Prop.19's Legal Pot -- A Zero-Sum Game
International News Source - October 6, 2010
How Marijuana Won't Save California's Economy.
Last week I picked up a newspaper that was lying about in public laundromat, and showed a particular headline to a rather bored-looking couple – the room's only other occupants – who easily could have passed for high school students. The headline was part of a feature story titled, “How Marijuana Can Save the Economy.” As I held it up for them to read, I asked the question, “Do you think this is true?” They answered in unison,“absolutely!”
Cannabis Plant
Bella Donna
Coca Plant
American Tobacco
It's the same argument made by tobacco users – “I smoke for relaxation; It's cheap and it calms my nerves.” Calming, yes. . .feeling jittery is but one among many withdrawal symptoms caused by chemical dependency. But cheap? You think you can afford it now, but it's only later that you find out how much it's going to cost to treat your emphysema. Sure, cigarettes are taxed and that's the good news, but nicotine is a dangerous drug, making tobacco a product with a double tax – once when you use it and again when you “lose it” as at the ripe old age of 45 you begin to work your way through the heath care system.
It's a Zero-Sum Game.
“Smokers who quit, in common with alcoholics and heroin junkies who quit, all go through a phase called withdrawal syndrome. The features vary from substance to substance and from addict to addict, but all agree that it is an intensely unpleasant experience, and responsible for a lot of backsliding. It is largely through the study of withdrawal that we know about addiction, and it is clear that for all addicts, it is the imperceptible onset of very early withdrawal symptoms that triggers the next intake of substance” (1).
Stramonium (Devil's Trumpet)
Temazepam
Peyote
Critics Don't Like the Idea.
“Although Randolph is talking about the process that causes alergic reactions, Non-allergic food hypersensitivity is the medical name for food intolerance, loosely referred to as food hypersensitivity, or previously as pseudo-allergic reactions. Non-allergic food hypersensitivity should not be confused with true food allergies.” [Wikipedia @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_intolerance]
Field of Poppies
Proponents Shout Back.
“Randolph termed the food-addiction type of illness "masked allergy", thereby unwittingly causing a giant step backwards in medical understanding as immunologists world wide pounced on his alleged misuse of the "allergy"concept, which they regard as their parochial possession. The symptoms are indeed not those of classic allergies (sneezes, wheezes or itches), rather, they include such "vague" symptoms as headaches, rheumatism, fluid retention, mood swings and childhood hyperactivity. Another cause for ridiculing Randolph's concept is of course that most people eat the same foods every day, more or less, and apparently come to no harm. Randolph would answer that he is not concerned with "most people", only with the chronic sick, and they are unusually susceptible to this effect” (3).
Street Marijuana
But Wait, It Gets Better.
Nothing describes “chronically sick” better than traditional alcoholism – either that of the “high-functioning” alcoholic or the falling-down drunk. There are M.Ds (no citation available) who agree with the majority of Alcoholics Anonymous members in the claim that alcoholism in an individual is “acquired” over a period of time, during which the person develops an allergic reaction to the alcohol. So could you actually be allergic to the substance that drives you toward it? Ever watch someone eat a strawberry even when they're pretty sure it'll cause a mild case of the hives? Pretty amazing stuff, and that which would fit neatly into Randolph's theory.“The central paradox is that the same substance that the addict craves is also poisonous to him. Tobacco smoke causes cancer, heart disease and emphysema. Alcohol causes liver damage. Even marijuana, one of the safest of addictant substances, causes brain damage in the long term” (4).
So to those who claim to be “up” on the subject, or who are currently “studying” in university under the tutelage of “experts” (as was the claim by my erstwhile young acquaintance) perhaps you are not casting a wide enough net. Perhaps you are cherry-picking the data. Marijuana is addictive – period.
Takin' It to the People.
The V-N-C City Council transcript of September 20, 2010 reveals testimony that took place before the council taken from Ventura Police Chief Ken Corney in opposing Prop. 19:“The Regulate, Control, and Tax Cannabis act was spoken to by the Ventura city police chief, who called it a faulty initiative. Proposition 19 does not [propose to] regulate marijuana like tobacco or alcohol … rather, it leaves to local governments the task of regulating marijuana. California already allows for the legal use of marijuana for medical purposes as part of the Compassionate Use Act – proposition 215. Quality of life problems (addiction) were noted. The increase in youth access to marijuana was also cited. Municipalities have abundant vacant lots that could end up being diverted from residential use to the growing of cannabis plants instead. “Drugged driving” was cited as another negative associated with the proposition. “Problems for employers” was yet another potential downside – the creation of workplace safety issues among them. Compliance with the federal Drug-Free Workplace Act may also be compromised, according to the police chief. Losses to school funding was a further consideration. Issues with taxes and the collection of taxes was mentioned, stating that the collection of certain taxes may be an elusive goal.”
So the hoped-for facts and figures being presented by those who are predisposed to favor approval of Prop. 19 are just that – hoped for. . .like landing your dream date and hoping “Dutch Treat”(5,6,7,8,9) won't be too big a turn-off. People will not buy a taxable product that they can grow free for themselves, and therein lies the real problem with Prop. 19 – control and regulation – followed by the fact that if the product cannot be controlled and regulated efficiently, tax revenues will simply go “up in smoke,” as it were.
If we were to expand on anything the police chief said, it would be this:
There will be weeks, months and years of rehab treatment costs associated with new addicts to come as a result of prop 19's passage, along with lost productivity in the workplace and irrecoverable absentee hours among students in K-12. Other reasons to oppose – including ways in which civil regulation and economic liability of legal cannabis can remain hidden – are:
- Ill-health effects of smoking pot – essentially the same as those from tobacco use – means that insurance rates for users on auto, home and health are bound to go up proportionally
- Parental example in raising children sends the wrong message – second-hand pot smoke potentially more hazardous than tobacco to child health considering the known brain damage associated with marijuana use
- Scientific evidence suggests that pot smoking induces lethargy (allergy-induced side effect) in habitual users – means that a proportional loss of productivity in the American work force could over time translate into billions of dollars
- Extreme temptation to use pot in public in violation of the proposed law – in theaters, stadiums and large enclosed spaces making isolation of the problem inordinately difficult and expensive for enforcement personnel
- Pot smoke and noxious residual odors carried by duct work and air conditioning systems in multiple dwelling units are bound to strain landlord/tenant relations
- Acrid residue left in clothing and hair – on a par with extreme body odor and a public nuisance for those who must share an elevator car with someone who has been using
Article Notes
1. Food Addiction [Para. 2] by Dr. David L. J. Freed, MB, MD, MIBiol – The Salford Allergy Clinic, 14 Marston Road, Salford, Manchester, M7 4ER (U.K) [ Read "Food Addiction" by Dr. David Freed ]
2. Ibid, [Para. 19]
3. Ibid, [Para. 21]
4. Ibid, [Para. 4]
5. ”Going Dutch” or the Dutch Model alluded to earlier [ vcreporter.com/cms/story/detail/going_dutch/8239/ ] was the inspiration for this op-ed piece. The print article (link above to cyber-issue) makes many claims concerning the social implications of marijuana usage, including the assertion that [quote] Prohibitionists continue the claim that marijuana is a dangerous drug, even though it has no lethal dose and no recorded death in history. They will talk about “marijuana addiction,” another misnomer, when marijuana’s level of “dependency” is on a par with or below that of caffeine. [endquote] The article makes no effort to support this statement, because it would be a given that no such reliable data exists.
6. The article purports to be taking a hard look at the economics of street-legal marijuana as a cash crop and the “savior” of the failing California economy. The inside copy also includes impressive (but meaningless) tables of figures showing federal drug control spending (in millions) but these are all for total U.S. drug consumption, not just marijuana. One would think that any true comparison against the “Dutch model,” as it was called, would include figures on Dutch spending in contemporaneous areas, but of course there are none.
7. What we have is a totally vapid argument that neglects what is perhaps the most important (and conveniently overlooked) aspect of the marijuana legalization debate – the known adverse side effects of marijuana use and their impact on individual health. When it comes to health (and even more significantly, the healthcare issue) it's like comparing apples to oranges. . .there is no debate whatsoever. Holland has universal health care, which means that anyone who is addicted to (or feels they have lost control over) drugs or alcohol has an immediate and affordable set of options for dealing with the problem. Try finding that in the United States.
8. The type of health care reforms America is now seeking have been law in Holland and other EU countries since the mid-'60s, and for good reason. Consider the healthcare costs centering around nicotine, as one example – costs that eventually reach into everyone's pockets – and it becomes crystal clear that marijuana legalization will turn the “economic benefits” argument into a zero-sum game. It's precisely the “quality of life” issue – the health and well being aspect of the debate – that is missing from the ridiculous arguments that are being put forth by advocacy journalists.
9. Any country or society that would consider legalizing drugs without planning for a high percentage of bad outcomes, and without setting in place methods for dealing with those outcomes, is a country or society which is too unsophisticated to be dabbling with drugs in the first place.