POT OF UNTAXED REVENUE

SHE COULD BE a middle-age soccer mom. Or maybe, a Prop. 8 supporter
warning against the "evils" of same-sex marriage. But from the looks
of her, Nadene Herndon is about the last person I'd envision firing up a joint.

But there she is, the star of a controversial television
advertisement from the Marijuana Policy Project -- stumping for the
legalization and taxing of pot in California.

Gazing earnestly into the camera, the Fair Oaks woman tells us that
California is facing huge cuts to schools, health care and public
safety as the state struggles with a whopper of a budget deficit.

"But the governor and the Legislature are ignoring millions of
Californians who want to pay taxes," Herndon says. "We're marijuana
users. Instead of being treated like criminals for a substance safer
than alcohol, we want to pay our fair share."

California's "marijuana industry," she says, could pay the salaries
of 20,000 teachers and give the state's empty coffers a $1 billion infusion.

Help solve California's budget problems by legalizing and taxing pot?

Oh heck no, said the honchos at some of our area television news
networks, who refused to air the 30-second spot.

NBC affiliate KNTV rejected it. ABC affiliate KGO also turned the ad
down because it was "not comfortable." CBS affiliate KPIX and Fox
affiliate KTVU never answered back.

The ads did begin airing on KRON, on stations statewide and on CNN,
Headline News, MSNBC and CNBC.

The squeamishness of some TV stations notwithstanding, the
pro-legalization movement is gaining momentum.

Oakland is ground zero.

The city made national news when it put Measure F on the ballot in
the July 21 special election. If F passes, Oakland would become the
first city in the country to levy a direct tax against marijuana
dispensaries -- $18 for every $1,000 sales, on some $20 million in gross sales.

The pot dispensers are all for it because they see the tax as a huge
step in their efforts to be treated like other businesses. You can't
call us criminals! We pay taxes like everyone else. They can afford
it. Pot sales, at least, are recession proof. Many Oakland officials
are for it because $315,000 in new revenue is nothing to sneeze at
when you're flat busted.

I suspect that if Oakland passes F, other California cities with pot
clubs in their midst will rush to follow suit.

That of course would give a huge boost to the legalization movement.

The fact is, if you're going to allow the cannabis dispensaries, you
might as well legalize pot. Just about anyone can qualify for a
medical marijuana card based on a supposed chronic illness that
impairs their ability to function. There are plenty of doctors
willing to do the wink and nod and plenty of folks with ID cards who
sell illegally what they obtain legally.

Many people, whether they indulge or not, probably get that.
According to a Field Poll conducted in April, 56 percent of
California voters think we should legalize marijuana for recreational
use and tax the proceeds. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says it's time
to revisit the issue and examine the impact of legalization.

Possession of marijuana for any reason is still a violation of
federal law. The Bush administration routinely sent out the Drug
Enforcement Agency to raid medical marijuana dispensaries.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. announced in March that the
feds would no longer prosecute the owners of legitimate medical
marijuana dispensaries -- only those, who "falsely masquerade as
medical dispensaries and use medical marijuana laws as a shield."
Good luck sorting that out.

Last month, Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., reintroduced the Personal Use
of Marijuana By Responsible Adults Act of 2009 (I kid you not).

The law would make it legal to possess up to 3.5 ounces of pot and
the "transfer not for sale" of up to one ounce. So say you want to
give a friend an ounce as a gift, you wouldn't have to worry about
the feds kicking in your door. Our very own Rep. George Miller,
D-Martinez, is on board.

In California, supporters of legalization are working on a state
initiative that would allow adults over the age of 21 to possess pot
for personal use. Meanwhile, Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San
Francisco, is pushing a bill in the Legislature that would regulate
pot much like alcohol.

A lot of people will scream bloody murder.

But if taxing pot means not having to make unconscionable spending
cuts that shaft old and poor people, I'd be willing to consider it.