William Martin, a senior fellow and director of the drug policy program at Rice University’s Baker Institute said a national trend is clear, and predicted that Texas will see legal marijuana in the not too distant future. Here are 10 questions posed to him prior to the elections in November, and their interesting answers.

For more than a decade, you and your colleagues [in the drug policy program at Rice University’s Baker Institute] have been calling for the legalization of marijuana for both medical and recreational use. Do you think that is a realistic goal in Texas?

It won’t happen immediately, but I’m optimistic. In keeping with national sentiment, slightly over half of Texans favor legalizing cannabis (the proper name for marijuana) for recreational purposes and approximately two-thirds believe it should be legal for medicinal purposes. Of course, a century of anti-pot propaganda poses a stiff challenge to legalization for either purpose. On the other hand, 100 million Americans have smoked marijuana at some point in their lives, 25 million in the last year, and more than 90 percent of them know it did not make them dangerous or crazy or lead them to use cocaine or heroin.

At this point, there is little expectation that Congress will lift the national prohibition of marijuana production, distribution, and use anytime soon. But the federal government is allowing considerable experimentation at the state and local level. This is one of the benefits of a federal system.

What is happening in other states?

Medical marijuana has led the way. Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia allow use of cannabis for medical purposes, though with widely varying regulations. In 1996, California approved a system generally regarded as too loose. Admittedly, not everyone getting a prescription from a California dispensary suffers from severe affliction, but neither do they suffer the stigma of a criminal conviction. At the other extreme, some states with medical cannabis programs still prohibit legal use of the drug for some conditions it is known to help. As predicted chaos failed to occur in these states, legalizing the drug for recreational purposes seemed less scary.

What other changes have occurred?

“Decriminalization” is occurring in many places. In 2003, with the approval of all the relevant law enforcement agencies in the county, Seattle voters officially directed police and prosecutors to regard enforcement of cannabis prohibition as the “lowest law enforcement priority.” A study conducted four years later found no increase in marijuana use or crime and no adverse impact on public health. Since then, a number of other cities, including the five largest cites in Michigan in 2012, have adopted “lowest priority” policies and at least some influential political figures in Houston are giving this approach serious thought.

What is “decriminalization?”

Decriminalization refers to lowering the status (e.g., from a felony to a misdemeanor) or reducing the penalties for production, distribution, or use but not actually declaring these activities legal. This protects such measures from running afoul of federal law and eases the minds of people who don’t want to put people in jail for smoking pot but can’t bring themselves to vote to make it legal. In the 2014 campaign for Harris County District Attorney, both the incumbent Devon Anderson and challenger Kim Ogg are offering competing versions of a decriminalization approach to marijuana use. (Anderson was re-elected.)

How does decriminalization differ from legalization?

Decriminalization is a significant advance over prohibition, but it differs from legalization in that criminals get to keep the money and decide what and to whom to sell. Legalization—which does not mean making cannabis buds available in the gumball machines at McDonald’s—involves 1) regulation of the product after the manner of prescription drugs and alcohol, 2) rules about who can buy and sell, and 3) collection of taxes. Those are three good reasons to support legalization. Drug dealers tend not to be scrupulous about purity of product or accuracy of labeling, and they do not ask kids for IDs.

Apart from helping people with medical needs, what other benefits would flow from legalizing marijuana?

Perhaps the greatest gain, in money saved and lives not ruined, will be reduction in law enforcement costs—court time not spent, jails and prisons not built or filled, fewer public defenders and court-appointed attorneys and probation officers and prison guards needed. Beyond these costs are the loss of taxes paid and families supported by people who could be working but are either incarcerated or shut out of the job market by a criminal record based on use of a drug demonstrably less dangerous than alcohol.

The economic implications of a legal cannabis industry itself are enormous. Estimates differ, but net gains in the hundreds of millions of dollars are probable. In addition, a once-thriving hemp industry could again produce high-quality cloth, paper, nutritious oil, and biodiesel fuel. Obviously, all of these businesses will need employees, providing another boost to the economy.

The market for marijuana is already large and will almost certainly grow substantially, though I suspect an initial surge by will be followed by a drop-off after current non-users satisfy their curiosity.

Colorado and Washington both legalized cannabis in 2012. Washington has trailed Colorado in fully implementing its system. How are things working out in Colorado?

After nine months of legal pot in Colorado, a majority of Coloradans still favor the change. Crime and use by children has not increased and tens of millions of dollars have streamed into the state treasury. Glitches, such as insufficient labeling and information about edibles, are being corrected, which a regulated system can accomplish, in contrast to a system controlled by criminals with little concern for safety or the age of its customers.

What states are likely to be the next to legalize?

Alaska, California, Oregon, and Maine are among states considered most likely to move toward full legalization.

The trend is clear and, absent unexpected and widespread negative effects, likely to continue. Legalization has the best chance in “initiative” states, in which citizens can gather enough signatures on petitions to put a measure on the ballot. The process is harder in states like Texas, where laws must be passed by the legislature. Even with a strong bill presented by a highly respected representative or senator, a bill can be stopped by a committee chair who refuses to hear it, an influential committee member who speaks against it, a committee that votes against it, the mysterious calendar committee that declines to bring a bill to the floor for a House vote, or a negative vote on the House or Senate floor.

What efforts are being made in Texas?

Well-organized efforts, involving veteran cannabis activists who were involved in others states are underway in Texas. Medical marijuana bills have the best chance for early success, as veterans with PTSD, parents of children with epilepsy and autism, patients undergoing chemotherapy for cancer, and victims of multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, and HIV/AIDS press the legislature for legal access to medicine proven to be effective for their conditions.

Medical marijuana has a long chance in 2015, a much better chance in 2017, both because organized support will have increased and more states will have approved its use. Recreational use has little chance in 2015. Passage in other states, particularly if it results in substantial boosts in income from taxes, will build momentum and lessen resistance in 2017. From this distance, legalizing recreational use in 2019 seems not at all far-fetched.