State budget crisis - time to kick the potheads out of prison?
Filed under: Recession
I've been using my trial membership in Netflix to watch the Showtime series Weed, about a suburban housewife who starts dealing pot to keep her household afloat. As the economy tanks, this has caused me to wonder if changing our approach to marijuana could free up enough money to help offset our state budget shortfalls.
A study done in June of 2005 by Jeffrey Miron, a Visiting Professor of Economics at Harvard, investigated just this question. He concluded that the annual cost of enforcing current weed prohibition was around $7.7 billion, split about 2/3 to the states and 1/3 to the federal government. (The Office of National Drug Control Policy does not agree with Miron's conclusions.)
Miron further concluded that, if the drug were legalized, it could yield an annual tax revenue of $2.4 billion if the tax matched prevailing sales taxes, and $6.2 billion if it were taxed at the rate of alcohol or tobacco. I suspect that many farmers would also appreciate having another cash crop to bolster their income.
Adding the two figures together, Miron conjectures legalization could improve our nation's balance sheet by $14 billion annually.
Of course, arguments about the wisdom of legalization range far beyond dollars and sense. Some claim it is a gateway drug, which could be true, since users are forced to obtain their weed from the same drug underground that deals more addictive substances. Certainly, many narcotics users began by smoking marijuana-- but I'll bet 100% of them abused alcohol and tobacco even earlier. So why don't we prohibit them as gateway drugs?
With states in crisis, I'd rather let a pothead walk free than deny an elderly woman money to keep her furnace running through the winter. $14 billion could go a long way toward keeping our clinics open, our schools funded and our elderly fed and housed. And I'm not just blowing smoke.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
12-22-2008 @ 11:17AM
Jillian Galloway said...
You have to take everything the ONDCP says with a grain of salt, as it’s legally mandated to "take such actions as necessary to oppose any attempt to legalize the use of" a Schedule I substance that hasn't been approved for use for medical purposes by the FDA.
Considering the FDA's ruling on marijuana, the FDA doesn't test whether drugs are better than existing ones on the market, it just tests whether they meet the manufacturer's claims and are within specified levels of safety.
So why does EVERY prohibitionist say "there's better drugs out there"??? That isn't what the FDA tests! If the FDA doesn't test other drugs to see if they're better than what’s currently available then why should marijuana be forced to meet this standard?
Marijuana is a GREAT drug for some things, and as safe as hell! That'd be enough to allow other drugs to pass the FDA's testing, so why isn't enough to allow marijuana to pass??? The Government needs to send marijuana back to the FDA, and get them to test it right this time!
Reply
12-22-2008 @ 11:43AM
j said...
My favorite story is of the 2 guys arrested in Minn. for selling pot.
They came from California because they say that medical marijuana has killed the pot business there.
Think of the money we could save if we just ok'd it for that.
By the way-
I have never done drugs, do not condone the use of drugs.
I just feel enough is enough it's time we used some common sense.
Reply
12-22-2008 @ 12:18PM
Wingnut said...
Hi! Yeah, I think its time to legalize and tax... and I can certainly condone and promote help for the elderly with those funds.
Legalization has some problems, especially when it comes to driving. Its probably not wise to smoke or eat herb-fortified baked goods... while driving. Having ANYTHING with a hot glowing ember on it, while driving, is maybe less than optimally intelligent.
Let's see, what else? Oh yeah. Baked folk tend to sit through green traffic lights, admiring the prettiness of its green mellow. Although sitting thru green lights is not an overly dangerous thing to do, it CAN cause road rage in others. If the driver had a weed symbol on the car or license plates, greenlight camping would likely be more tolerated by other drivers, and that might keep the road rage calmed. "Oh, I see why he's sitting thru the green light... he's a bake-o-lite boy".
Baked drivers tend to pull over and stop easily, both from distant sirens, and from somehow becoming "unable to maintain". "Unable to maintain" often comes from a bake-o-lite driver forgetting what town/state they're in, what highway they're on, and where they are driving-to. The more a town "looks like every other town", the more likely a bake-o-lite forgets what town they're in... and has to temporarily pull over and gather a grip.
And, of course, paying attention to the driving... is a problem... maybe more for herbivores than for others. Co-pilots help. Another set of eyes paying attention to things far-ahead, and even yapping with another ABOUT potential hazards ahead... might be wise advice.
Speaking of yapping... talking... and moreover... rattling-on far too descriptively... is the trait of the stoner... and likely the toot user too. Yapping, stoned or not, takes one's mind off of the road and its hazards... which is never good.
I suppose a standardized and accurate field sobriety test for herb-patrol people might be needed. And... does pot make ya sleepy on the way down, or is that ONLY after overstuffing with munchies? I dunno.
Policeman would also have to beware because bake-o-lites might sneak into the police car during the pullover, and eat all the policeman's cookies and donuts that we're supposed to last for the entire 8-hour patrol shift. Also, police officers should not let a baker near their own personal stash... lest it be mooched into extinction! :)
Happy Hollydays!
Reply
12-23-2008 @ 10:56AM
Jillian Galloway said...
The FDA doesn't test whether a new drug is better than existing ones on the market, it only tests whether it meets the manufacturers’ claims and it's within specified levels of safety.
So why does EVERY prohibitionist say "there's better drugs out there"??? That isn't what the FDA tests!
If the FDA doesn't test other drugs to see if they're better than what’s currently available then why should marijuana be forced to meet this standard?
Marijuana is a GREAT drug for some things, and as safe as hell! That'd be enough to allow other drugs to pass the FDA's testing, so why isn't enough to allow marijuana to pass???
The Government needs to send marijuana back to the FDA, and get them to test it right this time!
Reply