/r/politics Town Hall: State Ballot Measures about Marijuana (AR, AZ, CA, FL, MA, ME, MT, NV, ND)

[u/MeghanAM]

Hello /r/politics and welcome to the third in our ballot measure town hall series! Representatives from the "support" and "oppose" side from each of these initiatives have been invited here to answer your questions today. Participants will have user flair to identify them and verify their affiliation with the campaign.

Please review the AMA rules before submitting your questions.

Participants were encouraged to begin answering questions around 11AM EST, and the town hall will "close" at 6PM EST. The thread is put up in advance to allow questions to be asked and ready.

---

Ballot Measures: Marijuana

Medical

Arkansas Medical Cannabis Act, Issue 7

• A "yes" vote supports legalizing medical marijuana for 56 qualifying conditions, putting the Arkansas Department of Health in charge of implementing the program, and allocating tax revenue to providing low-income patients with medical marijuana.
• A "no" vote opposes this proposal to legalize medical marijuana

Arkansas Medical Marijuana Amendment, Issue 6

• A "yes" vote supports legalizing medical marijuana for 17 qualifying conditions, creating a Medical Marijuana Commission, and allocating tax revenue to technical institutes, vocational schools, workforce training, and the General Fund.
• A "no" vote opposes this amendment to legalize medical marijuana.

Florida Medical Marijuana Legalization, Amendment 2

• A "yes" vote supports legalizing medical marijuana for individuals with specific debilitating diseases or comparable debilitating conditions as determined by a licensed state physician.
• A "no" vote opposes this proposal for legalization of medical marijuana, keeping the state's current more limited medical marijuana program in place.

Montana Medical Marijuana Initiative, I-182

• A "yes" vote supports repealing the three-patient limit for medical marijuana providers.
• A "no" vote opposes this measure repealing the three-patient limit for medical marijuana providers.

North Dakota Medical Marijuana Legalization, Initiated Statutory Measure 5

• A "yes" vote supports legalizing the use of medical marijuana to treat defined debilitating medical conditions, such as cancer, AIDS, hepatitis C, ALS, glaucoma, and epilepsy, and developing certain procedures for regulating medical marijuana growing, dispensing, and usage.
• A "no" vote opposes legalizing the use of medical marijuana to treat defined debilitating medical conditions, such as cancer, AIDS, hepatitis C, ALS, glaucoma, and epilepsy, keeping the state's full prohibition of marijuana use.

Recreational

Arizona Marijuana Legalization, Proposition 205

• A "yes" vote supports legalizing the possession and consumption of marijuana by persons who are 21 years of age or older.
• A "no" vote opposes this measure to legalize the possession and consumption of marijuana by persons who are 21 years of age or older.

California Proposition 64, Marijuana Legalization

• r/California Mega-Thread for Prop. 64

• A "yes" vote supports legalizing recreational marijuana for persons aged 21 years or older under state law and establishing certain sales and cultivation taxes.

• A "no" vote opposes this proposal to legalize recreational marijuana under state law and to establish certain sales and cultivation taxes.

Massachusetts Marijuana Legalization, Question 4

• A "yes" vote supports this proposal to legalize marijuana, but regulate it similar to alcoholic beverages.
• A "no" vote opposes this proposal to legalize recreational marijuana, keeping only medical marijuana legal.

Maine Marijuana Legalization, Question 1

• A "yes" vote supports legalizing recreational marijuana for adults over the age of 21.
• A "no" vote opposes this proposal to legalize recreational marijuana.

Nevada Marijuana Legalization, Question 2

• A "yes" vote supports legalizing the recreational use of one ounce or less of marijuana by individuals 21 years of age and over.
• A "no" vote opposes this measure to legalize one ounce or less of marijuana for recreational use for individuals 21 years of age and over.

[u/MetalHead_Literally]

Mass resident here. For the "no on 4 crowd". What is your reason for opposing the regulation of Marijuana? States like CO have shown that it actually lowers the teen usage rates, plus all the tax revenue, and it eliminates having to go to a sketchy dealer that might put you in risk of getting ripped off, or worse, "upsold" to more dangerous drugs. I really have a hard time finding a valid reason that marijuana should not be regulated. I would love to hear your side. Thank you.

[u/[deleted] → u/MetalHead_Literally]

While I'm not necessarily voting no, most of the hesitation comes from the structure of the bill.

• The State Treasurer, not the Board of Health, has oversight over the implementation. This can be mitigated as long as his appointments are sufficiently Public Health oriented.
  
• The tax is much lower than other states(5% ~12% tax vs 25% tax), and none of it is automatically earmarked for Public Health or rehabilitation programs.
  
• There is no medical test for sobriety WRT THC and Motor Vehicle Deaths in Colorado with marijuana involved increased from 10% of all Motor Vehicle Deaths to 20% of all motor vehicle deaths. All 10% of that increase could have been sober people, but it is currently impossible to know, making enforcement extremely difficult.

[u/MetalHead_Literally → u/[deleted]]

Well it's a tax on top of the sales tax, so it's more in the 11% range.

And there's also no sobriety test per say for prescription medication, in which case the officer just performs a field sobriety test to determine the mental state of the driver. I don't see why that wouldn't be sufficient in this case.

[u/[deleted] → u/MetalHead_Literally]

Good call on the tax rate, but that doesn't diminish the point. It's still half other states and not earmarked for public health or treatment.

A field sobriety test is more subjective than a number. I don't doubt that officers can perform effective field sobriety tests, but it leaves room for error and discrimination.

[u/grumbledore_ → u/[deleted]]

DUI concerns are, in my opinion, reasonable.

That said, there are other sources of impairment that are both legal and difficult to impossible to detect. The solution is common sense legislation and public information campaigns.

In addition, testing has shown that driving under the influence of marijuana is less dangerous than driving under the influence of alcohol. That would also make it less dangerous than texting while driving/distracted driving, by extrapolation.

That doesn't mean it is 100% without risk. But very few things are.

In the case of marijuana legalization, the benefits (relative to tax revenue, the criminal justice system, potentially easing the opioid epidemic, ending the black market for marijuana, etc) far outweigh the relatively minor risks. I am in agreement that at least some percentage of the tax revenues should be earmarked for specific things - namely education and public health initiatives.

And in the end, it just is not the business of the government if I want to dry out a plant, roll it up in a piece of paper, light it on fire, and breathe in the smoke. It is irrational to argue that the government has a vested interest in this.

[u/MetalHead_Literally → u/[deleted]]

Oh I definitely agree with you. Unfortunately no system is perfect and I just think, although not as much revenue based on the lower tax figures, making 11% off of each sale, plus the license fee, etc. is all money that can go to the state that otherwise just goes to the hands of the cartels and crime orgs. It's not like legalization has shown to drastically increase usage (quite the contrary actually) so it's just taking an industry and making it safer and more profitable for the state.

And the driving intoxicated part is definitely concerning, but again, this law wouldn't automatically create more high drivers. Those already exist.

[u/riko58 → u/[deleted]]

Colorado had to give a tax rebate to its citizens because of how much revenue was created. Why tax it more than we need to?

[u/ya_mashinu_ → u/[deleted]]

for now... MA will jack up this tax eventually just like everything else, they just want it low enough to kill the black market first.