Don't Fear the Reafer

Before I begin, let me make one thing painfully clear: I have never, nor do I ever intend to, smoke marijuana.

With that said, one can't help but find the recently publicized images of national hero Michael Phelps smoking marijuana interesting. Many Americans, especially those with impressionable young children, have scolded the Olympic god for the decision he made to light up at a party in South Carolina last November--although it's doubtful that the incident in question was Phelps' first (or last) dance with Mary Jane. Nevertheless, while this issue has called some to question why celebrities so often get off with a slap on the wrist for this type of offense, I find myself asking a different question: Why doesn't everyone get off for smoking pot?

The issue of legalizing marijuana is not a new one. Student movements ranging from the free-loving 1960s to my next door neighbor's red-eyed rants, have been commonplace on college campus all over the country. Media portrayals and representations of the drug like the film Pineapple Express encourage expanding the legal boundaries. Pot even has its own political party, united by the belief that America's Gateway Drug should be available to all--or at least adults (http://www.usmjparty.org/).

So what would be the main incentive for the United States government to reverse its policy after so many years? The answer is something that Uncle Sam appears to be a little short on these days: cash. That's right, the U.S. government could use the stuff to turn a profit, and based on the available data, it could be quite a hefty profit indeed. According to a 2006 ABC News story (http://a.abcnews.com/Business/story?id=2735017&page=1), marijuana is among the top three cash crops in thirty of fifty states. The article goes on to estimate that pot production in America, as of two years ago, stood at over $35 billion, and that is not a number prone to decreasing over time.

That's quite a chunk of change, considering that government officials are, at this moment, scrambling to write a check to the American people of almost $1 trillion. So where does the cannabis come in? Simply put, the American government could legalize marijuana, then tax the heck out of its revenues. Not only would this help Congress raise capital during this time of economic recession and deficit spending, but it could also help breathe life into private industry with what remains of sales profits of the drug. Why, the new weed farms that are sure to spring up are sure to produce more jobs for Americans. I'm even willing to wager that the increased restaurant traffic due to late-night munchies would provide fast food establishments with some sales boosts.

Naturally, the fact that pot will make us money is not, by itself, sufficient reason to legalize the stuff. The "gateway drug" argument is one often heard regarding this debate with people stating that if marijuana is legal, more people will try it and, so the argument goes, it will lead to more people trying harder drugs. On the surface, this argument seems to raise a valid concern, but let's us look at how the progression from marijuana to other drugs would take place in a legalized world. As the system exists today, marijuana serves as a gateway because it is perhaps the least offensive of illegal street drugs. When a person decides to take marijuana, they are breaking the law. But if this act was no longer illegal, than the people who preform would be law-abiding citizens. Marijuana serves as a gateway in large part because people who do it are already law-breakers, so doing it desensitizes them to breaking the law for the sake of illegal drugs. Take that away and much of marijuana's gateway influences will be taken away.

It is also interesting to note that there are other, already legal drugs on the market today that have a greater potential to cause harm to users than marijuana. For example, Salvia divinorum, of the sage family, induces effects similar to that of LSD, yet it is completely legal in 41 states (http://www.salviacenter.com/6.php). Sage. It's a natural plant that grows in the ground, much like pot. How can we keep naturally occurring illegal when we have so many legal, unnatural drugs to do oh so very unnatural things? Consider Viagra, Levitra, and Cialis. Legal? Yes. Natural? By no means.

Finally, let us consider an example that our grandparents set for us on legalization and black markets. The 1920s brought about a time of profound change in the United States, but perhaps the most interesting one was the inability to buy a drink legally. The consequences from this misguided attempt of preserving morals in the U.S. resulted in one of the most far-reaching black markets in American history. Finally, after just over a decade, the 21st Amendment to the Constitution was ratified and Americans could finally have a drink again. Not only were most people happier, but it ended the wide-reaching criminal networks that were smuggling alcohol into the U.S., thereby decreasing the amount of illegal activity. There has been speculation that legalizing pot would increase crime because many criminals and gangs are financed by drug sales. Yet what supporters of this theory fail to realize is that legalizing marijuana will reduce prices drastically because the process of acquiring it will be much simpler. This means that criminals will be cut out of the market because they will be unable to support themselves at such low prices and cutting this revenue will stop huge chunks of financing for gang activity and other criminal actions. If you're still unconvinced on this point, ask yourself when the last time you saw a bootlegger was.

So whereas Michael Phelps' poor party decision is likely to cost him thousands of dollars--Kellogg's announced yesterday that they will not renew their sponsorship of the swimmer that is set to end this month--legalizing marijuana could make millions, or even billions, of dollars for the United States, in addition to ending Prohibition-style black market financing. And while it does not seem as though the government is likely to change its stance any time soon, it would appear as though young people have no intention to change theirs either.