Should Pennsylvania legalize pot?
There ARE clear public health benefits. But balancing the pros and the cons can get hazy.
Should Pennsylvania legalize pot?
By Jonathan Purtle
Earlier this month, Pennsylvania State Sen. Daylin Leach (D., Montgomery-Delaware) announced plans to introduce a bill that would legalize marijuana — not just for medical purposes, as New Jersey recently did, but also for recreational use. The substance would be regulated by the state in a way similar to alcohol and tobacco. As Leach describes on his website, the bill is founded on the idea that marijuana is no more harmful, and less addictive (this is debatable), than both these substances and that the financial costs of keeping marijuana illegal are enormous. Citing data from the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, Leach points out that 24,685 marijuana arrests were made in Pennsylvania in 2006 — translating into $325 million in criminal justice costs.
Leach’s proposal follows referendums in Colorado and Washington that recently gave those states the green light for recreational marijuana use. And while the Pennsylvania bill will likely go up in smoke — Gov. Corbett has vowed to veto the bill if it reaches his desk — it seems high time to explore the potential pros and cons of legalizing marijuana from a public health perspective.
First the cons.
Let’s assume that marijuana is 100 percent bad for the mind and body and that legalization would lead to increased consumption. While the notion that marijuana is all harm and no good is debatable — advocates of medical marijuana tout its therapeutic benefits — evidence of its adverse health impacts is strong. A White House document entitled “The Public Health Consequences of Marijuana Legalization” synthesizes some of this research. Outcomes include respiratory problems (smoke is never good for lungs) and cognitive impairment.
The science says that the less marijuana a population consumes the better. But would legalization actually result in more people toking up more often? The answer is hazy. Economists at RAND, the non-partisan think tank, crunched the numbers and concluded that marijuana consumption would probably increase with legalization, but they had little idea how large the increase would be.
Now the pros.
The most clear-cut public health benefits of marijuana legalization would likely result from reductions in incarceration. While there are many ways in which incarceration negatively impacts public health — by disrupting monogamous sexual partnerships, for example, which increases the number of sexual partners that people have, and thus the spread of sexual transmitted diseases — let’s just focus on the financial costs of putting people behind bars for weed. As Senator Leach notes, Pennsylvania taxpayers spend around $325 million annually on marijuana-related arrests. While not all of this goes to incarceration, legalization would free up a lot of public money that could be invested in health.
As described in a previous post, research has documented a link between increases in public health spending and improvements in population health. A large, multisite study found that a 10 percent increase in local public health department spending was associated with a 6.9 percent decrease in infant mortality, a 3.2 percent decrease in deaths from cardiovascular disease, a 1.4 percent decrease in deaths from diabetes, and a 1.1 decrease in deaths from cancer. The Philadelphia Department of Public Health’s budget would double if the state took $200 million of marijuana-related criminal justice savings and invested it in the city’s health. This would translate into a substantial number of lives saved. Exactly how many? We can only speculate.
Data from the 2010-2011 National Survey on Drug Use and Health indicate that an estimated 10.82 percent of Pennsylvanians over the age of 12 used marijuana in the past month — as did nearly one-third (31.16 percent) of residents between the ages of 18-25. The estimates are similar for New Jersey — 10.73 percent and 31.79 percent, respectively. While uncertainty abounds regarding the public health costs and benefits of legalizing marijuana, one thing is for sure — people are using it, legal or not.
Read more about The Public's Health.
Finally a legislator who has the right idea. There is a ton of money to be made by the state in regulating this industry and a whole lot to be saved in no longer treating users as criminals. Legalization will also dry up the "dealers" as people find they can enjoy themselves without resorting to criminal behavior. Bravo Mr. Leach!— longbikez- While I hardly agree with anything Comrad Leach says (he has the fiscal aptitude of the former USSR), he is correct here. Legalizing POT would go a long way for:
1) Reducing prison populations and court cases;
2) Possibly increasing revenues for mental health treatment;
3) Create much needed jobs for millions;
4) Reduce the stigmatism that "pot" is unhealthy.
Of course the Criminal Justice System and the central bankers that make billions off of The US Industrial Prison Complex" would lose all their profits (1) and budgets for District Attorneys and Police Depts would be cut due to lack of need.
It was only when Fiorello LaGuardia, a RINO no less, decided to cowtow to FDR's "progressive" efforts outlawed marijuana despite the fact his own reports proved MJ was not as bad as they initially projected(2).
(1) - http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1998/12/the-prison-industrial-complex/304669/
(2) - http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/lag/conc1.htm
— Professor1982 - In 2013, if you believe that pot is a dangerous and harmful street drug, then you're a flat out moron that has not experienced enough of life to make decisions that affect others lives.— DixonBunz
- This would make way too much sense to get passed.....— main liner
- "Citing data from the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, Leach points out that 24,685 marijuana arrests were made in Pennsylvania in 2006 — translating into $325 million in criminal justice costs."
So - now the legislation and laws that have incarcerated so many otherwise law abiding citizens might be changed. And WHY? Not because it may be the right thing to do and the government really doesn't have to protect us from ourselves.... but because of the almighty dollar! That is the real bottom line here. Shame on them for taking so long! And shame on Philly Dot Com for the picture for the picture it used in the article! Are you trying to influence public opinion in a negative way?
Why didn't you show a picture of an upper class couple sitting in their high end home enjoying a doobie with their neighbors?
My only caveat is the possibility of driving or working under the influence - liability will be the big issue here. I do not want "Captain Buzz" to welcome me aboard the 737 for a "red eye" flight telling me that we will be getting high today! I'm not denouncing the legalization of pot at all, but there has to be some form of regulation and RESPONSIBLE use! Another plus for the argument would be the lowering demand to the Mexican smugglers and gangs, thus reducing crime and violence. What amazes me is that NORML has been around since the 70's trying to repeal the pot laws, and it has taken almost 50 years for states to begin trending that way - and only because it is now ECONOMICALLY a sound move! On another view, we seem to need more mass sedation to put a lid on all of this senseless violence and shootings which is inundating our country. Good on ya, Pennsylvania, for even considering the proposal - but I won't hold my breath waiting for this necessary change to take effect!— Sound Mind - Let's be the first on the east coast like Jersey was for gambling. Tax the heck out of it. Sell and distribute it through the State Stores to make them viable again. They have a state wide well established network of retain and distribution. We have plenty of fertile farm land and can build secure indoor greenhouses for year round cultivation.
Fire up Pennsylvania!— DarnelX - Answer- YUP.... Tax the hell out of it.— fman727
- of course it should be legalized but that would mean common sense would have to happen.— Rock1
- Thank you for posting how the legalization of marijuana would be extremely beneficial for public health in our state. However, your post also contains several misconceptions that are a product of Drug War propaganda and not true science. It is "debatable" that marijuana is "no more harmful, and less addictive" than nicotine or alcohol only if one wishes to avoid the facts. Alcohol and nicotine (through its delivery system of cigarettes) are responsible for thousands of emergency room visits and fatalities annually, and both nicotine and alcohol are physically addictive and have lethal doses. Marijuana, although it can be habit forming is not physically addictive, and it is impossible to overdose on it. There is NO lethal dose. When speaking of "medical marijuana" and its properties as a therapy for pain, compare this to the opioid derived medications that physicians in this state are forced to prescribe for chronic pain conditions. Oxycodone and other prescription narcotics are the truly addictive and dangerous drugs which are quickly eclipsing motor vehicle crashes as the most deadly form of unintentional death in this country.— eh99
- Yes, didn' we learn anything from the The National Prohibition Act, known informally as the Volstead Act? Use the resources to tackle dangerous drugs like; meth, coke, heroin, designer drugs. etc.,that are killing our kids.— STEPHEN1988
- Keep it illegal but stop putting people in jail for possession. If they can calculate the medical costs associated with pot use, the revenue from fines should equal the cost to society. The revenue should fund the safety, health and other costs. After a few years, they’ll know the average number of fines per year. Total the costs and divide by the average number of fines and adjust annually. They should do the same with tobacco and alcohol.— MikeP
- Originally when I read your post I was upset because you wanted marijuana to remain illegal.. By the end though, I give you credit for atleast being fair. If marijuana is to remain illegal, making tobacco and alcohol illegal is only just. Good comment. — mystikast
- I personally do not care how huch money this would bring in, I care about safety. Currently, there is no way of knowing what ammount of marijuana is in the body without very expensive testing. I do not want to have people, high as kites, driving down the same roads as myself, or worse yet, working next to me. This will dramatically increase car accidents, work related accidents as well as domestic disputes. For all those that are for legalizing it, go get a job and do something productive and stop worrying about getting high! For every dollar that comes in from legalizing it, 2 more dollars will be going out to pay off higher medical insurance costs and car insurance payments that people like myself that are against it will be forced to pay!— PhillyTaz
- Nothing you said is remotely close to accurate or based in fact. Do you work and drive with people who are drunk? Just assuming that people who are for legalization is lazy, and makes you sound like an uneducated tard.
