My Thoughts on The Legalization Controversy

I cover many controversial topics on this blog, but here is one I never covered before.  

In the past week I have been receiving robocalls from "SAM".  I thought when I picked up the phone it was some clever way of hiding the word "spam" but it turns out SAM stands for "Smart Approaches to Marijuana."  I was intrigued as the call began.  What was this about? I decided to listen for a while.

The bubbly recorded voice told me that the state was trying to ram through legislation to legalize next week.  I had no idea.  I wasn't sure if the call was meant to be for legalization or against it.  The voice went on to say that we can't let the big corporations win.  At this point I was all ears.  What was she getting at?  She said we can't create another Big Tobacco.  We have to stop legalization in New York.

Now I must make an admission.  I have no dog in this fight.  I don't smoke (or otherwise ingest) pot and (yes, I am admitting this to the world) I never have.  Part of it is that I can't inhale the stuff without choking uncontrollably.  I find the smell of pot smoke painfully irritating.  More to the point, I  don't care to partake.  It's not a moral or legal issue (well, I wouldn't want to be arrested for using it) but a simple issue that I don't know what its effects will be on me and I don't want to put myself in a situation where I have little control over my brain.  I don't like to drink heavily for the same reason.  

Since I don't have a personal reason to favor legalization, I think it helps me see both sides. It doesn't affect me personally if it's legal or not.  I don't believe marijuana legalization (or drug legalization in general) is a magic pill that will end all drug addiction and crime.  On the other hand, I understand how this country's War on Drugs did nothing to stop the horrors of addiction and instead became a way to feed into the prison industrial complex and fan the fires of racism.  Our justice system needs major reform in the way it handles drug crimes. Addiction is a public health issue and not a legal issue.  If marijuana isn't fully legalized, it certainly needs to be decriminalized.  Beyond decriminalization I don't think the issue is black or white.

I listened to almost all of the recording in this call.  The voice went on about how drug legalization was supposed to bring in more tax revenue, but that initiative failed.  She said that Colorado was an example of this because four/fifths of the tax revenue is spent on administrative and regulatory fees.  I tried to do some research about this.  Most of the information I found was either neutral, or corroborated SAM's message.  In other words, I don't see states currently reaping the benefit of marijuana taxes, but is it too soon to tell?  Has marijuana been legal long enough for states to reap the rewards?

Whoever was behind this message carefully chose the language to appeal to liberals.  The constant talk of corporate profit and comparisons to Big Tobacco made me want to listen.  

I began to have doubts when the message pivoted to the dangers of addiction and then accused marijuana growers of targeting children (I have never seen such a thing myself).  I could feel the ghost of Nancy Reagan in those words.  Who exactly is SAM and what is it all about?

I decided to check out the SAM website.  At first I felt it was nothing more than stylized D.A.R.E propaganda.  The first link on the home page was for a list of sensational stories about addiction (although in many stories the issue was heroin and not marijuana and relied on the “gateway drug” trope).  I'm not in high school anymore.  These arguments don't sway me.  Addiction is a far more complex issue than this. 

As I explored further, I saw some more compelling arguments and seemed targeted squarely at liberals who are indifferent or on the fence.  

According to the website, Big Tobacco and Big Pharma want a piece of the pie and risk dominating the industry.  I think many of us see marijuana growers as peaceful, hippie co-ops.  That may be true, but I can see the point SAM makes about the potential for giant corporations to take over.  You could be a little hippie co-op grower and you receive a buyout offer from Philip Morris you can't refuse that will set you up for life.  Do you say no on principle or trust the deal is solid?  What happens to the industry when it is controlled by big money?  Cannabis is a hearty plant most people can grow in their backyards.  Will there be more draconian laws against black market growers because it cuts into the profits of the corporations that are paying off the government?  

The site also tries to make a case for social justice.  According to SAM, states with legalized recreational marijuana have not seen a drop in incarcerations.  I don't buy that argument because I think it's too soon to tell what the big picture is on that topic.  On the other hand, the site makes the case that in low-income communities of color, there is already a larger-than-necessary number of regulated businesses that prey on poor such as liquor stores and stores that sell cigarettes and lottery tickets.  Will marijuana dispensaries flourish in poor neighborhoods as well?  Regardless of whether or not the drug itself is harmful, I can see a genuine concern about predatory selling techniques and targeting the poor.

SAM claims many of the studies showing the benefits (or at least lack of harm) of marijuana are flawed.  They say their own science showing its negative effects is all good though.  I remain skeptical of both sides when it comes to science.

I don't think I could ever win an argument - pro or con - about the dangers and benefits of marijuana.  There is too much conflicting information and the only conclusion I can draw within reason is that it is no different from any other drug.  Any substance that is going to alter your body or brain chemistry is going to have other effects on your body.  Every substance you can put into your body has consequences.  I have no personal experiences of those consequences, so it is difficult for me to judge.  I would refer anyone who wants to know my opinion to go watch the Netflix documentary Explained, which has an episode about marijuana (and that episode assured me marijuana was not likely to cure my insomnia no matter what its proponents say).

What about the argument about corporate greed and the potential exploitation of profit by Big Pharma and Big Tobacco?  I am sure SAM is right.  This will happen.  This is the price we pay for living in a free-market, capitalistic society.  Over the decades small, niche business or businesses that cater to non-mainstream lifestyles have been targeted by larger corporations for acquisition.  This is nothing new.  Ben & Jerry's, Carol's Daughter, Burt's Bees, Justin's Nut Butters, Tom's of Maine, and Dagoba Chocolate were all small companies once, and have all been taken over by the corporate conglomerates.  I am sure all kinds of nasty things will happen when big corporations own the means for producing marijuana.  The hippie co-ops who don't want to sell out will go under.  Maybe corporations will start their own chains of dispensaries that will put small independent ones out of business.  It's possible these companies will find clever ways to target children.  That is the price of living and doing business in the United States.  All I can say is that we can find a bright side and say the money isn't going to drug cartels and the people who work for these companies will be able to put in a truly honest day's work within the established pay and benefit structure.

The organization does seem to not have any sort of hidden agenda.  It claims it doesn't accept dark money and seems to be able to back up this claim.  Whoever is behind this organization is obviously passionate and committed and seems to only care about stopping full legalization.  The agenda seems reasonable when it comes to decriminalization and medical marijuana.  I don't get the vibe that it's a rabid, right-wing, law-and-order organization.  Whoever is behind this organization is someone who cares enough to make a compelling case - right or wrong.

As for me, I will continue to keep my dogs out of this fight.  Legalization will not benefit or harm me personally at the moment, so carry on without me.