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.
What are we going to do with all the Pot dealers who are suddenly out of a job? How many will just up and quit and supplemental the income some other, legal way? Some people make good money selling Pot and when you take that away- Well, I don't know what will happen but we need to be ready for it.
— timprov- I find a suggestion/pro argument a little weird
would be fair or unfair if the STATE expense of 325 million, once ended
translated into a CITY benefit of 200 million?
— MDBJ - Let's use some common sense (not so common) and declare victory in the war on drugs and legalize pot for recreational and medicinal use. Take away the attraction (and associated crime) of using an illegal substance, regulate it and tax it just like alcohol and call it a day. This from a non-pot user.— skippack_cyclist
Be careful what you wish for...DO NOT legalize marijuana - please. Just decriminalize it. If the political class legalizes it, expect HUGE taxes that will double the cost. Expect massive, costly regulations. Expect hassles every where you turn. Expect Big Brother surveilance of users...in short, expect the worst once John Law gets involved, and then multiply the worst by ten.— The Monk- People who use heroin, crack, and cocaine did not get up one day and say, perhaps I'll try crack today with no prior drug use history. What I am trying to say is that marijuana seems to be the number 1 gateway drug. Making the gate wider and more accessible seems to be irresponsible on some levels. Perhaps there are many out there who use the drug recreationally without detriment to themselves or others, but I would imagine they are in the minority. Let me get this straight, Mr. Leach is against vouchers and or tax credits for parents of students trapped in violenet and or under-performing schools, but he is for the legalization of a drug most widely known for producing laziness...wow! You cannot create this stuff!— reasonableihope
- Pot is bad for your lungs? LMGTFY:
CBS NEWS "Marijuana might not harm lungs, but experts leery of other effects" - http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-57356867-10391704/marijuana-might-not-harm-lungs-but-experts-leery-of-other-effects/
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/01/13/is-pot-good-for-lungs-new-marijuana-study-adds-to-health-effects-debate.html
I can haz real reporting?
— alexua 
NON ADDICTIVE!- my dad recently died from cancer in dec. due to the loss of appetite from the therapy he endured we couldn't afford the $700plus Rx for Megace ES prescribed to boost his appetite. the alternative, regular Megace, was too much as well. so you know my heart went out that we didn't live in a state where if we had even medical marijuana we could've tried that as perhaps a reduced cost alternative. instead i had to watch my dad waste away because we couldn't afford the cost of overpriced chemically made pharmaceuticals that the insurance companies don't cover and make big pharma richer.— ihatenewyorkers
As a pot smoker, I was against the legalization of marijuanna. I get my weed just fine, I don't need the government stepping in and now taxing yet another thing in my life. The thing that swayed me though was the unused retail space that will be occupied by dispensaries and the revenue that it will generate. Our country could use the economic jolt as we have been stuck in neutral for quite sometime. For the economies sake, legalize it.— gilligan- ...Not to mention it will take revenue away from Mexican drug cartels. — Izzy812
- Way to go, little buddy! — CoettaGarner25
- Sure! We have drunks on the roads. People who fly through red lights and ignore stop signs are plentiful. Let's get some idiots high and get them on the road.— tlee
- MAKE IT LEGAL create jobs and like another person said tax the hell out of it. Let's go america use what we can, create and grow and keep jobs in this country.— twentysecs
- Isn't Obama's criteria "if we save one life we should try"? Well having a bunch of potheads walking and driving around could cost lives so using that criteria I say no.— Phillies2008WSChamps
- Weed, Killer, Bhudda, Hydro, Chronic, Ganja, Skunk, Backyard Boogie, Mary Jane, Endo.....— MrBigDizzle
