Do you support Ballot Question Four which would legalize the sale of recreational marijuana in Massachusetts? If so or if not why?
How will you vote on ballot question 4 (legalizing marijuana)?
by Greg Reibman | Oct 14, 2016 | Elections | 28 comments
Hundreds of new businesses. Thousands of new jobs. Billion$ pumped into the Massachusetts economy. All on the line with this vote.
Even more significantly, this vote is about freedom. Americans are fond of saying we live in a “free country,” or reflecting on those who have “fought for our freedoms.” Yet, many times over the years we have allowed religious conservatives within our own government to oppress individual freedom. Civil rights, a woman’s right to choose, marriage equality, and marijuana legalization are all in fact the same issue at their core… freedom. Embrace it!
It is a victim-less crime and there is no logic in putting people in a cage for smoking a plant. As we have seen in the past month with the helicopter raid of granny’s “pot farm” in Western Mass, law enforcement is far too heavy-handed in enforcing marijuana laws. If you vote no, you are voting to continue this sort of nonsensical waste of taxpayer dollars and police resources. With this ballot question, the drug will be regulated and taxed by the state, just like alcohol. I am voting YES, and I don’t even care for smoking the stuff.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/10/07/drug-cops-raid-an-81-year-old-grandmothers-garden-to-take-out-a-single-marijuana-plant/
Legalize it.
Voting for it. There’s a lot of potential economic benefit, and there is no reasonable legal or moral justification for continuing this ban. The “gateway” argument is utter BS in my opinion.
Definitely voting Yes on 4. Agree with everything said above.
I’d planned on voting Yes in part because the state of MA has been so slow in and resistent to opening up medical marijuana dispensaries. Then a friend pointed out that the legalization of marijuana could in fact have a negative effect on the establishment of dispensaries that provide the it for medicinal purposes. The availability of medicinal marijuana is the priority for me. So now I’m torn…
My mom and dad took us into Boston regularly during the 40’s and 50’s and we always made it a point to hit South Station an hour or so before the Highland branch train would leave for Newton. South Station had a movie theater in those days that showed news reels and short features. That was my first introduction to two or three short features I remember that made false and outlandish claims about how marijuana would cause people to rape, murder, commit suicide and generally to act crazy in any number of dangerous ways. This propaganda was regularly fed to people from the 1930’s right up to the present. We are debating the legalization of marijuana today because of all the lies and scare tactics used against it for most of the 20th century and even into this century. People have been incarcerated, lost jobs, scholarships and a lot of other benefits because of lies and distortions. I have never used marijuana and may never use it. But I don’t want anyone telling me I can’t when far more dangerous drugs are legal. Yes marijuana can be abused, but so can ice cream. Maybe it’s my advanced age, but I’m getting less tolerant of nonsense the older I get and not making possession legal is pure nonsense.
Legalize it – reasons posted above.
A bit of a digression here RE: medical marijuana, what I don’t understand is that if it is indeed “medicine” in this context, why is it not sold at pharmacies? Why must we create a whole new infrastructure and new bureaucracies when we already have those set up for pharmacies?
It’s not legal nationally, I think is the main reason.
@Ann. I’ve been asking myself the same question. I think one reason is because too much of the political leadership can’t bring themselves to totally break with the lies and distortions that were so widely disseminated in past decades. Again, this is written by someone who has never used marijuana and who probably never will use it and by one who also concedes that very heavy use of the substance can produce a range of serious health effects.
While in the Navy, I was stationed for 2 years in Morocco which has bountiful supplies of some of the World’s best hashish . On one occasion, our executive officer gave us a “leadership” briefing on drug and alcohol abuse. The gist of what he said from a paper prepared by the Navy, was that alcohol abuse damaged the heart, liver, nervous system, judgment, morals etc. and should be used only in moderation and certainly not consumed on a daily basis. (This at a time when we could buy bottles of Heineken, Lowenbrau and Amstel for 10 cents a pop at the officers beer mess; actually 5 cents when there were surplus funds in the beer mess treasury. ) Then the paper the XO was reading from went on to state that a lot of the health concerns about marijuana were probably not true or overblown and it didn’t seem to have most of the serious side effects of alcohol; but under no circumstances were we to buy or purchase it because we would lose our top secret security clearance and probably get kicked out of the Navy if we did. It’s clear we haven’t climbed completely out of this insanity.
Agree completely Bob. From my experience as a prior Army brat and Navy wife, I am convinced service in the military contributed to producing many an alcoholic. I knew many who smoked marijuana, illegally of course, and were in more control than the ones drinking.
I had an interesting conversation yesterday at Harvest Fair with an artist/exhibitor from Colorado. I can’t even remember how the subject came up, but she emphatically told me and another local resident “vote No.” I want to do some internet research and also check with my nephew in Denver for his impressions, but this is some of what she told me:
— real estate prices are being driven up, pricing out local residents because out of state people are moving there because they can use marijuana legally, and because the growers, needing a place to put their profits, are buying up real estate. She’s moving back East partly because she can’t afford to live there.
— Colorado has very strict regulations about taking water from aquifers. She says the growers are getting around that by building huge buildings and drilling the wells inside the buildings, and using huge amounts of water, and no one is cracking down on it. The state is happy with the tax revenue.
— People who used to grow marijuana illegally formed companies to grow legally but still behave illegally, evading taxes.
As I said, I need to find out more, but the water and environmental aspect would be particularly concerning given the current drought.
Other people I know are concerned about the “edibles” aspect, and keeping children from getting access. And I’ve gotta say, I like Gary Johnson but his “Aleppo moments” are not a great advertisement for long-term brain impact of marijuana.
Julia, I really don’t understand any of these arguments against legalization. Many legal crops consume a lot of water, and many professionals in legal trades evade taxes. You don’t hear a lot of people wanting to make almonds illegal or ban house cleaning services for these reasons. And I don’t understand what real estate prices have to do with whether or not something should be legal. If anything, legalization can give an economic boost to the rural parts of the state (but again, that’s irrelevant). Not every negative effect is a reason for banning something.
Julia, I’m having trouble understanding why your conversation with a woman you know nothing about caused you to post fearful inducing reasons not to legalize marijuana before finding out more.
As for Gary Johnson, there is a lot more than his Aleppo moment to be concerned about. Here’s a link to a Boston.com article about last night’s Jon Oliver’s humorous breakdown of the third party candidates. https://www.boston.com/culture/entertainment/2016/10/17/john-oliver-isnt-impressed-by-the-policies-of-gary-johnson-and-jill-stein
Julia posted so much incorrect information that it would take too long to respond to each point. Much of this disinformation originates with a loose knit coalition of cannabis reform opponents. Those folks have no sensible arguments left, so they throw nonsense out for public consumption and hope it sticks….
Jane mentioned one of these talking points earlier, in questioning whether legalized marijuana would have a “negative effect on the establishment of [medical marijuana] dispensaries.” The answer is no, legalized marijuana will not effect patient access to medical marijuana….
The fact is, dispensaries have been slow to open here in Massachusetts, because most in government opposed the medical marijuana ballot initiative, didn’t understand how to implement it, and in some cases made deliberate efforts to block dispensaries…
Ann asked a great question about why medical marijuana is not made available at pharmacies. For many years the pharmaceutical industry has been hostile toward cannabis. Medical grade cannabis and its extracted forms of THC, directly compete with many products pushed by pharmaceutical companies. Those companies have little ability to patent cannabis products, and they cannot gain financial control of the supply chain.
Just to follow up my last post… I would suggest people visit the following website…
http://www.leafly.com
Leafly is a resource site for all things cannabis. It’s very informative. Take a look.
A few concerns with ballot question as written:
1) Missed opportunity for tax revenue. If passes sales will have a 3.75% sales tax, and up to 2% additional local tax. By comparison in Washington State the tax is 37%, in Colorado 29%, and in Oregon and Alaska 25%
2) No public health oversight or body with authority to regulate. Only a three member commission appointed by the state treasurer.
3) No revenue earmarked for public health, addiction treatment, or education. All revenue (after administration expenses paid) goes to general fund.
In general I’m supportive of legalization for recreational use, but am disappointed by above not being included in the ballot question.
@Newbie– Most of the grow facilities licensed in Massachusetts have financial agreements with their host communities. Some of these payments are quite large, as high as 10% of gross revenue. You have to include those payments to properly calculate the effective tax rate.
This one’s a no-brainer. I’m voting yes. I’m so disappointed in Charlie Baker and Marty Walsh for pushing the nonsense that marijuana is a gateway drug. People don’t die from smoking marijuana. If it’s going to lead to other drugs, it won’t matter whether it’s legal or not. People who want to try other drugs will try them, regardless of the legality of cannabis. If people smoked/vaped/ate marijuana instead of taking opioids for pain, we’d likely have fewer deaths from drugs.
It’s great to see an almost unanimous “yes” on Village 14. Let’s hope it is somewhat representative of the general population.
I *just* started reading about this, but as of the moment I would vote NO. It’s already decriminalized in the state and becoming more available for medical purposes. But I’m not convinced it’s safe recreationally, especially considering that the drug available today is much more potent than what was available in the 60s and 70s, possibly addictive. The idea of kids consuming it via edibles and possible long term health/brain effects has me a little worried. The profit motive – increased tax revenue and economic activity – seems like a terrible basis for making decision like this which affects public health. I am aware of the dubious history of the criminalizing of marijuana but that seems irrelevant to me. The question is whether it is safe for adults and kids, and whether it’s a good thing to have it widely available for recreational use no questions asked. So I may change my mind by Nov 8 but right now I’m not compelled to vote yes.
“If people smoked/vaped/ate marijuana instead of taking opioids for pain, we’d likely have fewer deaths from drugs.” This is the most compelling reason for me to vote yes because the options for pain medication are truly frightening. That being said, Steve’s arguments are a concern. Still undecided on this one.
@Steven Feinstein– I’m not authorized to hand out prizes, but you should get the Reefer Madness Award for that post. You’re “not convinced it’s safe recreationally,” and that opinion is your basis for suppressing a multi-billion dollar industry and keeping other adults from legally smoking cannabis? And clearly you’ve swallowed this edibles fear mongering that Charlie Baker and Marty Walsh have been pushing. There are lots of non-food consumer products that come in edible form, including weigh loss supplements, over-the-counter medications and even many flavored prescription pharmaceuticals. The way to keep these products out of kid’s hands is through proper labeling, packaging, and adult supervision.
Put me down as undecided. I’d really like to vote yes on this but feel conflicted by two lost opportunities:
The low tax rate.
Lack of restrictions on potency.
Part of me wants to wait for a better written law, which I believe would eventually come, But I get the yes arguments.
Gummy and sour patch vitamins, bubblegum, grape and cherry cough syrup and pain killers, multi flavored, chewable aspirin, Tums that look and taste like tic tacs and many other edibles I won’t cover. Good grief. Keep them away from children like with cigarettes and liquor. Lock them up like other meds when you have children.
“Possibly addictive …”
Positively addictive – alcohol, narcotics, opioids, cigarettes.
I share Greg’s concerns about potency and the low tax rate but I feel better knowing that if this passes, the legislature can improve upon it. For me Q4 is about whether I want marijuana to be regulated and legal for adult consumption. I say yes.
I’ll vote no. A lot of what Steve Feinstein said is correct. Beyond this, I see it as just one more step taken by western society in its descent into lack of morality and higher level values. But this is a debate for another time and one that the short-sighted progressives on this blog can’t come close to comprehending.