ADVOCATES FOR LEGAL POT SAY TIME'S RIGHT IN STATE

Big Financial Incentives for Government May Tip Scales

Joseph Surgenor of Oxnard is 32, a part-time concert promoter and a
full-time medical marijuana entrepreneur.

His nonprofit Ventura County Patients Cooperative grows enough
cannabis to serve the medical needs of its 40-plus members and in
many cases delivers the pot to their doors and bills them monthly.
"We're doing it as best we can and as legal as we can," he said.

Surgenor has a vision for his enterprise. He'd like to open a sort of
marijuana clinic and health spa in downtown Ventura, a place where
members of the cooperative could come to purchase marijuana, take
yoga classes and get instruction on healthy living and nutrition.

He is a missionary for medical marijuana, fervent in his belief that
it brings relief to sick people. But ask him his views about
legalizing cannabis for broad, recreational use and he pauses.

"My biggest fear," he said, "is that the kids could be getting it. We
might be sending the wrong message."

Over in Thousand Oaks, Bill Watkins is a conservative economist who
heads the Center for Economic Research and Forecasting at California
Lutheran University. He is decidedly bearish about the state's
business climate, the state budget and the prospects of the
Legislature being able to navigate its way out of long-term,
structural deficits.

Ask Watkins what he thinks about legalizing marijuana in California,
and he doesn't blink.

"There's no adverse consequence at all that I can see," he said,
noting that the high rate of teen consumption under the current
prohibition would not likely rise and could possibly decline under
regulation. "It just doesn't seem like there are a lot of negatives."

By regulating and taxing marijuana sales, he said, California could
bring in at least an additional $1 billion a year. "That's the
closest thing we have to a free lunch."

The conversation about the end of marijuana prohibition has begun.

It intensified in 2009 in a way that stunned even longtime
drug-legalization advocates, as polls across the country and in
California registered a decided shift in public thinking. In 2010, it
will be an issue that few Californians can ignore.

On Tuesday in Sacramento, an Assembly panel could become the first
legislative committee anywhere in America to approve a bill that
would legalize the recreational, adult use of marijuana. And within a
week or so, backers of an initiative to accomplish that goal say,
they will turn in close to 700,000 signatures that would place the
issue on the November ballot for all Californians to decide.

"It's really quite something," said Stephen Gutwillig, state director
of the Drug Policy Alliance, a national group that has been
advocating for reform of drug laws for decades. "Marijuana reform had
been a very niche issue until 2009. It's suddenly become a mainstream
issue, and it's only a matter of time before the Legislature is going
to have to participate in regulating marijuana in California."

Medical marijuana laws have been adopted by 13 states, and there has
been an explosion of dispensaries openly selling marijuana with a
wink and a nod to the concept of medical necessity in such locales as
California's pot-growing capital of Humboldt County, Denver and Los
Angeles. But the notion of a transition to a post-prohibition world
is still a paradigm-shattering idea.

A Long-Standing Ban

No American born after 1937, when Congress passed the Marihuana Tax
Act, can remember a world in which to smoke a joint wasn't to risk arrest.

To be sure, no state alone could completely change the legal
landscape. Marijuana is and will remain for some time a Schedule 1
drug under the federal Controlled Substances Act, which means it is
strictly illegal under federal law and deemed to have a high tendency
for abuse and no accepted medical uses. Photo with no caption

If California or any state were to legalize marijuana, growers,
sellers and users would still potentially be subject to federal
prosecution. But most law enforcement is conducted by state and local
authorities, who under Section 3 of the California Constitution
cannot refuse to enforce a state law "on the basis that federal law
or federal regulations prohibit the enforcement."

Legalization advocates, heartened by last year's decision by the U.S.
Department of Justice not to federally prosecute anyone using pot in
compliance with state medical-marijuana laws, believe legal marijuana
is an emerging states' rights issue.

"If Californians decide to remove penalties, nothing in federal law
stands in their way," said Theshia Naidoo, a staff attorney with the
Drug Policy Alliance. "The federal government has neither the
resources nor the political will to take on state enforcement."

How Would It Work?

What would a world of legal marijuana in California look like? Would
reefer be rampant? Would that pungent smell that emanated from
college dorm rooms in the '70s overtake parks and playgrounds? Would
7-Eleven stores stock packets of pot behind the counter alongside
canisters of smokeless tobacco?

Proponents of legal marijuana have two words of advice for those who
tense up at the thought: Think alcohol.

Distillers and wholesalers are licensed and taxed. Retailers are
regulated and licensed, their hours of operation limited, their
density restricted and their licenses put at risk if they are caught
selling alcohol without first checking whether a customer meets the
minimum age requirement.

"Alcohol might be the broadest parallel," said Assemblyman Tom
Ammiano, D-San Francisco, author of the marijuana legalization bill
to be heard in committee this week.

Craig Reinerman, a sociology professor at UC Santa Cruz, wrote a 2004
academic treatise titled "Lessons from alcohol policy for drug
policy." In it, he noted many were skeptical in the 1930s that a
regulatory framework could tame the "wide open" liquor business that
thrived during Prohibition.

Yet alcohol control laws quickly succeeded in establishing order, he concludes.

"Alcohol moved from being a scandal, crisis and constant front-page
news story to something routine and manageable, a little noticed
thread in the fabric of American life," Reinerman wrote. "Alcohol
regulation has quietly and effectively organized and managed the
production, distribution and sale of alcohol, as well as public drinking."

Blueprint for Change

At an international conference on drug legalization in Albuquerque
last fall, proponents rolled out ideas for establishing a regulatory
regime for marijuana that closely follows the alcohol model.

They argued it makes far more sense than the status quo, in which
cannabis use is commonplace, a black market thrives and law
enforcement spends resources in a futile effort to enforce an
unenforceable ban.

"The problem with the debate up until now is that, despite the
conclusion that prohibition doesn't work, there's never been a
meaningful debate about alternatives," said Danny Kushlick, head of
policy at Britain's Transform Drug Policy Foundation and the author
of a just-released book, "After the War on Drugs: Blueprint for Regulation."

Sanho Tree, director of the Drug Policy Project for the Washington,
D.C.-based Institute for Policy Studies, said most Americans already
believe "the current regime doesn't work," but policymakers have
stubbornly declined to look at alternatives.

"It's like taking a broken car to a mechanic to fix it and saying,
'There's one rule: You can't look under the hood.'"

One important element of alcohol control, Reinerman said in an
interview, is that it placed a heavy emphasis on local control. He
noted Mississippi did not lift its ban on alcohol sales until 1966,
and "we still have dozens and dozens of counties in the United States
that are dry."

Legalizing Marijuana

The language of the California initiative follows that model: It says
that while possession of an ounce or less of marijuana would be legal
statewide, each city could decide on its own whether to allow sales
in its jurisdiction.

Is It Good for Society?

Skeptics, led by those in law enforcement, say the comparison with
alcohol regulation simply reveals that marijuana-legalization
advocates are unable to make an argument that legal pot would be good
for society.

"The question is: Is it really good?" said Capt. Derek West of the
Ventura County Sheriff's Department's Special Services Bureau, which
includes drug enforcement. "Nobody's talking about the social and
economic costs. Is marijuana good for you? Is it really good for
society? The comparison with alcohol is a straw argument."

Senior Deputy Gary Pentis, who notes he's "worked dope a lot" over
his career, said law enforcement officers see the dark side of
marijuana use, including families and young lives that have been
turned upside down by it.

"We see the negative effects of the drain of economic resources," he
said. "That has a huge cost to society. For every dollar in tax
revenue marijuana would bring in, it would take six, seven, eight
dollars in tax money to deal with health and abuse issues."

Legalization advocates say such arguments ignore the real-world
reality that whatever social costs stem from marijuana use already
exist. The most recent national survey on drug use reports 41 percent
of all Americans over the age of 12 have tried marijuana at least
once, and a majority of those 21 to 34 have done so.

Doctors Endorse Change

Dr. Larry Bedard of Sausalito sponsored a resolution approved in
November by the California Medical Association that declares "the
criminalization of marijuana to be a failed public policy." He says
public policy ought to acknowledge reality.

"The U.S. has one of the highest marijuana usage rates in the world
- -- significantly higher than in the Netherlands, where it is, in
essence, legal," Bedard said. "As an emergency physician, I'm a
realist. What would be the difference if marijuana was legal and
regulated? Do you think more college students are going to smoke
marijuana than they do now?"

Bedard, now retired, spent much of his career treating patients in
emergency rooms. He estimates he treated "probably 10,000 patients"
who were brought in because of injuries and illnesses stemming from
alcohol use and only a handful who were admitted from incidents
involving marijuana.

"I'm not saying this would be nirvana," he said of legalization.
"There is no drug that is used that doesn't have potential adverse
consequences."

In his view, however, one of the biggest negative consequences of
marijuana use today is "getting arrested and getting a record" that
could limit someone's educational and employment opportunities.

"I think right now the adverse consequences of having it illegal far
outweigh the consequences of making it legal and regulated."

Marijuana Arrests Up

California has long treated adult possession of a small amount of
marijuana as a misdemeanor punishable by nothing more than a fine of
$100. But arrest statistics show that not only is the law frequently
enforced, but arrests for pot possession are by far the
fastest-growing category of arrests in the state.

An October study by the San Francisco-based Center on Juvenile and
Criminal Justice found the number of arrests for misdemeanor
marijuana possession soared 127 percent from 1990 to 2008, a period
in which "virtually every category of serious crime registered
sizeable decreases in rate of arrest."

In 1990, the study shows, misdemeanor marijuana arrests accounted for
just 8.2 percent of all drug-related arrests, including felonies for
the sale or manufacture of hard drugs such as heroin, meth and
cocaine. By 2008, 22.8 percent of all drug arrests in California were
for misdemeanor marijuana possession. The number of Californians
arrested for the crime was 61,388, a rate of 168 each day.

"The amount of law enforcement resources being directed toward
marijuana enforcement is an abomination," said Daniel Macallair, the
center's executive director and a co-author of the study. "With the
state budget crisis, how can you justify that?"

Deputy Cites Prevalence

While there are clearly costs involved in processing these arrests,
Senior Deputy Pentis scoffs at the suggestion that police agencies
are spending resources going after small-time marijuana users.

The reason the number of arrests is so high, he said, is simply that
marijuana has become so prevalent, and officers cannot simply ignore
the fact that people detained for other reasons also have pot in
their possession.

"You can get marijuana anywhere," he said. "People are smoking it."

Those who are arrested, he said, typically pay the fine and suffer
little other consequence. "They don't get placed on probation, they
aren't required to do urine tests."

Ventura defense attorney Jay Leiderman, who specializes in
marijuana-related cases, said it's true the policy of county
prosecutors is not to charge stand-alone arrests for misdemeanor
marijuana possession. "But even though a lot of police officers have
gotten the memo, they're not with the program."

For those arrested, Leiderman said, the consequences extend well
beyond the possible $100 fine. Even if a charge isn't filed, the
arrest alone will show up on background checks for at least two years.

"Everyone who hires today uses those background checks, and that's
where the real devastation comes in. I can't tell you how many young
people I've talked to who are waiting for their two years to expire
so that they can apply for a new job," he said.

For those seeking jobs in law enforcement, banking or nursing, the
arrest lingers for many years on background checks.

No Quick End to Cartel

Capt. West said the main law enforcement focus on marijuana is to go
after large-scale growers and dealers. Last year, sheriff's narcotics
officers destroyed 112,000 plants, seized 550 pounds of marijuana and
arrested 23 people involved in growing pot in Los Padres National
Forest. In addition, they raided nine indoor pot-growing operations,
seizing 3,104 plants and 94 pounds of processed marijuana, arresting 11.

Although legalization advocates argue that a regulated market for
marijuana would largely drive black marketeers out business, West
believes otherwise. "The cartel is not going to go away," he said.
"What they do well is selling dope."

Advocates again point to the alcohol precedent, noting the end of
Prohibition almost immediately eliminated rum-runners, speak-easies
and the gang-controlled liquor black market. But they acknowledge if
marijuana prohibition ended, it would not likely mean the immediate
end of illegal pot-dealing.

Legal Option Attractive

"There are going to be legitimate market forces and a movement of
many marijuana consumers away from underground markets, because
that's where people want to shop," said Gutwillig of the Drug Policy
Alliance. "Most people would rather buy from a legitimate business
than a drug dealer, even if it's more expensive."

Lisa Cordova Schwartz of Camarillo, a regular marijuana user since
she turned to it as an alternative to a doctor-proposed morphine pump
for pain relief, said her current options in dispensary-free Ventura
County are to grow her own or to buy from illegal dealers. She
chooses to grow her own.

"The quality is bad, and we don't want the money to go into the black
market," she said.

Ventura attorney James Devine, a medical marijuana patient,
represents clients in the industry who grow, transport and sell
marijuana to those who have a doctor's recommendation to use it.

He said he believes legal growers, "going full bore, can produce it
at a rate and a cost that undermines a cartel."

And as a consumer, Devine said, his choice in a world of legal
marijuana would be a no-brainer.

"Everybody I've ever bought weed from is going to be upset," he said,
"because I'm never going there again."