Below are links to a few resources about marijuana policy from a youth substance abuse prevention perspective.
Marijuana: Science-based information for the public
Legalization of marijuana: Potential impact on youth
Marijuana Facts and Washington State
Marijuana Legalization: A Bad Idea
RAND Drug Policy Research Center Hot Topic: Marijuana Legalization
Kevin Sabet: Clear thinking about drug policy
National Association of Drug Court Professionals: Position against California's Prop 19
But What About the Children? Campaign
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Friday, March 23, 2012
I-502 revenue projections don't take into consideration increased need for enforcement and services needed to mitigate harm
WASAVP's Jim Cooper appeared on q13FOX yesterday as part of a discussion about projected tax revenue that may be generated if Initiative 502 passes. When thinking about marijuana legalization and potential tax revenue, following are a few things to consider from a prevention perspective.
No money set aside to mitigate harm. What is not discussed when estimating revenue is that legalizing marijuana will create more harm with increased use among youth (and associated school failure), crime, DUI and dependence. There will be an increased need for intervention services in schools, local and state police, and treatment. No funding is set aside in I-502 for any of these things. Yes, there is money that will go into the general fund that could possibly fund these and a variety of public health and safety-related services but, in today's state fiscal climate, it is unlikely the amount would meet increased needs when these services are struggling to meet current needs.
No money set aside to meet increased enforcement needs. I-502 does not set aside money for an increase in Liquor Control Board enforcement activities. While there is money set aside of LCB "administration" there is no extra money to enforce regulations of this new drug market. What good are regulations if they are not enforced? As it is, LCB enforcement is not funded at levels that enable them to handle strict enforcement of liquor laws.
Initiative supporters make the assumption in their fiscal projections that persons who are not LCB licensed marijuana producers, processors, and retailers will continue to be subject to criminal prosecution under current law. Who will enforce these new laws around producing, processing, sales and possession? Who is going to do enforcement around home grow operations? Who is going to meet the need of increased enforcement around the new DUI law I-502 creates? Nowhere in the initiative or related fiscal documents is this issue considered.
Consumption estimates are likely too low. Initiative proponents are conservative in their estimates of how many people will start using marijuana if legalized. They base it on how many people are currently using it illegally. They do not take into account how many people currently do not use marijuana solely because it is illegal. They do not take into account how many youth do not use marijuana right now because it is illegal. While a significant increase in consumption may be good for revenue, it certainly is not good for public health and safety. Just like alcohol, increased consumption equals increased public health and safety harms.
Costs may outweigh benefits. I-502 includes funding for a cost-benefits analysis to be done by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy because they don’t know what costs will be associated with increased access and related harm. Multiple studies on alcohol have shown that increased access means increased harm. As a state, we already can’t handle all of the harms done by legalized alcohol.
Re-inventing a system voters disapprove of. The fiscal assumptions for I-502 are made using the old, state-run liquor control model. After I-1183 is fully implemented, there will be no state-run stores to sell marijuana. The old system will need to be re-invented. Which begs the question: If voters didn’t think the state should be in the business of selling alcohol, why should the state be in the business of selling marijuana?
Minimal criminal justice savings. Interestingly, the fiscal assumptions for I-502 also don't bring up criminal justice savings if marijuana is legalized. Why is this? Because their claim that legalizing marijuana would save money by reducing the number of people in jail is just not true. People who are in jail for drug-related offenses are not there for simple marijuana possession. They are there for other crimes that may include marijuana possession.
No guarantee of sustained funding for prevention. Though I-502 contains provisions that funnel revenue to pay for substance abuse prevention programs, there is no guarantee that this will create sustained funding for prevention. Let's remember what history has taught us. Tobacco sales revenue that was dedicated to tobacco prevention is now going into the general fund. Tobacco prevention programs are vanishing. Alcohol sales revenue that was dedicated to prevention now goes to the general fund. Don’t believe it when legalization proponents promise funding for prevention. It won’t be long before the legislature diverts these funds to the general fund.
No money set aside to mitigate harm. What is not discussed when estimating revenue is that legalizing marijuana will create more harm with increased use among youth (and associated school failure), crime, DUI and dependence. There will be an increased need for intervention services in schools, local and state police, and treatment. No funding is set aside in I-502 for any of these things. Yes, there is money that will go into the general fund that could possibly fund these and a variety of public health and safety-related services but, in today's state fiscal climate, it is unlikely the amount would meet increased needs when these services are struggling to meet current needs.
No money set aside to meet increased enforcement needs. I-502 does not set aside money for an increase in Liquor Control Board enforcement activities. While there is money set aside of LCB "administration" there is no extra money to enforce regulations of this new drug market. What good are regulations if they are not enforced? As it is, LCB enforcement is not funded at levels that enable them to handle strict enforcement of liquor laws.
Initiative supporters make the assumption in their fiscal projections that persons who are not LCB licensed marijuana producers, processors, and retailers will continue to be subject to criminal prosecution under current law. Who will enforce these new laws around producing, processing, sales and possession? Who is going to do enforcement around home grow operations? Who is going to meet the need of increased enforcement around the new DUI law I-502 creates? Nowhere in the initiative or related fiscal documents is this issue considered.
Consumption estimates are likely too low. Initiative proponents are conservative in their estimates of how many people will start using marijuana if legalized. They base it on how many people are currently using it illegally. They do not take into account how many people currently do not use marijuana solely because it is illegal. They do not take into account how many youth do not use marijuana right now because it is illegal. While a significant increase in consumption may be good for revenue, it certainly is not good for public health and safety. Just like alcohol, increased consumption equals increased public health and safety harms.
Costs may outweigh benefits. I-502 includes funding for a cost-benefits analysis to be done by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy because they don’t know what costs will be associated with increased access and related harm. Multiple studies on alcohol have shown that increased access means increased harm. As a state, we already can’t handle all of the harms done by legalized alcohol.
Re-inventing a system voters disapprove of. The fiscal assumptions for I-502 are made using the old, state-run liquor control model. After I-1183 is fully implemented, there will be no state-run stores to sell marijuana. The old system will need to be re-invented. Which begs the question: If voters didn’t think the state should be in the business of selling alcohol, why should the state be in the business of selling marijuana?
Minimal criminal justice savings. Interestingly, the fiscal assumptions for I-502 also don't bring up criminal justice savings if marijuana is legalized. Why is this? Because their claim that legalizing marijuana would save money by reducing the number of people in jail is just not true. People who are in jail for drug-related offenses are not there for simple marijuana possession. They are there for other crimes that may include marijuana possession.
No guarantee of sustained funding for prevention. Though I-502 contains provisions that funnel revenue to pay for substance abuse prevention programs, there is no guarantee that this will create sustained funding for prevention. Let's remember what history has taught us. Tobacco sales revenue that was dedicated to tobacco prevention is now going into the general fund. Tobacco prevention programs are vanishing. Alcohol sales revenue that was dedicated to prevention now goes to the general fund. Don’t believe it when legalization proponents promise funding for prevention. It won’t be long before the legislature diverts these funds to the general fund.
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
WASAVP on TV
Last month, WASAVP's Jim Cooper appeared on the Seattle Channel to discuss why marijuana legalization is a bad idea.
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Liquor Control Board hearings: extended alcohol service hours
An invitation from the Washington State Liquor Control Board:
808 W Spokane Falls Blvd.
Spokane, WA 99201
The Liquor Control Board is holding public hearings regarding a petition to open rulemaking for extended hours of alcohol service. This petition, submitted by the City of Seattle, proposes that individual cities would have the ability to seek an exemption from the 2:00 a.m. deadline for alcohol sales at on-premises locations. Cities would be able to set their own hours, including allowing alcohol sales around-the-clock.
Prior to making a determination of whether to pursue rulemaking, the Board is interested in hearing from community members and leaders across the state, law enforcement at the local, county and state level, neighborhood and community groups and other interested parties. For more background information on this petition for extended hours, please see the LCB website:
April 3, 2012, 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
Vancouver City Hall
415 West 6th Street
Vancouver, WA 98660
April 11, 2012, 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. Kennewick Police Department
211 West 6th Avenue Kennewick, WA 99336
April 16th
Spokane City Hall 808 W Spokane Falls Blvd.
Spokane, WA 99201
Monday, March 19, 2012
Notes From the Liquor Control Board Health & Safety Forum
On Tuesday, March 13, the Liquor Control Board hosted a Public Health & Safety Forum about the implementation of I-1183, the initiative that privatizes the sale of liquor and further deregulates marketing wine and liquor in Washington. The forum was well attended not only by public health and safety advocates but by representatives of the businesses that will benefit from I-1183 including Costco, Target and the Grocers Association.
Following are some notes from the hearing.
Trade Area
The initiative states that stores selling liquor must be 10,000 square feet or larger. Exceptions will be made if such a store does not exist in a "trade area". Trade area is not defined. The Liquor Control Board (LCB) will look at defining trade area after June 1, 2012. Previously, the LCB determined if a new liquor store should be opened if (1) there was significant population growth in an area, (2) if travel time for customers was more than 15 minutes, and (3) customer satisfaction surveys indicated that people were unhappy about how far they had to travel to get to a store.
It is estimated that the number of stores selling liquor in Washington will increase from 340 to about 1300-1400 once I-1183 is implemented.
Hours of Sale
Currently, most liquor stores close at 10:00 p.m. I-1183 does not contain a provision limiting the hours of sale of liquor -- grocery and other large stores may sell liquor as long as they are open for business.
Responsible Vendor Program
The LCB is instituting a Responsible Vendor Program that encourages liquor licensees to put in place store policies meant to prevent the sale of liquor to minors. The program is free, voluntary and self-monitoring. The LCB will only check compliance with the program if they receive complaints about the business. Of the more than 1,000 businesses that have applied for liquor licenses around the state as of the beginning of the month, only about 30 have applied to be a part of the Responsible Vendor Program.
Enforcement
No additional funds have been allocated to the Liquor Control Board to provide increased enforcement. Currently, there are 300 liquor licensees per LCB officer. They will focus their efforts on licensees near schools and colleges and those about which they receive complaints.
Following are some notes from the hearing.
Trade Area
The initiative states that stores selling liquor must be 10,000 square feet or larger. Exceptions will be made if such a store does not exist in a "trade area". Trade area is not defined. The Liquor Control Board (LCB) will look at defining trade area after June 1, 2012. Previously, the LCB determined if a new liquor store should be opened if (1) there was significant population growth in an area, (2) if travel time for customers was more than 15 minutes, and (3) customer satisfaction surveys indicated that people were unhappy about how far they had to travel to get to a store.
It is estimated that the number of stores selling liquor in Washington will increase from 340 to about 1300-1400 once I-1183 is implemented.
Hours of Sale
Currently, most liquor stores close at 10:00 p.m. I-1183 does not contain a provision limiting the hours of sale of liquor -- grocery and other large stores may sell liquor as long as they are open for business.
Responsible Vendor Program
The LCB is instituting a Responsible Vendor Program that encourages liquor licensees to put in place store policies meant to prevent the sale of liquor to minors. The program is free, voluntary and self-monitoring. The LCB will only check compliance with the program if they receive complaints about the business. Of the more than 1,000 businesses that have applied for liquor licenses around the state as of the beginning of the month, only about 30 have applied to be a part of the Responsible Vendor Program.
Enforcement
No additional funds have been allocated to the Liquor Control Board to provide increased enforcement. Currently, there are 300 liquor licensees per LCB officer. They will focus their efforts on licensees near schools and colleges and those about which they receive complaints.
Friday, March 2, 2012
I-1183 Stakeholders Forum March 13
Prevention advocates are invited to a:
Public Health and Safety Stakeholder Forum on the implementation of 1183
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
10am to 12noon
WSLCB Headquarters, 3000 Pacific Ave. SE, Olympia, WA.
It is important that WASAVP and prevention advocates "pack the room" and help the conversation focus on mitigating the harm 1183 is poised to inflict on our kids and communities. Below is cut from the invitation email:
"In the next few months you will see many changes in how spirits (hard alcohol) are distributed and sold in the State of Washington as a result of the passage of Initiative 1183. There will also be changes in licensing and regulation.
We realize there are many questions regarding what this all means for your communities in terms of public health and safety. For instance, how might the changes impact underage drinking, access to alcohol, enforcement of liquor laws, etc.?
Senior staff will be available to answer questions. We hope you will take this opportunity to become better informed."
The invitation is from Sharon Foster, LCB and Michael Langer, DBHR--a big "thank you" to them for this opportunity for public dialogue.
ACTION NEEDED:
1. Let's mobilize and "pack the room" at LCB with prevention advocates.
2. Send questions in advance to Samantha Trotter at st@liq.wa.gov. (Please also cc: your questions to the WASAVP Board at action@wasavp.org as we are working to coordinate questions to insure all pertinent issues and concerns are submitted.)
3. If you would like to take advantage of a call-in option, please e-mail Trotter at st@liq.wa.gov, and you will receive instructions with a call-in number.
Public Health and Safety Stakeholder Forum on the implementation of 1183
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
10am to 12noon
WSLCB Headquarters, 3000 Pacific Ave. SE, Olympia, WA.
It is important that WASAVP and prevention advocates "pack the room" and help the conversation focus on mitigating the harm 1183 is poised to inflict on our kids and communities. Below is cut from the invitation email:
"In the next few months you will see many changes in how spirits (hard alcohol) are distributed and sold in the State of Washington as a result of the passage of Initiative 1183. There will also be changes in licensing and regulation.
We realize there are many questions regarding what this all means for your communities in terms of public health and safety. For instance, how might the changes impact underage drinking, access to alcohol, enforcement of liquor laws, etc.?
Senior staff will be available to answer questions. We hope you will take this opportunity to become better informed."
The invitation is from Sharon Foster, LCB and Michael Langer, DBHR--a big "thank you" to them for this opportunity for public dialogue.
ACTION NEEDED:
1. Let's mobilize and "pack the room" at LCB with prevention advocates.
2. Send questions in advance to Samantha Trotter at st@liq.wa.gov. (Please also cc: your questions to the WASAVP Board at action@wasavp.org as we are working to coordinate questions to insure all pertinent issues and concerns are submitted.)
3. If you would like to take advantage of a call-in option, please e-mail Trotter at st@liq.wa.gov, and you will receive instructions with a call-in number.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)