MARIJUANA PROHIBITION ONLY HELPS GOVERNMENT

The battle to legalize marijuana has always been an issue in American
culture and politics. However, due to inherent hypocrisies and
misconceptions in the American government and public at large, there
has never been enough political capital to repeal the unjust laws
governing the drug's use. Legalization is the last step in a long
process that would allow for unrestrained recreational use of a drug
that would not, as many people fear, lead to the downfall of American
society. When people sift through all the propaganda, they will find
that the only people who benefit from marijuana prohibition is the
government and big business, while the average American citizen is
burdened with the negative effects.

From the first laws founded in racism against American immigrants, to
the ignorance of scientific data that marijuana has legitimate
medicinal uses, politicians and a drug prohibition lobby have been
successful in perpetuating the fear of effects of marijuana, along
with all other drugs, that the American public feeds on. However, this
stance does not benefit the American public one iota. Instead of doing
what is right, politicians fear the backlash and the stigma that
coincide with the accusations of being soft on crime.

Many states have begun to see the light and have passed laws allowing
for medicinal marijuana uses, while others still seek to decriminalize
its possession. This past week, Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts
stated on the HBO show "Real Time with Bill Maher" that he would
introduce a bill in Congress decriminalize small amounts of marijuana.
Instead of being arrested people who were caught with marijuana would
instead pay a fine much like a traffic ticket.

Unfortunately, there is not enough political capital to even pass this
small bill in Congress. And even if it did pass, anything short of
legalization is unjust. This recent attempt to decriminalize marijuana
at the federal level demonstrates the first way legalization would
benefit the average American citizen - it would save them money. There
would no longer be a need to spend money on marijuana enforcement or
related court fees associated with the victimless crime. Instead money
could be reallocated so law enforcement could actually do some real
police work by cutting down on violent crimes and ensuring the safety
of residents, especially in the cities. Taxes could be decreased or
possibly spent more efficiently.

More importantly, marijuana could be a large source of revenue for
state governments who are experiencing financial woes during the
current economic downturn. Sales tax generated from people who
purchase marijuana could generate significant sums of money and could
be similar in statute to taxes on alcohol, cigarettes and gas.

Yet again, despite the legitimate reasons for legalization, there are
overriding forces at work that stifle this path, separate of
scientific and moral inquiry (if it was scientific and moral inquiry
in anything, American society would be much different). The first
beneficiary of marijuana prohibition, whether people like to admit or
not, is the federal government. The federal government employs
thousands of people in agencies such as the FBI and DEA to enforce
drug laws. The sole reason these jobs exist is because of the laws on
the books. What happens to these jobs if marijuana or any other drugs
are legalized or medicinalized? They go by the wayside. Fortunately
for these people, the bureaucracy of the government saves their jobs.
Despite scholarly research and popular opinions, the higher ups in
these organizations will do anything to save their agencies, even if
it means needless spending on drug enforcement. One unfortunate
byproduct of bureaucracies is that it is ofte! n more important to
create and save jobs than to run the government efficiently. And in
the case of U.S. government agencies, millions of dollars of funding
are at stake.

By eliminating marijuana prohibition, there may be many people who
would lose their jobs. However, despite their bad fortune, funding
jobs at the expense of the American people is just unfair. If a
company in the real world does not have a niche or a market they go
out of business (except for farmers who get subsidies) and their
employees have to find new jobs. In this case though, the agencies
continue thrive, this time at the expense of the taxpayer, whose
rights are being violated. The only reason these organizations exist
is because the government has people's tax money and is the ultimate
authority on how to spend it.

Another important beneficiary of marijuana prohibition is the alcohol
industry. All things considered marijuana is less harmful, less
addictive and less painful (for example, there are no hangovers) than
alcohol. The reason alcohol is legal is because it has been America's
drug of choice for hundreds of years. The alcohol industry stands to
lose millions, maybe billions of dollars from the repeal of marijuana
prohibition. The high cost of marijuana is tied up in the fact that it
takes an immense amount of risk to farm and distribute a substance
which is still, though unfairly, a Schedule I drug. The moment
marijuana is legalized, the price would shoot down and the alcohol
industry lose out. Motivation for alcohol companies to support
continued marijuana prohibition remains high (that is unless they
start to produce it themselves, but corporate control is another issue
altogether).

Despite the unjustified moral qualms that people and the government
have with regulating the substances that another person chooses to put
in their body at their own expense, the one argument that has proven
most effective at staving off a movement of marijuana legalization is
that it is a "gateway drug." Yes, marijuana is a gateway drug in a
sense, but not in the sense that is traditionally thought. Marijuana
does not cause people to try other drugs. Instead an individual
person's psychology is how their propensity to try other drugs should
be evaluated. Yes, marijuana gets people comfortable with trying
illegal substances, but that is it. Many people experiment with
alcohol first, especially in high school yet, alcohol is not
considered a gateway drug only for the reason that it is legal.

Proponents still point to the fact, after ignoring alcohol, that
people start with marijuana and work their way up to harder drugs,
such as heroin. Of course, this should make sense. It is analogous to
running a marathon. People don't start running 26 miles, they train
their way up to it. They only progress if they want to. However, there
are still people that prefer to only run maybe two or three miles. A
simple SAT analogy - running short distances is not a "gateway" to
running marathons as marijuana is not a "gateway" to harder drugs.

In conclusion, supporting marijuana prohibition for the benefit of
companies and the government at the expense of the people, literally
and figuratively, is not right. As of this moment, people are forced
to pay to taxes in the millions of dollars to fight a drug that is
only considered harmful for many unjustified reasons. In a surprising
twist, a conservative notion is that marijuana prohibition is not
fiscally responsible. Americans should not have to pay to prohibit the
actions of others for crimes which there are no victims. Once again,
the American people lose out.