MARIJUANA AND TAX REVENUE

A threshold was quietly crossed last week on Beacon Hill: Marijuana
legalization was discussed with barely a giggle.

Thirty years after a trend toward liberalizing marijuana laws was
reversed by Nixon's "war on drugs," we're seeing a shift in attitudes
and laws. In California, a medical marijuana initiative approved by
voters has changed the facts on the ground. Pot shops are everywhere,
operating on the tissue of legality provided by medical professionals
with the broadest possible interpretation of the ills cannabis may be
presumed to treat. But there are no signs of great damage done by
making the drug more openly available, and no sign of a serious
movement to recriminalize it.

Instead, California is moving toward the next obvious step:
legalizing, regulating and taxing cannabis. Two referendum questions
are being proposed for the 2010 ballot.

The opponents of medical marijuana were right when they predicted it
was a slippery slope to legalization. If they had just taken it off
the drug schedule, let it be legally produced and sold only with a
prescription, things might have been different. But Californians are
now being forced to admit the people purchasing pot from licensed
distributors aren't all that sick.

The alternative to the medical model of marijuana regulation is the
alcohol model. That's what the Joint Committee on Revenue of the
Massachusetts Legislature heard testimony on last Wednesday. House
2929, submitted at the request of a Northampton attorney, is modeled
on the state's alcohol law. It wouldn't just legalize marijuana, it
would provide for the regulation of its potency, set rules for its
distribution and - of particular note to a Legislature struggling
with enormous revenue shortfalls - heavily tax it.

No one is predicting this bill will make it to the floor for a vote
any time soon. California will likely lead the way on this issue, and
no state can effectively legalize a controlled substance until
Congress changes federal law. But the Revenue Committee gave a
respectful hearing to about 20 supporters and one opponent who
testified on the bill. Neither the lawmakers nor the media tried to
turn a serious topic into a joke. That itself is progress.