April 2, 2011 – Legalizing marijuana use has been a debate that waxes and wanes in various political climates but has always remained a hot issue with smoking embers. However, a recent poll finds most Americans support legalizing the drug.

Several states have legalized it for medical purposes and some have considered legalizing it in a broader sense. Three quarters of Americans surveyed said they support legalization of marijuana for medical treatment (74 percent) with almost half saying they strongly support it (48 percent).

However, the Harris Poll conducted in late February also found that a significant amount of Americans say they oppose the legalization of medical marijuana in their state (18 percent), and even fewer–7 percent–said they are not sure what they think about the issue.

Despite widespread approval of cannabis for medical use, lighting up a doobie for recreational purposes is far less agreeable. Two in five supported legalizing marijuana for recreational use in their state (42 percent) and half opposed it (49 percent). Some 7 percent said they were unsure and 2 percent declined to answer.

The results of the poll varied by region. Adults in the East were most supportive of legalizing marijuana for both medical use and recreational use, 80 percent and 50 percent respectively. People in the West were the next most supportive, with 76 percent supporting legalizing medical marijuana and 50 percent saying recreational use was ok.

Some 74 percent of Midwesterners supported medical marijuana legalization, but fewer than two in five okayed it for recreational use (39 percent). Southerners were the least supportive in general with only 69 percent supporting medical marijuana legalization and 34 percent for recreational use.

Marijuana has been legalized for certain medical uses in 15 states, and possession of the drug has been decriminalized in various places. California recently voted on whether or not to legalize it completely. The measure failed to pass.

Differences by Region

Adults in the East are most supportive of legalizing marijuana for both medical use (80%) and recreational use (50%). The West is the next most supportive region-76% support legalizing medical marijuana and 50% say so for recreational marijuana. While three quarters of Midwesterners support medical marijuana legalization (74%), less than two in five say so for recreational use (39%) and Southerners are least supportive of both medical marijuana legalization (69%) and marijuana legalized for recreational use (34%).

Who Should Make the Decision

While most Americans support legalizing medical marijuana, there is no consensus about legalizing marijuana for recreational use and who should decide whether or not to legalize it. A plurality of 44% of adults say it should be a state decision, 40% say it should be a federal decision, and 14% are not at all sure. There again are some regional differences-over half of Westerners (52%) think marijuana legalization should be a state decision compared to fewer in the South (44%), Midwest (42%) and East (38%) who say the same. Easterners are most likely to say it should be a federal decision (47%).

What Would the Result Be

If marijuana was legalized generally, majorities think it would cause an increase in both the number of people who use marijuana (68%) and the amount of marijuana used (68%). However, majorities also think it would increase tax revenue (75%), with 51% saying it would cause a large increase in tax revenue, as well as an increase in the consistency and standardization of marijuana used (59%). Substantial pluralities say that legalizing marijuana generally would cause a decrease in the crime rate (41%) and the amount of money spent on prisons/prisoners (44%).

So What?

Marijuana has been legalized for certain medical uses in 15 states, possession of the drug has been decriminalized in various places, and California recently voted on whether or not to legalize it completely (they voted not to do so). Americans may favor legalizing the drug for medical purposes, but many questions remain unanswered such as: what medical issues warrant the use of marijuana? Where should it be dispensed? Who should regulate production and distribution? Furthermore, some experts believe much more work is needed to ascertain the risks and benefits of marijuana use.

Methodology

This Harris Poll was conducted online within the United States between February 14 to 21, 2011 among 3,171 adults (aged 18 and over). Figures for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, region and household income were weighted where necessary to bring them into line with their actual proportions in the population. Propensity score weighting was also used to adjust for respondents’ propensity to be online.

All sample surveys and polls, whether or not they use probability sampling, are subject to multiple sources of error which are most often not possible to quantify or estimate, including sampling error, coverage error, error associated with nonresponse, error associated with question wording and response options, and post-survey weighting and adjustments. Therefore, Harris Interactive avoids the words “margin of error” as they are misleading. All that can be calculated are different possible sampling errors with different probabilities for pure, unweighted, random samples with 100% response rates. These are only theoretical because no published polls come close to this ideal.

Respondents for this survey were selected from among those who have agreed to participate in Harris Interactive surveys. The data have been weighted to reflect the composition of the adult population. Because the sample is based on those who agreed to participate in the Harris Interactive panel, no estimates of theoretical sampling error can be calculated.

These statements conform to the principles of disclosure of the National Council on Public Polls.

Source.

February 18, 2011 – An advertisement for Oaksterdam University reads “Cannabis Industry Now Hiring,” along with claims to a salary between $50,000 and $100,000 dollars. To the average American, such an ad would surely be deemed a joke — but in Oaksterdam, a district in downtown Oakland lined with medical marijuana dispensaries, training centers, head shops and the like, cannabis is serious business.

Marijuana has been used for thousands of years, and hemp itself was for centuries of great importance to the United States economy. But in the early to mid-20th century, many states began to ban the drug (the reasons for which are moot and worthy of their own article), and soon marijuana consumption became illegal under federal law.

The latter half of the 20th century saw a resurgence in cannabis usage and in 1996, California became the first of several states to allow the use of the drug for medicinal purposes. Since, “medical marijuana” has exploded with an estimated 2,100 cannabis dispensaries in California alone. Last year, California once again pioneered the push to legitimize marijuana with a proposition, Proposition 19, that would make it legal in a manner similar to alcohol; the act was ultimately defeated by a narrow margin.

Yet the question still stands — if countless studies (some more legitimate than others) claim the drug has a variety of medicinal benefits and is less harmful than tobacco, alcohol and other drugs, why is it still illegal under federal law?

One important facet of California’s proposition was an excise tax that proponents claimed would bring billions of tax dollars to a state in economic turmoil. From an economic perspective, it seems pretty rational — imposing a tax on a multi-billion dollar market and cuttting spending on law enforcement will yield more money.

Let’s think in terms of real dollars: a 2003 study by the Office of National Drug Control Policy estimated domestic spending on cannabis prosecution to be a whopping $29 billion each year. Furthermore, a study commissioned by the United Nations in 2006 estimated the North American cannabis market to be worth upwards of $60 billion per year, more than the combined value of corn and wheat. It seems obvious that the economic benefits would be outstanding, but there are other contributing factors.

Price points
First and foremost, it is a basic rule of economics that the easier it is to obtain a product, the less the product will cost. Taking marijuana off the black market and into a legitimate marketplace will make it easier to buy and consequently cause a considerable drop in price. In fact, a study by the international think tank Research and Development Corporation concluded that Proposition 19 could potentially lead to a decrease in the price of marijuana by as much as 80%.

If prices were to fall so drastically, it is unknown whether the economic tax benefits would outweigh the social costs.

Cannabis consumption
Secondly, the law of supply and demand tells us that as the price of a product decreases, consumption will increase. This is something that legalization opponents are quick to point out, and it is difficult to predict exactly how marijuana usage in the United States would change.

Enter the Netherlands, a country notorious for its lax (albeit somewhat complex) drug policies. Though marijuana isn’t exactly legal in the Netherlands, there exists a tolerance policy where possession of up to five grams is not prosecuted. The country distinguishes between “soft” and “hard” drugs — the idea being that tolerance of soft drugs will keep people away from the harder ones.

This legal distinction has faced much criticism, yet surprisingly young adults in the Netherlands have lower rates of “soft drug” use than those in most other Western European countries with less tolerant laws. Rates in Spain and Italy were twice as high as those in the Netherlands between 2002 and 2004, and cannabis use actually declined in the Netherlands in 2009 according to a study by the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction.

Weed prohibition
Many compare the illegality of marijuana to the Prohibition Era of the 1920s and 30s, and argue that legalization would have effects similar to those of the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment. However, there are critical differences between the legality of alcohol and cannabis.

Socially, alcohol has widely been considered a part of American society, whereas marijuana carries a less acceptable reputation. Economically, the production of alcoholic spirits and beverages is difficult and costly on an individual level, and major alcohol companies have existed for centuries. Marijuana production is vastly different — there exist no major marijuana companies, and the thought of corporate cannabis sounds silly.

Nevertheless, the Prohibition Era was notorious for multi-million dollar crime rings involved in the underground trade of alcohol, and the same exists today for the marijuana industry.

The American marijuana trade is a large part of the ongoing drug war with and within Mexico, Canada and other countries. Pro-legalization activists argue that by legalizing marijuana, criminal activity would literally decrease and take the “shady” aspects out of the drug trade.

We may never know exactly what America would be like should marijuana be legalized, but the debate over doing so will surely never die until it happens. Source.

See Also:

How Big Is The Marijuana Market?

Legal Pot Means Big Savings on Law Enforcement