By Shelley Fox-Loken

I went into criminal justice because I wanted to serve the public. As a corrections official, I thought that by working with inmates I'd be able to help them reintegrate into society, making their lives better and our community safer. I quickly became disillusioned with that noble idea, however, as I saw that rehabilitation, once the overarching goal of the penal system, was increasingly impeded as Oregon's prisons were overrun with people whose only crimes were drug-related.

Prison used to be reserved for those who committed what we think of when we hear the word "crime" -- murderers, rapists, thieves. But increasingly during the past 40 years, drug users and low-level dealers who've committed no offense other than succumbing to the medical problem of substance abuse have been joining those ranks. In order to prosecute those committing these consensual crimes, we're using resources -- police time, court time, jail beds -- that could be better spent going after those whose victims are all too real.

, the initiative on Oregon's ballot this November that would regulate marijuana like alcohol, doesn't solve that problem entirely, but it's certainly a step in the right direction.

Not only would regulating marijuana free up law enforcement resources to go after the real criminals in society, it would increase public safety in other ways. Right now, the marijuana trade is largely controlled by large and dangerous international drug cartels drawn to the industry because of the huge profits available. Many of these cartels are in Mexico -- which by some estimates has lost 60,000 people to drug war-related violence since 2006 -- although the U.S. Justice Department reports that Mexican cartels are now operating in more than 1,000 U.S. cities.

The majority of those cartels' revenue comes from marijuana sales. If marijuana becomes legal and grown by local farmers, so that the revenue stays in the state and taxes go to funding schools and hospitals, cartels' profits disappear. Just as organized crime took a major blow when alcohol prohibition was lifted in 1933, so too will public safety be improved when marijuana is sold at regulated stores, where people know they're getting a safe product, rather than by criminals on the street.

Measure 80 would also help fund efforts to reduce substance abuse, by earmarking 7 percent of tax revenue it generates to go toward drug treatment. This amounts to millions of dollars that are currently unavailable and badly needed by counties around Oregon.

But how much good would ending marijuana prohibition in Oregon do if it remains illegal in the rest of the country? A lot. First, it closes down a market to the cartels that may seem small compared with the rest of the United States but actually represents millions of dollars. More important, though, it will kick-start a nationwide movement for change. There are currently two other states, Washington and Colorado, with initiatives to legalize marijuana on the ballot. If any of these efforts succeed, it will send a powerful message to our political leaders that the country is ready to reform our failed marijuana laws. Once the statutes are enacted and the world doesn't end (just as it didn't end when Oregon became the first state to decriminalize possession of marijuana in 1973), it will show that we've developed a sustainable model that can be implemented elsewhere.

By any measure, marijuana prohibition has been a spectacular failure. In terms of rates of use, in terms of wasted resources, in terms of wasted lives and human potential. Take it from someone who once believed, who wanted to believe: It's not working. We Oregonians need to show that pioneering spirit once again and lead the nation in ending this failed war. Show that Beaver State spirit and vote yes on Measure 80 this November.

Shelley Fox-Loken, a speaker for Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, is a former corrections counselor in Oregon.