WHY YOU SHOULD SAY 'YES' TO PROPOSITION 19

Seventy-eight years ago this November, Californians overwhelmingly
voted to repeal a morally, socially, and economically failed public
policy -- alcohol prohibition. Voters did not wait for the federal
government to act; they took matters into their own hands.

On Nov. 2, California voters have an opportunity to repeat history
and repeal an equally bankrupt public policy -- marijuana prohibition.

California lawmakers criminalized the possession and cultivation of
marijuana in 1913, some 24 years before Congress enacted similar
prohibitions federally. Yet today some 3.3 million Californians
acknowledge using pot regularly, and the Golden State stands alone as
the largest domestic producer of the crop. Self-evidently, marijuana
is here to stay. The question is: What is the most pragmatic and
effective way to deal with this reality?

Proposition 19 -- which legalizes the adult possession of limited
quantities of marijuana in private, and allows local governments to
regulate its commercial production and retail distribution -- offers
voters a sound alternative to the inflexible and failed strategies of
the past. The measure acknowledges that adults should not be legally
punished for their private use of a substance that is objectively
safer than alcohol or tobacco, while simultaneously enacting common
sense controls regarding who can legally consume it, distribute it,
and produce it.

Critics of Prop. 19, such as the editorial board of the Times-Herald
("Just say 'no' to faulty Prop. 19," Oct. 10), express concerns that
passage of this initiative will lead to increased marijuana use and
send a mixed message to children. Both arguments are specious at best.

Virtually any Californian who wishes to obtain or consume marijuana
can already do so, and it is unlikely that adults who presently
abstain from pot will cease doing so simply because certain
restrictions on its prohibition are lifted. Further, it must be
acknowledged that unlike alcohol, marijuana is incapable of causing
lethal overdose, is relatively nontoxic to healthy cells and organs,
and its use is not typically associated with violent, aggressive, or
reckless behavior. Why then are we so worried about adults consuming
it in the privacy of their own home?

The Times-Herald's concerns regarding marijuana and youth are also
not persuasive. Young people already report that they have easier
access to illicit marijuana than they do legal beer or cigarettes.
Why? It is because the production and sale of these latter products
are regulated and legally limited to a specific age group. As a
result teen use of cigarettes, for example, has fallen to its lowest
levels in decades while, conversely, young people's use of cannabis
is rising. In short, it's legalization, regulation, and public
education -- coupled with the enforcement of age restrictions -- that
most effectively keep mind-altering substances out of the hands of children.

Further, a regulated system of cannabis legalization will make it
easier, not harder, for parents and educators to rationally and
persuasively discuss this subject with young people. Many parents who
may have tried pot during their youth (or who continue to use it
occasionally) will no longer perceive societal pressures to lie to
their children about their own behaviors. Rather, just as many
parents presently speak to their children openly about their use of
alcohol -- instructing them that booze may be appropriate for adults
in moderation, but that it remains inappropriate for young people --
legalization will empower adults to talk objectively and rationally
to their kids about marijuana.

The Bottom line? For nearly 100 years in California the criminal
prohibition of marijuana has fueled an underground, unregulated,
black market economy that empowers criminal entrepreneurs while
having no tangible effect on the public's access to pot or their use
of it. A "yes" vote on Prop. 19 is a first step toward allowing
lawmakers and regulators to seize control of this illegal market and
turn it over to licensed business. A "no" vote continues to abdicate
command of this market to criminal gangs and drug traffickers.

The choice is up to us.

Paul Armentano

Vallejo

Editor's note: The author is the co-author of the book Marijuana Is
Safer: So Why Are We Driving People to Drink? (Chelsea Green, 2009),
and co-chairs the public health steering committee for Prop. 19.