DON'T DO IT FOR THE MONEY

It's one of this state's biggest cash crops, but nobody pays taxes on
its production, distribution or sale. That's because it's illegal.

Taxing marijuana - grown in abundance in the Golden State, where
about 500 tons are used each year - would generate some $1.4 billion
in taxes, according to a study by the state Board of Equalization.

There's only one problem; well, there's at least one significant
problem: It's illegal.

Still in cash-strapped times like these, state officials are looking
under ever rock, and apparently in every garden, for new money.

That's why San Francisco Democratic Assemblyman Tom Ammiano in
February introduced legislation that would allow adults 21 and older
to legally possess, grow and sell marijuana.

And that's why officials at the state taxing agency made their study.

But there's that legality problem out there, in this case federal
law. And even though U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has said the
federal government will defer to state law on this question (meaning
no more federal raids on California's legal medical marijuana
dispensaries) that's a far cry from settling the legality issue.

Then there's the whole question of whether we should legalize another
mind-numbing substance (think alcohol during Prohibition) by giving
it a state stamp of approval.

Libertarians argue that laws banning substances many in the
population want and use only drives use underground, increases its
price, wastes valuable law enforcement resources and expands criminal
activity ancillary to its production, distribution and sale (again,
think alcohol).

That's all true, logical even.

But the logic breaks down when extended to say, prostitution.

Sex certainly is something some are willing to pay for, but not
everyone is willing to suggest legalizing and taxing it.

There is the argument that marijuana is safer and less addictive than
alcohol, the ravages of which have cut a wide swath through many
families. And maybe it is.

But we're still left with the gnawing question of whether we should
legalize another substance that numbs the brain.

These questions deserve rational discussion, absent the knee-jerk
reaction sure to come from some quarters. We should at least have a
strong scientific basis for making claims about its use.

But our money problems should not be used as an excuse to forego such
a discussion and study in a headlong rush to grab some extra cash.