an avid smoker for over ten years and now he is using his blog to keep track of his progress and share his experiences and difficulties with others that feel addicted to Mary Jane. Throughout his posts, the addict seems to keep a fairly scientific and straightforward perspective on his progress and observations. However, you can notice a large difference in the tone and candor of his posts on days when his sobriety is going well, and the days when it is not.
In the authors's post entitled "How To Quit Smoking Marijuana", the author discribes what he believes are the three most important factors to being able to quit smoking weed for himself, and for his readers. He structures it well and takes a straight forward approach to explaining how each of the points helped him quit and how they can help others. He posts links to other stop smoking sights and makes sure to post important points in bold. He responds well to the discourse and comments that are developing on his sight by saying things such as,
Many people have discussed how hard it is to quit because that is all their friends do is smoke and drink. I had to step away from some friendships that were based on marijuana and nothing else.By responding to his readers and sharing his own experiences with people the author helps to foster a conversation with his readers and provide excellent material to comment on. In one of his first relapse posts, the addict describes his desire to not smoke, but also does a good job of pulling you into the situation so that the reader can see just how the relapse occurred.
It is in these moments of weakness and despair that you get a true sense of the readers voice and persona. The descriptions of these times are more detailed and stylistic, and they show the reader exactly how the author relapsed, as well as convey true sense of the Addict's enjoyment of marijuana.I slipped up again and smoked last night. This was the first relapse in a long time —-more than 3 weeks. Over the last week I had been drinking more than I normally do - well more than normal when I was smoking pot multiple times per day. I ended up having about 5 beers last night, then smoking a bowl.
I knew I didn’t *want* to smoke weed, but I decided to follow everyone out. I knew I didn’t want to smoke, but I joined the circle. I knew I didn’t want to smoke weed, but I lit up and took a puff, and held that smoke down for what felt like an eternity. The act of smoking was so a release, almost like peeing after holding it too long. For a few brief moments, I enjoyed myself.
Many of the posts on this blog are very clear cut and scientific. The Addict uses lists and proper sentence structure in order to most clearly convey the information and reasoning behind it.
However, the posts about his relapses (possibly written while high) have a much more poetic approach to them. He really wants to bring you into the mindset that he was in when he decided to smoke. Then, for a brief moment, he explains the enjoyment of the high, just before a lengthy description of his crushing guilt and week-long weed benders to follow the relapse. The writer is engaging, articulate, and really shows how to change the voice of the writer depending on the situation or the thoughts and emotions that they would like to evoke in the reader.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Hello World
Welcome!
Currently, California is going through a serious economic crisis. There is a 26 billion dollar budget deficit, and the state government just pushed through legislation to make 15 billion in spending cuts in order to close the spending gap. 9 billion dollars of this cut is to come directly from education. The plan is said said to not even fix the crisis, there is still a rising 11.6% unemployment rate and foreclosing homes all over the state. Some economists feel that the spending cuts will actually hurt the economy by making the California recession longer and more severe than it normally would be.
Because of the widespread knowledge of the Cali economic crisis, and the widespread lack of solutions by the state government, Governer Schwarzenegger has decided to enlist the help and ideas of the state's residence. He has created a myidea4CA.com twitter page where normal people can tweet their ideas about how to help the crisis. The people's overwhelming plan?
Legalize Marijuana.
This blog addresses the effects that the people's plan would have on the state and its economy. As a student of economics, medical Marijuana user and fellow Californian, I have always wondered why the state government would not want to take full advantage of California's largest cash crop. For years Californians have been fighting for legalization, and unlike most Americans, these activists embrace taxation with open arms. So why then is the government still so hesitant? For many years the economy was not on as dire of straights as it is now, and the old federal administration was opposed to the idea and was willing to enforce the federal laws on marijuana throughout California. Now however, the state is squeezing cash from anywhere it can think of, and President Obama has already ended the DEA raids on Marijuana medical clinics. He has also hinted at a lack of federal opposition to a California Legalization movement.
The time for Marijuana activists seems to be coming, and not a moment too soon. They have been screaming for taxation for many years, and are now closer than ever to legalization. There is legislation in Sacramento set for 2010 that will put an alcohol-like legalization on pot. Only those 21 and over will be able to purchase Marijuana and only stores with the correct permits will be able to distribute it. The direct and indrect effects of such legislation would be immediate and outreaching. Hundreds of inmates would be granted their freedom on their non-violent marijuana charges, hemp products would immediately become re-legalized in California, and thousands of taxable jobs would be created by the newly legalized industry. An increase in health-care and medical treatment may result from an increase in Marijuana users but this has yet to be determined.
The overall goal of this blog is to fully explore all of the different sectors of the California state economy that would be effected by legalization and to summarize findings and overall effects that this act could have on the state's people and it's growing economic crisis. The purpose is not to push for legalization, but rather to weigh in all the effects a plan like this would have on California and make conclusions about its feasibility and effectiveness.
Welcome and feel free to provide any comments or insights you may have on the subject.
Currently, California is going through a serious economic crisis. There is a 26 billion dollar budget deficit, and the state government just pushed through legislation to make 15 billion in spending cuts in order to close the spending gap. 9 billion dollars of this cut is to come directly from education. The plan is said said to not even fix the crisis, there is still a rising 11.6% unemployment rate and foreclosing homes all over the state. Some economists feel that the spending cuts will actually hurt the economy by making the California recession longer and more severe than it normally would be.
Because of the widespread knowledge of the Cali economic crisis, and the widespread lack of solutions by the state government, Governer Schwarzenegger has decided to enlist the help and ideas of the state's residence. He has created a myidea4CA.com twitter page where normal people can tweet their ideas about how to help the crisis. The people's overwhelming plan?
Legalize Marijuana.
This blog addresses the effects that the people's plan would have on the state and its economy. As a student of economics, medical Marijuana user and fellow Californian, I have always wondered why the state government would not want to take full advantage of California's largest cash crop. For years Californians have been fighting for legalization, and unlike most Americans, these activists embrace taxation with open arms. So why then is the government still so hesitant? For many years the economy was not on as dire of straights as it is now, and the old federal administration was opposed to the idea and was willing to enforce the federal laws on marijuana throughout California. Now however, the state is squeezing cash from anywhere it can think of, and President Obama has already ended the DEA raids on Marijuana medical clinics. He has also hinted at a lack of federal opposition to a California Legalization movement.
The time for Marijuana activists seems to be coming, and not a moment too soon. They have been screaming for taxation for many years, and are now closer than ever to legalization. There is legislation in Sacramento set for 2010 that will put an alcohol-like legalization on pot. Only those 21 and over will be able to purchase Marijuana and only stores with the correct permits will be able to distribute it. The direct and indrect effects of such legislation would be immediate and outreaching. Hundreds of inmates would be granted their freedom on their non-violent marijuana charges, hemp products would immediately become re-legalized in California, and thousands of taxable jobs would be created by the newly legalized industry. An increase in health-care and medical treatment may result from an increase in Marijuana users but this has yet to be determined.
The overall goal of this blog is to fully explore all of the different sectors of the California state economy that would be effected by legalization and to summarize findings and overall effects that this act could have on the state's people and it's growing economic crisis. The purpose is not to push for legalization, but rather to weigh in all the effects a plan like this would have on California and make conclusions about its feasibility and effectiveness.
Welcome and feel free to provide any comments or insights you may have on the subject.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
