Last July, the city of Oakland approved a measure that was unprecedented in California history. After facing a $18.9 million budget deficit with $25 million more in the red projected and the prospect of bankruptcy, Oakland voters overwhelmingly approved a measure that would tax the sale of medical marijuana, becoming the first city in the country to tax proceeds on cannabis. The following month, the Obama administration ruled that it would no longer prosecute individuals who sell marijuana for medical purposes, even though this conflicts with federal law. Last January, the state of New Jersey legalized the sale of medical marijuana. With public opinion rising amid growing support and renewed enthusiasm, the time for legalization has come. 

As California struggles to deal with a projected looming $20.7 billion budget deficit this year, the state is in dire need of revenue to prevent additional deep cuts in education and social welfare programs. While there are no short-term quick fixes to entirely alleviating California’s budget woes, legalization could ease the painful decisions being made and prevent even more potentially devastating cuts. This year, Californians face two pathways toward legalization: one through an assembly bill and the other through the ballot this November, when voters may have the ability to legalize the sale of marijuana, not solely for medical purposes, but for recreational use.

Although not officially on the ballot yet, the campaign for taxing and regulating marijuana has won significant support and will likely be on the ballot this November. Once the ballot initiative is approved by voters, legalizing marijuana would allow the state government to tax and regulate the industry in the same way it regulates the alcohol and tobacco industries.  The new tax revenue would provide immediate relief, filling the state’s coffers by approximately $1.4 billion, according to a study last July by the state Board of Equalization, the state’s authority on tax and regulation measures.

Long-term potential benefits from legalization would also come from the decreased amount of resources local law enforcement officials would have to use chasing drug-dealers and others who currently sell marijuana illegally. According to a strong proponent of legalization, San Francisco Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, the state would save millions, if not billions, of dollars freeing up our state’s overcrowded prisons of individuals convicted for possessing minor amounts of marijuana. While marijuana possession does not account for all of the state’s 170,000 prisoners convicted for illegal drug possessions, with most convicted of possessing cocaine and other drugs, it would still be a step in the right direction toward having law enforcement officials divert their attention to other pressing issues.

While polls show that a majority of Americans would support sensible legalization, there are those who still adhere to illogical and misleading data.

Arguments that legalizing marijuana would destroy society and cause an increase in criminal behavior and the number of drug users are flawed and outdated. When opponents first fought against the legalization of medical marijuana they argued it would cause an increase in the number of users who would fake their condition in order to obtain the drugs. According to the DEA, however, overall marijuana consumption has dropped between 2001 and 2005, when the legalization of medical marijuana was in full-force. Current marijuana use decreased 28 percent among 8th graders and 23 percent among 10th graders, even as the drug has become more pronounced and available.

Aside from the voting booth, the Californian legislature has taken up action themselves without waiting for the public.

Another pathway toward legalization exists in the state assembly through legislation from Ammiano. Ammiano’s bill, AB 390, encourages the government to set up wholesale and retail sale regulation, and to impose a $50-per-ounce sales tax on marijuana products to fund drug abuse prevention programs attached to marijuana products as a sales tax. The California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control would be responsible for regulation. The legislation would also ban local and state assistance “in enforcing inconsistent federal and other laws” so that existing federal laws would not conflict with the measure.

Although Ammiano’s bill died in the legislature last month, he has remained committed to the cause and will reintroduce the legislation. Despite the setback, Californians still have the opportunity to voice their support for legalization this November. The campaign for legalization will undoubtedly be subject to vicious attacks from outside groups who will try to sink it in the same way the no on Proposition 8 campaign failed. Independent analysts estimated the total amount of television advertisements and direct-mailings for Proposition 8 at $35.8 million and the same forces will be at work again this year. Californians should mobilize to support the ballot initiative and vote for its approval. It is time for Californians to recognize the potential benefits of legalization and stop quibbling over the culture wars that plagued legalization efforts in the past.

Illustration by Vivian Tong