LEGALIZE MARIJUANA? NOT SO FAST

Though an Assembly Panel Has Taken a Step in That Direction, It's Too
Soon for Such a Dramatic Action.

Marijuana advocates are cheering the Assembly's Public Safety
Committee for voting out a measure Tuesday designed to legalize, tax
and regulate the sale of the drug to adults 21 and over. The bill is
being marketed as a revenue raiser; the Board of Equalization
estimates that the state could reap up to $1.3 billion in sorely
needed tax revenue, and proponents have skillfully wielded the budget
crisis to boost support for the measure.

Polls show that 56% of Californians back legalizing marijuana. Across
the country, the numbers are somewhat lower, but nevertheless
momentum is building for a reconsideration of marijuana laws covering
both medicinal and recreational use. Many states now treat marijuana
offenses as mere infractions, not subject to jail time. The American
Medical Assn. recently reversed its long-held position and urged more
research into the drug's properties.

Still, for California to purport to legalize marijuana unilaterally
raises several serious concerns. For one thing, to do so simply
because the state faces a budget crisis would be a rash and reckless
way to make public policy. More important, California does not have
the authority to take such a step. Cannabis may be the nation's
largest cash crop, but marijuana remains a Schedule I drug, deemed by
the federal government to have a high potential for abuse, no
accepted medical value and illegal to use under all circumstances.
Perhaps Californians have been emboldened by their pioneering role in
legalizing medicinal marijuana, but in truth, the conflict between
state and federal law has had serious consequences for users and
distributors caught in the federal web. Yes, the Obama administration
now has a formal policy of ignoring medical marijuana activity in
states that have passed laws permitting its use, and the Justice
Department has halted raids on dispensaries and prosecutions of sick
patients. But that is merely a truce. Widespread legalization for
recreational purposes is almost guaranteed to upset the delicate
detente with Washington.

AB 390, sponsored by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco), would
not be an appropriate first step for California. It's true that a
$50-per-ounce fee is included in the bill that would go to anti-drug
programs. But that's not enough. The state needs a thorough airing of
the pros and cons of legalization and the pitfalls related to abuse
of the drug before taking such dramatic action. We welcome a debate
over legalizing marijuana, but we do not support this bill.