Cannabis Conversation

Students and profs weigh in on Calif. proposition to legalize marijuana

On Nov. 2, California might just become the envy of Bob Marley fans across the country. Proposition 19, a measure that proposes legalization of marijuana possession for adults 21 and over, has blazed up more emotional reactions than iPod lighter apps at a Palo Alto High School dance.

Many Stanford students view Proposition 19 — which is slated for the Nov. 2 California statewide ballot — as a natural step in light of California’s budget issues, growing cultural acceptance of marijuana and the dangerous aspects of many currently legal drugs, such as alcohol and OxyContin.

“I think it’s really exciting that California might take this step to be more responsible with substance abuse issues,” said Brian Anderson, a Stanford medical student who donated money to Yes on Proposition 19.

Fifteen states currently support legal medical marijuana — with Washington D.C. recently joining the list — but California stands poised to be the first state to legalize personal, recreational use. Proposition 19 would allow for regulation and taxation of marijuana much like alcohol today.

Driving under the influence, selling to minors, using in public or smoking in the presence of minors would remain prohibited.

“As someone involved in medicine I think this is not just a political thing but a medical thing, and having drugs more regulated and hopefully from safer sources is a great thing for public health,” Anderson said.

While many state politicians still refuse to take strong stands, groups ranging from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People to the American Civil Liberties Union to the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, as well as a number of police chiefs and district attorneys, have endorsed Proposition 19. Increasing publicity surrounding addiction to legal substances, such as painkillers, in concurrence with marijuana becoming more mainstream in popular culture, has opened a wider variety of groups to the idea of legalization than ever before.

Many students seem to agree that in comparison to the dangers of legal alcohol, keeping marijuana banned makes little sense.

“People are more impaired [and] more likely to do things that would hurt others around them when they’re drunk than when they’re high,” said Brittany Huggins ‘13.

Statistics back up the dangers of alcohol, with some citing more than 85,000 alcohol-related deaths in America per year, as well as medically related issues such as fetal alcohol syndrome, exacerbation of domestic violence and traffic accidents. However, for the simple reason that marijuana is currently illegal, few reliable studies on its effects exist. Should Proposition 19 pass, therefore, California will serve as something of a great American experiment.

“I think if California is the first to do it, a lot of states will follow,” said Nicole Brooks ‘11.

Proposition 19, however, may have more than just political effects. If marijuana becomes legal, estimates from the Research and Development Corporation show the drug’s price may drop by 80 percent, establishing the Golden State as a nationwide dispensary of marijuana at Costco-like prices.

Proponents of legalizing marijuana believe it will decrease gang violence and Mexican cartels, but Keith Humphreys, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences, believes it may actually create stronger gang activity in smuggling cannabis across state lines.

“If our price drops 80 percent, all the drug rings are going to do the smart thing and set up operations in California,” Humphreys said. “They’d be foolish not to.”

Humphreys, who served last year in the Obama administration as senior policy advisor at the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, has worked to reduce criminal penalties for crack cocaine and other drugs. He believes that states have a lot of work to do in creating humane drug policy, but that Proposition 19 would likely hurt public health by giving rise to new marijuana mega-corporations, in the model of Big Tobacco.

“This law hands another product to market to tobacco companies or creates a doppelganger that will lobby with them,” Humphreys said. “I don’t want to see some 16-year-old kid who smokes a joint have his life ruined, but . . . this law is not just legalized use, it’s legalized corporate ownership [and] legalized marketing.”

Humphreys predicts that tobacco companies, which have been poised and ready to accept cannabis into their product line since the 1970s, will align their aggressive marketing tactics and billions of dollars in lobbying power to gain control of cannabis in California.

“It’s taken us 40 years to bring tobacco companies even modestly to heel, and tobacco still kills 40,000 people per year,” he said. “How about let’s show we can regulate one industry that sells an addictive plant before we take on another.”

Is legalization of marijuana a step toward common sense and greater personal freedom or a submission under the heels of powerful corporate interests? Either way, the impetus of California’s budget crisis, coupled with the lure of tax revenue from legalized marijuana, takes the issue out of morality and emotion and into the realm of cold, hard cash.

To a state drowning in debt, the $14 billion in underground cash flow that marijuana currently generates in California runs frustratingly untouchable. If legalized, state tax collectors estimate new revenue up to $1.3 billion per year.

“Proposition 19 is a great thing for California,” Brooks said. “It might not be the best way to solve the deficit, but I don’t think Proposition 19 would hurt it.”

The illegal activity policy at Stanford tends to focus on safety and trust rather than on policing every infraction. However, would state-sanctioned marijuana use lead to students lighting up on every rooftop, tendrils of smoke smothering Hoover Tower and Introduction to the Humanities books left unread by dilated pupils?

“I’m kind of surprised that as an institution, Stanford hasn’t started gauging student interest on the issue,” Brooks said. “I would hope that Stanford would at least have a discussion — for example, we have AlcoholEdu but no DrugEdu.”

While overall, Stanford students trend toward either favoring Proposition 19 or apathy — in typical Stanford political form — knowing they’ll be able to rely on a comprehensive set of University guidelines in the event of legalization is reassuring to many.

But even without Stanford intervention, the unwavering belief in Stanford students’ ability to moderate themselves, to keep that duck paddle going through temptation, remains strong.

“The amount of people doing stupid things on marijuana will increase for a short time, but once people get over the shock it will go back down,” Huggins predicted.

“I think more people would be willing to try it if it weren’t illegal,” she added. “But a lot of people would stop because it would no longer be such a rebellious thing.”

  • malcolm kyle

    Prohibition is a sickening horror and the ocean of hypocrisy, incompetence, corruption and human wreckage it has left in its wake is almost endless.

    Prohibition has decimated generations and criminalized millions for a behavior which is entwined in human existence, and for what other purpose than to uphold the defunct and corrupt thinking of a minority of misguided, self-righteous Neo-Puritans and degenerate demagogues who wish nothing but unadulterated destruction on the rest of us.

    Based on the unalterable proviso that drug use is essentially an unstoppable and ongoing human behavior which has been with us since the dawn of time, any serious reading on the subject of past attempts at any form of drug prohibition would point most normal thinking people in the direction of sensible regulation.

    By its very nature, prohibition cannot fail but create a vast increase in criminal activity, and rather than preventing society from descending into anarchy, it actually fosters an anarchic business model – the international Drug Trade. Any decisions concerning quality, quantity, distribution and availability are then left in the hands of unregulated, anonymous and ruthless drug dealers, who are interested only in the huge profits involved. Thus the allure of this reliable and lucrative industry with it’s enormous income potential that consistently outweighs the risks associated with the illegal operations that such a trade entails, will remain with us until we are collectively forced to admit the obvious.

    There is therefore an irrefutable connection between drug prohibition and the crime, corruption, disease and death it causes. Anybody ‘halfway bright’, and who’s not psychologically challenged, should be capable of understanding that it is not simply the demand for drugs that creates the mayhem, it is our refusal to allow legal businesses to meet that demand. If you are not capable of understanding this connection then maybe you’re using something far stronger than the rest of us. So put away your pipe, lock yourself away in a small room with some tinned soup and water, and try to crawl back into reality A.S.A.P.

    Because Drug cartels will always have an endless supply of ready cash for wages, bribery and equipment, no amount of tax money, police powers, weaponry, wishful thinking or pseudo-science will make our streets safe again. Only an end to prohibition can do that! How much longer are you willing to foolishly risk your own survival by continuing to ignore the obvious, historically confirmed solution?

    If you support the Kool-Aid mass suicide cult of prohibition, and erroneously believe that you can win a war without logic and practical solutions, then prepare yourself for even more death, tortured corpses, corruption, terrorism, sickness, imprisonment, economic tribulation, unemployment and the complete loss of the rule of law.

    “A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded.”
    Abraham Lincoln

    The only thing prohibition successfully does is prohibit regulation & taxation while turning even our schools and prisons into black markets for drugs. Regulation would mean the opposite!

  • Jullian

    Partnership for a Drug Free America
    Sources of Funding from 1988-91
    Extracted from Federal Tax Returns

    (figures are approximate)

    Pharmaceutical Firms

    J. Seward Johnson, Sr. Charitable Trusts — $1.1 million
    Du Pont — 125,000
    Proctor and Gamble Fund — 120,000
    Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation — 115,000
    Johnson & Johnson — 100,000
    Merck Foundation — 85,000
    Hoffman-LaRoche — 75,000

    Tobacco and Liquor Firms
    Phillip Morris — 125,000
    Anheuser-Busch — 100,000
    RJ Reynolds — 100,000
    American Brands — 100,000

  • malcolm kyle

    So how has prohibition helped kids by triggering the worst crime wave in history?

    So how has prohibition helped kids by escalating the number of people on welfare who can’t find employment due to their felony status?

    So how has prohibition helped kids by creating a black market with massive incentives to hook both adults and children alike?

    So how has prohibition helped kids by making dangerous substances available in schools and prisons?

    So how has prohibition helped kids by raising gang warfare to a level not seen since the days of alcohol bootlegging?

    So how has prohibition helped kids by creating a prison-for-profit synergy with drug lords?

    So how has prohibition helped kids if it’s removed many important civil liberties from their parents?

    So how has prohibition helped kids by putting previously unknown and contaminated drugs on the streets?

    So how has prohibition helped kids by escalating Theft, Muggings and Burglaries?

    So how has prohibition helped kids by overcrowding the courts and prisons, thus making it increasingly impossible to curtail the people who are hurting and terrorizing others?

    So how has prohibition helped kids by evolving local gangs into transnational enterprises with intricate power structures that reach into every corner of society, controlling vast swaths of territory with significant social and military resources at their disposal?

  • Christian

    Jesus said to treat other people the way we would want to be treated. I know I wouldn’t want my college kid to go to jail with the sexual predators, or my parents to have their house stolen by the police, if they used a little marijuana.

    Let’s change the world. Let’s get registered and vote.

    Citizens and college students in California can register at
    w w w . sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_vr.htm .
    (just fill out the form and mail it in).

    And you can request a ballot by mail at
    w w w . sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_m.htm .

    In other states, Google your state name and the phrase, voter registration. Print off the form and mail it in (or drive it down to City Hall).

    Five minutes. Register to vote. Change the world. Right now.

    Pass it on

  • Laurie

    Currently online at Stanford Magazine you can find Joseph D. McNamara, Hoover Institution Research Fellow and retired Chief of Police of San Jose, California, who signed the Proposition 19 Ballot Initiative, interviewed by the editor alongside Professor Humphreys. Perhaps the Daily can follow up!

  • Jess

    Big Tobacco “gaining control of cannibis”? Obviously this guy has never met a grower. Once you grow your own, the only thing that will happen is trading. Nobody is going to be paying for that stuff. EVERY CA resident can have up to a 25 sq. ft. garden. Do you know HOW MUCH you can grow with 25 sq. ft.? I have known people that pulled 5 lbs out of 16 sq ft in 3 months. In his closet. Nobody is going to be BUYING anything from Big Tobacco but cigarettes. Did people BUY pot at woodstock? Hell no! That shit was free. I don’t think big tobacco has a chance.

    I do agree that it will be difficult to control the amount of cannabis going from CA to neighboring state borders though. But hell, if the other states have to pay to run roadblocks 24/7, maybe they will be more inclined to pass it too. Nobody likes paying 8 cops to stand around with a drug dog in the rain checking trunks on every major road along your state line. Right?

  • Good points Jess

    I was thinking the same thing—with the potential for the citizens growing their own, where’s the tax boost? California loses hundreds of millions in cigarette taxes every year anyway to smuggling , no reason to think they’re not going to be big losers on this one either.
    It’s still not a good enough reason to move back to California though.