In late August I helped my daughter move in to campus for her first day of college. As we waited in various lines for her ID card, dorm keys and other things, I looked at the many bright-faced, eager young students around her and thought about the wonderful experiences awaiting them: New friends, new knowledge, new thoughts about who they are and where they want to go in life. I also had concerns. I hoped they wouldn’t drink alcohol. I hoped they wouldn’t drive fast. I hoped they wouldn’t smoke cigarettes, do drugs, or make other choices that could bring them harm. But I’m not a fool.
It occurred to me then that our society recognizes many areas of potential harm and does what it can to mitigate dangers. We require seat belts and air bags in cars, along with operating aids like directional signals and anti-lock brakes. We require that cars and trucks be inspected each year to assure safety standards. We sell alcohol at licensed establishments, where clerks check IDs. We put proof labels on the bottles so the buyer knows how much alcohol is inside. We have inspectors who ensure the safety of the brewing or fermenting process.
Yet when it comes to marijuana, we do nothing. Marijuana is the most widely-used illegal substance in the nation. In Massachusetts alone there are 880,000 regular marijuana users. They don’t know who grows the product they’re buying. They don’t know who transports it or who packages it. They don’t know what’s in it. They are forced into markets where sellers don’t check IDs and don’t care how young their buyers are. They are forced into the embrace of criminals who sell heroin and other deadly drugs.
Responsible societies recognize public policy failures and endeavor to correct them. It is time for Massachusetts voters to recognize that the marijuana market is thriving, it’s permanent, and it needs to be controlled . The current prohibition system has failed at every level.
Question 4 presents voters a chance to actually control the marijuana market . Question 4 would set up a regulated and taxed system similar to how the state regulates the alcohol industry and others, including the banking, medical, construction and insurance industries. The measure would create a three-person Cannabis Control Commission that would regulate all aspects of the industry: Permitting, licensing, packaging, labeling, advertising, security, public safety, proper cultivation procedures, code enforcement, product safety, and all other pertinent areas. Local officials would be able to determine location, hours, lighting, and other aspects of marijuana retail establishments. Local officials would also have the ability to limit the number of marijuana establishments to 20 percent of the existing liquor store licenses in the town. So, if a town has 10 liquor stores, local officials could cap marijuana establishments at two. What’s more, residents could prohibit marijuana establishments altogether through a ballot vote.
Question 4 would take commerce out of the hands of criminals and put it under the control of state regulators and local authorities . A recent story in the Boston Globe estimated that tax revenues would reach $100 million by 2020. That new revenue could be put to use in creating more opioid treatment beds, or for substance awareness programs, or for any other helpful public use.
Responsible societies recognize public policy failures and endeavor to correct them. It is time for Massachusetts voters to recognize that the marijuana market is thriving, it’s permanent, and it needs to be controlled. The current prohibition system has failed at every level.
Massachusetts would not be the first state to adopt a taxed and regulated system. Such structures are in place in Colorado, Washington, Oregon and Alaska. The results are clear. Teen use has not increased. Motorist OUIs involving marijuana decreased in Colorado in 2015 compared to 2014, despite far greater vigilance by specially-trained police Drug Recognition Experts. Police have been able to redirect resources and manpower to serious crimes. New tax revenues have helped schools, job training programs, numerous community-based activities like 4H clubs and activity centers, and many other projects and programs. The illicit market has been undercut. The governor of Colorado, once an opponent of regulated marijuana, now says the state’s system is working.
In addition to helping put drug dealers out of business, a regulated and taxed marijuana system would benefit the many individuals in Massachusetts who seek marijuana for medical reasons. While we have medical marijuana laws in Massachusetts, we don’t have a functional system. There are only seven dispensaries, and only 155 participating doctors. Many veterans and federal employees do not want their names to go on the database of marijuana patients because they fear losing their federal benefits, since marijuana is illegal at the federal level. Question 4 will allow these individuals to access the therapeutic marijuana they need without forcing them to break the law.
As a father of two children, I am deeply concerned about safety. A system where commerce is handled by licenses businesses under the control of state and local authorities is far safer than a system dominated by street dealers. Our opponents are wrong to use fear tactics about legalization leading to increased teen use. In fact, a CDC study released on Sept. 2 shows that use among 12- to 17-year-olds has not increased since 2002, despite 27 states legalizing marijuana and 16 more decriminalizing it. This is the fourth straight federal study to show that teen use is not rising despite increased legal availability of marijuana.
The taxed and regulated system proposed by Question 4 would also address the chronic social injustices of the war on drugs, particularly the war on marijuana. In Massachusetts, black residents are 3.9 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana offenses than white residents, despite similar use rates. Do we want to be a society that ignores such rampant injustices?
Canada in 2017 will enact a regulate-and-tax approach to marijuana. In addition to Massachusetts seven other states, including California and Maine, will vote on marijuana initiatives this year. Our society is taking a fresh look at the long-failed approach to marijuana and seeking new answers. Question 4 is the right path forward for Massachusetts.
Editor’s note: click here to read the counter argument by Dr. James Gessner of the Massachusetts Medical Society.
Featured image by Alexis Breaux.
