Perhaps the most high-profile measure on the Nov. 8 ballot, Proposition 64 wouldn’t just legalize recreational use of marijuana by adults in California. It would set up a regulatory framework that governed licensing, advertising, labeling and testing for a multibillion-dollar industry. It would also launch a mass social experiment. No state anywhere near this large has ever legalized marijuana.

If approved, the ballot measure championed by Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom would allow those 21 and older to grow up to six plants at home, so long as the plants are not readily visible to the public, and to buy and possess an ounce or less of marijuana and 8 grams or less of concentrated cannabis products. It would remain illegal to smoke or otherwise consume marijuana in public, and to smoke pot anywhere tobacco smoking is banned. Marijuana could, however, be used at licensed cafes. Marijuana sales would have a 15 percent state tax, and growers would be taxed based on the weight of their harvest. Annual state revenue of about $1 billion is expected, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

The San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Board supports Proposition 64. We get why many worry about giving a de facto seal of acceptability to casual drug use. But the state already is inundated with pot use because of Proposition 215, a lax 1996 medical marijuana law used by tens of thousands of Californians and sometimes gamed. The argument that it makes sense to regulate and tax the drug rather than accept a status quo of little regulation and taxation is powerful and persuasive.

Local governments can also add their own marijuana sales taxes, and the San Diego City Council put Measure N on the ballot in anticipation of Proposition 64’s passage. San Diego would start with a 5 percent levy that would increase to 8 percent in 2019, and could eventually go as high as 15 percent.


RELATED OP-EDS

Yes on 64: Prop. 64 legalizes recreational marijuana the right way

No on 64: Legalizing recreational marijuana hurts youth, families

On the issue of drugged driving, the lack of an adequate DUI test for THC, marijuana’s primary active ingredient, has been a major concern. Hopes that an oral swab saliva test could be a quick, cheap police tool have faded after field tests showed it wasn’t good at measuring actual driver impairment, as opposed to THC’s presence in the body. But as Newsom emphasized in a telephone interview with two Union-Tribune editorial writers, the state pot tax would provide millions of dollars to efforts to develop a pot DUI test, among other constructive uses.


Meanwhile, a 2015 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration overview of drugged driving research concluded that marijuana impairment isn’t nearly the problem that alcohol impairment is: “Some of these studies have suggested that marijuana use has minimal or no effect on the likelihood of crash involvement, while others have estimated a small increase in the risk.”

What’s more, claims of big problems in Washington and Colorado after those states allowed the use of recreational marijuana look weak when carefully reviewed. The recent increases in those states of the number of people in fatal accidents found to have THC in their systems may reflect a greater emphasis on drug testing instead of a spike in stoned motorists. Marijuana use has barely increased among Washington teenagers and somewhat increased among Colorado teens, reflecting a trend in the Rocky Mountain State that predated adult legalization. It’s telling that polls show residents’ support of legal recreational use of marijuana has grown since those states’ laws took effect.

Proposition 64 is a policy gamble, but the downside decreases the more one looks at its basics and at how similar laws have played out elsewhere.

As for Measure N, no matter how San Diego voters feel about Proposition 64, they should vote yes. If marijuana is going to be legalized in California, as looks likely, San Diego should share in the tax bonanza that will result.


Vote yes on Measure N — even if you oppose legalizing marijuana

Twitter: @sdutIdeas

Facebook: UTOpinion