LEGAL POT A BAD IDEA

THE best way to look at Proposition 19, which would legalize the sale
and possession of marijuana for adults, is to paint a picture of the
state if the measure were to pass:

The guy in the cubicle next to you at work is stoned. There's an
increased likelihood the driver of the car in the next lane on the
freeway is under the influence of pot. Commercial entities openly
selling pot in storefronts near where you shop, or perhaps in your
child or grandchild's college dormitory.

California's tourism industry attracts families to its theme parks,
state parks and beaches. California's natural wonders and temperate
weather are a draw for millions of tourists each year from Kansas to
China and Germany to Australia. Now, that will change. Our state will
draw visitors from other states (every other one) where marijuana is
illegal, and from citizens of countries looking for a legal high. It
will be bigger than Amsterdam, where criminal operations have flocked
since the legal marijuana coffee houses have opened for business.
Increased crime is a problem authorities in the Netherlands are
desperately trying to rectify.

This is not our vision of a bright California future. Yet these
scenarios are just a conservative estimate of what will happen if
voters legalize the drug.

Will the measure, as proponents say, "put strict safety controls on
marijuana?" Hardly. While only adults over 21 legally could possess
and cultivate the narcotic, and commercial entities sell it, the
ballot sponsors "forgot" to prescribe an action level for driving
under the influence. This poorly written law would release chaos on
the CHP and other law enforcement agencies. How can they test a
driver when there's no standard? This loophole is partly why Kamala
Harris and Steve Cooley, district attorneys running against each
other for attorney general, agree that Prop. 19 is bad policy. Others
lining up on the "no" side include almost every single local law
enforcement group and organization. Bitter opponents for the
governor's seat, Democrat Jerry Brown and Republican Meg Whitman,
agree that Prop. 19 should be defeated. As does Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein.

Last, there's an argument that making marijuana legal will allow
states, cities and counties to tax sales and that this revenue could
fill in state budget gaps. Remember how legalized gambling via the
state Lottery was going to fill in gaps in education funding? It
didn't happen. So, in the same way, don't vote for Prop. 19 for
fiscal reasons or you'll end up being disappointed. Like most ballot
measures, this one promises more than it can deliver.

There is no provision for a specific tax on legal marijuana. The
measure leaves that up to whatever governmental entity wants to do
so. But there is a provision that allows people to cultivate
marijuana in their yards and even on empty lots. And how is the state
going to tax cannabis plants? Knock on everyone's door and collect?
Use Google Earth? Call Homeland Security? Will this really take the
drug cartels out of the business?

Think again. They'll find a way to grow it or sell it on the black
market, avoiding taxation.

All a voter has to do is think through the consequences of legalizing
marijuana. It is not a pretty picture. On Nov. 2, vote "no" on Prop. 19.