The use of marijuana and its legalization have become important issues in the US domestic policy as well as in public debates. The fact that two states have already legalized marijuana for recreational use means that this practice can be applied to other states as well and marijuana can be fully decriminalized. The widespread use of marijuana among people of different ages and their positive attitude to marijuana as legal phenomena of American society make us argue in favor of its legalization. The essay will present main arguments, according to which marijuana should be legalized in the US. These arguments are freedom of choice under the US democracy, relative harm from marijuana in comparison to cigarettes and alcohol used on a daily basis, and legalization as a means of combatting the black market.
The US democracy is based on people’s right to express their will towards solution of one or the other problem, therefore the majority’s will to legalize marijuana needs to be taken into consideration. The history of the use of marijuana clearly showed how the status of marijuana varied from the majority’s opinion. Marijuana was widely used for medical purposed and officially recognized in the US Pharmacopoeia in 1850. During the Prohibition Era of 1930s marijuana was used for recreational purposes only. In 1937, the Marijuana Tax Act decreased the use of it significantly through high taxes, but did not criminalize it. Only in 1970 the Controlled Substances Act made marijuana an illicit drug and its possession a federal crime (Lustman& Lynn 91). Nevertheless the fact that making marijuana illegal and establishing criminal persecution for using it did not solve the problem is obvious. According to Governance Studies at Brookings, support for marijuana’s decriminalization grew significantly among major demographic and political groups (men, women, white, black, Hispanic, republican, democrats etc.). This tendency dates back to 1980s when average support for marijuana was about 20%. By 2013, almost 60% of the US population shows support for legal marijuana (Galston& Dionne 6). To make the argument even stronger one needs to mention the increasing support for decriminalization between both parties. 37% of Republicans as well as 61% of Democrats favor legalization. This tendency can be explained by the fact that 43% of Republicans and 47% of Democrats reported the past use of marijuana. These figures show narrowing ideological gap between two parties and facilitate their cooperation in dealing with this issue. Despite the fact that marijuana is illegal in the US almost half the population has tried it at least once in their life. In 2013 this figure was 48%, 70% out of which tried marijuana “just for fun” (Dimock 2). The number of politics and regular people who used marijuana is astonishing, and it cannot be disregarded when talking about democratic rights of a citizen to articulate his interests in domestic policy. The congress, elected by American people, needs to represent people’s will, not contradict it. In case the majority’s opinion encourages decriminalization of marijuana the politicians need to initiate public debates and monitor public opinion to make the right decision. The history of marijuana usage clearly pointed that the more people are restricted in their desires, the more they want them to come true. The similar situation can be observed in 1920s, when the Volstead Act, also known as Nation Prohibition Act, prohibited sale, use and production of alcoholic beverages. This caused negative reaction among population as well as alcohol related crimes, police corruption and binge drinking. The effects of alcohol prohibition were so serious that in 1932 election the Democratic Party platform included anti-prohibition plank and Roosevelt won presidency promising repeal. In 1933 the National Prohibition Act became unenforceable (“National Prohibition Act”). This historical case with alcohol shows that legalization of marijuana will only represent current opinion of the majority, which is applicable to modern concepts of democracy and human right to choose whatever is better for their community. The fact that almost 1 million people was imprisoned for marijuana related issues does not mean that all these people are guilty, but simply means that legislature that regulates this sphere is not effective anymore.
The widespread of marijuana among Americans (about 12% of them used marijuana in the past year) raises question about black market that supplies this enormous demand (Dimock2). Legalization of marijuana will make it taxable and therefore will provide additional revenues to government. The world known economists, such as Milton Friedman, George Akerlof, and Vernon Smith together with almost 500 other scientists argue for legalization of marihuana from tax revenue position (Grammy 2). The economists argue that marijuana when taxed as a regular product can bring about $20 billion benefits that include not only tax revenue, but also police protection and judicial and legal spending. Abbas P. Grammy argues that prohibition eventually ends like in 1930s and education becomes the main vehicle to control the demand (Grammy 3). Alex Kreit reviewed the Netherlands’ case to show how legalized marijuana can be beneficial for the country. He clearly pointed that marijuana should not be subjected to marketing technologies and should be sold on retail basis. The Netherlands’ case study proved the efficacy of this theory: “the Dutch citizens use cannabis at more modest rates than some of their neighbors, and do not appear to be particularly likely to escalate their use relative to counterparts in Europe and the United States” (Kreit 1033) In contrast to Colorado’s and Washington’s commercial manufacture of marijuana the Netherlands use more moderate strategy of spreading marijuana limited to special coffee shops for tourists. Therefore, one needs clearly define in what way marijuana will become available on the market. In case manufactures use marketing technologies and low prices there is a threat that marijuana will be spread among people even more than under ban, as it will be legal. However if one conducts moderate policy and does not promote marijuana use through commercials the results can be promising. Another important point of the argument is elimination of the marijuana black market. Currently more than 17 million of the US people get cannabis there, as there are no legal means to get it. Legalization will result in market competition between legal and black markets. Although black market will not be diminished at once and will try to decrease prices, the issue of safety and legality will still matter. People who are not addicted to marijuana and do not use it on a regular basis will definitely choose to buy some cannabis from official distributor rather than searching for black market dealers. The current rate of marijuana users is constantly growing: from 5.8% or 14.4 million users in 2007 to 16.7 million users or 6.6% of total population in 2009 (Lustman& Lynn 91). This statistics shows that governmental policies aimed at enforcing marijuana ban do not work properly although consume state’s budget. Legalization will direct those money spent on marijuana law enforcement to education and other social programs that will enable to prepare young generation to understanding all drawbacks of cannabis usage.
The previous argument leads us to the last one regarding health impacts of marijuana. Although the topic is quite contradictive, the argument is that people use marijuana not on such regular basis as alcohol and cigarettes and therefore cause less harm by prohibited marijuana than by legal alcohol and tobacco. According to Edward Fisher and Kristen Bamberg 100,000 people die as a result of alcohol abuse and 430,000 people as a result of tobacco abuse (1). Although the health impact of alcohol and tobacco is not that extremely toxic, both cause addiction that leads to chronic diseases. 40% of emergency rooms are filled with alcohol related diseases (Bamberg & Fisher 4). Alcohol affects mostly liver, while nicotine heart. Nicotine and alcohol are always combined, which severs their impact on human health. Cannabis causes many similar adverse effects, however marijuana does not contain known carcinogens and therefore does not cause lung cancer alone. Moreover the tests conducted by the UCLA showed that cannabis scored lower in both addiction and harm than legal drugs, alcohol and tobacco (Finkbeiner). The journal Scientific American in its article also stressed on this fact by pointing out that moderate use of marijuana increases lung volume while cigarettes decrease it (Wanjek). These factors together with lower addiction and consuming rate make cannabis safer than legal drugs, such as alcohol and tobacco. Therefore, marijuana should be legalized due to its less harmful effects than legal drugs have.
Of course there are many counterarguments at this point, especially health and moral. According to Wayne Hall and Nadia Solowij, cannabis causes psychomotor impairment, chronic respiratory diseases, immunity problems and reproduction problems (1613). These facts cannot be denied, however like any other drug or even food cannabis has lethal effects only when abused. People will more likely try cannabis when it is prohibited rather than when it is available in every drug store. Another argument regards morality. It claims that cannabis like other drugs impacts the whole society by “spoiling” traditions and values. The cannabis users are demonized by society that wants certain model of behavior from them. Moreover, smoking marijuana breaks the law established to keep community safe and those who smoke disrespect the community they live in. The counterargument can be rejected by statistics, according to which the proportion of Americans who see cannabis use as immoral decreased from 50% to 32% (Galson& Dionne 1). This clearly points at the fact that more than two thirds of American does not see cannabis usage as something that breaks morality of the society. This is another claim that marijuana needs to be legalized.
CONCLUSION
The essay argued for legalization of marijuana using three different approaches: civil, economic, and medical. It was shown that majority of Americans approve legalization of cannabis and have their citizen right to vote for it. It is the party’s duty to represent its electorate and pass the decriminalizing law as it was done in Colorado and Washington. Moreover, legalization of cannabis will benefit state’s economy by increasing revenue from taxes and fighting black market. The health arguments, although contradictive, clearly point at necessity of responsible use of marijuana to avoid lethal health problems. Nevertheless it was shown that cannabis is less harmful in long-term perspective as legal drugs, such as tobacco and alcohol. Changing attitudes of the society rejected the moral counterargument. The number of moral argument’s supporters decreased from 50% to 32%, which enhances the arguments provided in the essay.
Works Cited
Abbas P. Grammy. Economic Benefits of Marijuana Legalization. Economic Research Center, 2012. Print. 24 Nov. 2013. < http://www.csub.edu/kej/documents/economic_rsch/2012-03-26.pdf>
Dimock,Michael. Majority Now Supports Legalizing Marijuana. PewResearchCenter, 2013. Web. 25 Nov. 2013. < http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/4-4-13 Marijuana Release.pdf>
Dionne E.J. Jr, and GalstonA., William.The New Politics of Marijuana Legalization: Why Opinion is Changing. Governance Studies at Brookings, 2013. Web. 25 Nov. 2013.< http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2013/05/29 politics marijuana legalization galston dionne/dionne galston_newpoliticsofmjleg_final.pdf>
Finkbeiner, Brad. "Alcohol VS. Marijuana: Which is the More Dangerous Drug?" N.p., 2010. Web. 26 Nov. 2013. <http://infohost.nmt.edu/~paydirt/j/index.php/archives/156-a-vs-m>.
Fisher, Edward, and Kristen Bamberg. The Treatment of Addiction and Withdrawal Associated with Tobacco and Alcohol.N.p., Web. 25 Nov. 2013 < http://www.inetce.com/articles/pdf/221-146-04-063-H01.pdf>
Hall, Wayne, and Solowij,Nadia. Adverse effects of cannabis.The Lancet, 1998. Web. 25 Nov. 2013.< http://www.ukcia.org/research/AdverseEffectsOfCannabis.pdf>
Kreit, Alex. The Federal Response to State Marijuana Legalization: Room for Compromise?.Oregon Law Review, 2013. Web. 25 Nov. 2013.< http://law.uoregon.edu/org/olr/volumes/91/2/documents/Kreit.pdf>
LustmanJ., Patrick and Lynn, Taylor Andrea. "Legalization,Decriminalization& Medicinal Use of Cannabis:." Missouri Medicine 109.2 (2012): 90-98. Web. 25 Nov. 2013.< http://www.msma.org/docs/communications/momed/Medicinal_Use_Cannabis.pdf>
"National Prohibition Act." WWW2 Webserver. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Nov. 2013. <http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/Controversies/National-Prohibition-Act.html#.UpYgPmTk-Fc>.
Wanjek, Christopher. "Casual Marijuana Smoking Not Harmful to Lungs: Scientific American." Science News, Articles and Information | Scientific American.N.p., Jan. 2012. Web. 26 Nov. 2013. <http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=casual-marijuana-smoking>.
