High time for a vote

OF THE nine statewide measures on the ballot next month in California, and the more than 100 throughout America, probably the most famous—or infamous, according to some—is Proposition 19, which legalises marijuana. According to the polls, it might just pass.

The proposition has a chance of winning mainly because Californians have become rather relaxed about weed. Back in 1972 a proposition to legalise the drug was defeated almost two-to-one. These days, fully half of Californians tell pollsters they favour legalisation, and almost as many admit to having smoked marijuana themselves, which probably means that a big majority have actually done so. In parts of the state, enjoying an occasional doobie is nowadays considered little different from sipping a Pinot Noir.

Proposition 19, which would allow adults to grow, own and consume a bit of cannabis for personal pleasure, would thus remove any remaining hypocrisy. Indulging is already unlikely to lead to prison in California—a recently-passed law will, from next year, treat limited possession as an infraction, the equivalent of a speeding ticket. Using cannabis for medicinal purposes (a doctor's “recommendation”, rather than a prescription, will suffice) has been legal since 1997.

To persuade those who do not accept the libertarian argument for legalisation, supporters have emphasised two other lines of reasoning. One is financial. Proposition 19 would also allow California's county and municipal governments to decide whether to regulate and tax the commercial production and sale (of no more than an ounce, or 28g, at a time however) of marijuana. Counties that choose to do this would reap handsome new revenues, goes the argument.

The other argument has to do with the violence in Mexico (see article). Legal and home-grown Californian cannabis might displace the illegal stuff smuggled across the Mexican border, reducing the profits of the trafficking cartels and the horrendous violence they wreak.

According to Mexican officials, up to half the cartels' income comes from marijuana. Others, though, are more sceptical. A new study by the RAND Corporation, a non-partisan research group, reckons that the revenues that the Mexican drugs cartels get from smuggling cannabis to America probably amount to less than $2 billion a year, or between 15% and 26% of their total. This is much lower than previous estimates. And California accounts for only one seventh of that. If RAND is roughly right then if Proposition 19 merely takes one drug (cannabis) in one state (California) away from the cartels, their revenue losses would be trivial, at only around 2%-4%.

Californian weed may well become competitive in other American states; it is certain to become cheaper on legalisation, and is at least twice as potent as Mexican marijuana. But other states and the federal government are unlikely to allow large-scale domestic smuggling to replace the international sort.

So the immediate benefits that will accrue from California legalising by itself will not be as great as some Proposition 19 people claim. But that does not undercut the general case for legalisation. On the contrary. As Rand suggests, if both Mexico and America as a whole were to legalise marijuana, the economics of the trafficking cartels would take a serious hit. That, though, is very far from happening—at least for now.