Read article below

Supporters Argue

Possessing marijuana should not be a crime punishable with jail time or heavy fines. The U.S. government wastes far too much money arresting, prosecuting, and jailing marijuana offenders. States should legalize marijuana and allow it to be sold on the retail market, using the generated tax revenue to fund drug awareness and treatment programs.

Opponents Argue

It is not true that marijuana is a harmless drug. Legalizing it would result in higher usage rates. Marijuana has posed serious public health problems in states that allow its use. Encouraging a commercial marijuana market will lead to the same abuses and immoral marketing techniques seen in the alcohol and tobacco industries.

Introduction

Federal law classifies marijuana as a Schedule I drug under the 1970 Controlled Substances Act (CSA), placing it alongside such illegal drugs as heroin, LSD, and MDMA (commonly known as ecstasy). The CSA imposes a punishment of up to one year in prison or up to a $1,000 fine for possession of marijuana, and these punishments increase if a defendant has previous drug convictions. Intent to distribute marijuana can garner up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000. Most state laws also treat the possession or sale of marijuana as a criminal offense punishable by jail time and large fines. (More than half of states make an exception for the use of "medical marijuana," prescribed by a doctor to help patients ease the symptoms of diseases ranging from cancer to glaucoma.)

The prohibition of marijuanaone of the most widely used and prosecuted illegal drugs in the United Stateshas been perhaps the most controversial aspect of the so-called war on drugs, which was launched under President Richard Nixon (R, 1969-74) and intensified under President Ronald Reagan (R, 1981-89). Over the past few decades, many observers have argued that the war on drugs has become extremely expensive and ineffective, imposing excessive punishments on nonviolent offenders and contributing to organized crime by pushing drug cultivation and sales underground.

Opponents of the war on drugs often argue that the government should either legalize or decriminalize marijuana. If legalized, it would become more widely accessible. If decriminalized, the possession of small amounts of marijuana would be considered a civil offense as opposed to a criminal offense, warranting punishment more along the lines of a speeding ticket than other, more serious, crimes. Decriminalization can come in two forms: de jure and de facto. De jure decriminalization indicates that a legislature has amended previous legislation or passed a new law officially changing penalties for marijuana-related offenses. Fourteen states have laws decriminalizing certain marijuana offenses. De facto decriminalization, which has occurred in several major cities, means that local law enforcement agencies have decided not to strictly target marijuana offenders, even though they have the legal authority to do so. City authorities often signal de facto decriminalization by announcing that marijuana offenses are a low priority for local police.

Some argue that the government should treat marijuana as it does alcohol or tobaccolegal, but taxed and regulated. This status, they contend, keeps harmful substances out of the underground market while imposing other measures to curb their use. Ten statesAlaska, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, and Washingtonand Washington, D.C., have legalized recreational marijuana. Those who buy, sell, or use marijuana in states where it is legal, however, are still vulnerable to prosecution under federal law.

The legalization of marijuana has won broad public support in the United States. A national Gallup poll has indicated that the proportion of Americans who favor legalization increased from 12 percent in 1969 to 66 percent in 2018. Though Democrats and younger Americans are more likely to support legalization, proposals have also gained support among libertarian-leaning Republicans.

Others, however, argue that marijuana should remain illegal. Smoking marijuana, they maintain, is an unhealthy, unproductive, and potentially addictive and developmentally damaging habit. Legalization, they contend, could send the wrong message to young potential users.

Should marijuana be legal?

Supporters of legalizing marijuana argue that the penalties imposed for nonviolent marijuana offenses are far too harsh. Legalization puts an end to the unwieldy costs and injustices caused by prohibition, they contend, and generates sorely needed tax revenue and economic growth in the process. Legalizing marijuana, they insist, frees up government resources to fund drug awareness and treatment programs that decrease drug use more effectively than do draconian penalties.

Opponents of legalizing marijuana argue that it will lead to higher rates of use of an addictive substance that poses many health risks. Legalization, they contend, sends the dangerous message to children and teenagers that drug use is acceptable. Popular misconceptions that marijuana is harmless are simply not true, they insist, and the public health problems that wider use will bring are not worth the supposed benefits of legalization.

Background

Policy Makers Question Prohibition of Marijuana

Marijuanathe common name for a plant known as Cannabis sativa, or cannabisis the most frequently used illegal drug in the United States. A poll conducted by Gallup in August 2018 indicated that 13 percent of Americans regularly used marijuana. The rate is significantly higher among young adults (18 to 29 years of age), however, with about 24 percentnearly one in fourusing it regularly or occasionally.

Marijuana, like many other recreational drugs, was legal throughout much of American history. In the early 20th century, however, a public health campaign against the drug led many states to outlaw it. In 1937, Congress passed the Marijuana Tax Act, which levied crippling regulations and taxes on marijuana growers, effectively outlawing the drug. During the 1960s, marijuana use became popular among the so-called counter-culture movement, which included many young Americans who protested U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War.

In 1970, President Nixon signed the Controlled Substances Act, which outlawed many addictive drugs. The law included marijuana on its list of the most harmful drugs, making the possession and sale of it a criminal act subject to harsh penalties. The following year, President Nixon cited illegal drug abuse as "public enemy number one" and launched what he called a national "war on drugs." In 1973, he signed legislation establishing the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), which was charged with enforcing federal drug laws.

In the following years, however, several states decriminalized marijuana, starting with Oregon in 1973. President Jimmy Carter (D, 1977-81) supported this trend. "Penalties against drug use should not be more damaging to an individual than the use of the drug itself," he said in a speech to Congress in 1977. "Nowhere is this more clear than in the laws against the possession of marijuana in private for personal use."

In the 1980s, many policy makers blamed illegal drug use for an increase in crime rates. Endorsing this notion, President Reagan intensified the war on drugs. In 1986, he signed the Anti-Drug Abuse Act, which, among other measures, imposed mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses. Under the law, an individual convicted of selling 100 kilograms (220 pounds) of marijuana could be sentenced to no less than 5 years in prison without the possibility of parole; a conviction of selling 1,000 kilograms (2,200 pounds) would result in a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years in prison without the possibility of parole.

Both the federal and state governments continued to embrace so-called tough-on-crime laws in the 1990s. In 1994, President Bill Clinton (D, 1993-2001) signed the Violent Crime Control Act, which further enhanced penalties for major drug trafficking offenses. According to the Clemency Report, a nonprofit group that promotes executive clemency for prisoners convicted of certain crimes, federal judges sentenced 54 people to life in prison for marijuana offenses from 1996 to 2014. Many state governments, meanwhile, have implemented so-called three-strikes measures, which impose harsh sentences on those convicted of three offenses, including drug-related crimes. Defendants in Missouri and Louisiana, for example, have received life sentences under three-strike laws for crimes involving marijuana.

The crackdown on crime and drug use in the 1980s and 1990s led to a drastic increase in the number of people imprisoned for possession of illegal drugs, including marijuana. Arrests for marijuana possession remain high today. "The nation's law enforcement agencies are still arresting people for possession of marijuana at near record-high rates," Washington Post reporter Christopher Ingraham wrote in September 2015. "In 2014, at least 620,000 people were arrested for simple pot possessionthat's 1,700 people per day, or more than 1 per minute. And that number is an undercount, because a handful of states either don't report arrest numbers to the FBI, or do so only on a limited basis."

Many also pointed out that a disproportionate number of those arrested for drug use were members of minority groups, particularly African Americans. According to the American Civil Liberties Union, a nonprofit group committed to protecting essential freedoms, blacks and whites use marijuana at roughly the same rates, but blacks are about four times more likely than whites to be arrested for possessing the drug.

The vast majority of people arrested for marijuana-related crimes are detained for simple possession. While such arrests do not always lead to incarceration, a record of a possession conviction can disqualify defendants from federal student aid, welfare benefits, and public housing opportunities, and, in some areas, can lead to the revocation of driver's licenses.

In response to what many view as overly aggressive penalties, some cities have moved to decriminalize marijuana. In 2007, for example, the residents of Denver, Colorado, voted for a measure that made arresting and prosecuting adults for marijuana possession the city's "lowest law-enforcement priority." Missoula, Montana; Seattle, Washington; and Oakland, San Francisco, and Santa Monica in California have approved similar de facto decriminalization measures. Such measures have also passed on the statewide level. In June 2015, for example, Delaware passed a bill reducing the penalty for possessing up to an ounce of marijuana from a $575 fine and up to three months in jail to a $100 fine and no possibility of jail time.

Thirty-three states, meanwhile, have legalized medical marijuanathe use of marijuana prescribed by a doctor to alleviate such symptoms as chronic pain, nausea, and anxiety. Whether marijuana actually has medicinal value is itself a topic of debate, one undercut by a dearth of controlled scientific studies. Because of marijuana's categorization as a Schedule I drug, researchers working with the plant must obtain federal approval for their studies. "Changing marijuana's schedule is a bit of a catch-22," Vox writer German Lopez noted in November 2014. "There needs to be a certain level of scientific research proving marijuana has medical value, but the federal government's restrictions make it difficult to conduct that research."

Colorado and Washington Become the First States to Legalize Recreational Marijuana

In November 2012, voters in Colorado and Washington approved initiatives that made it legal for adults over the age of 21 to buy and sell small amounts of marijuana for recreational purposes. Both measures limited how much consumers could purchase, both in smokable and edible form, and prohibited the use of marijuana in public. After the vote, various questions arose regarding how legalized marijuana use would be regulated and how state policies could help prevent abuses, such as the smuggling of marijuana across state borders, the sale of marijuana to minors, and the theft of marijuana from retail shops.

Retail marijuana stores opened in Colorado on New Year's Day, 2014, to long lines. "The biggest concerns of criticswhether the new policy will increase teen use or lead to marijuana trickling out of the state, for instancemay take months or years to assess," Christian Science Monitor journalist Amanda Paulson wrote in January 2014. "But so far, the biggest snarls have revolved around shortage of supply and long lines at the handful of dispensaries." Colorado, Paulson noted, requires dispensaries to grow most of the marijuana they sell themselves, potentially limiting supply. The state has also implemented regulations to prevent the illegal sale of unregulated marijuana, enacting a so-called seed-to-sale tracking system to account for every retail marijuana plant. The state also prohibits stores from selling more than one ounce of marijuana to Colorado residents and more than one quarter of an ounce of marijuana to out-of-state visitors in one transaction. (Consumers, however, can exceed these amounts by going to more than one shop per day.) Colorado state law also requires retail stores to have working video surveillance systems to deter marijuana theft.

In addition to legalizing marijuana sales, the Colorado measure made it legal for individuals to grow small amounts of the plant at home. Police have expressed concern, however, that growers could exceed their allotment and potentially move that marijuana to illegal markets in other states. Authorities in Nevada have claimed that seizures of marijuana at the border the state shares with Colorado have increased significantly since the law's passage.

Policy makers in Colorado have also made efforts to track the effects, if any, of legalization on traffic incidents. The science of studying the impact of THCthe ingredient in marijuana that induces a "high" in userson driving is still relatively new, and policy makers in Colorado and Washington have attempted to design the best methods of determining whether a driver is under the influence of the drug. Law enforcement agents currently use blood tests, though scientists disagree on how high the legal THC concentration limits for driving should be.

Other concerns have surrounded marijuana ediblesdrinks or food items containing THC. New users sometimes gravitate toward such products because they do not require smoking to feel the effects of the drug. Tourists, similarly, often buy edibles because some hotels prohibit smoking in rooms, and Colorado law prohibits them from smoking in public. Edibles, however, can contain powerful concentrations of THC, which may or may not be spread equally throughout the product. Recommended serving sizes of edibles (for example, one-sixth of a brownie) are sometimes much smaller than consumers realize, meaning that if they don't read the ingredients carefully they may ingest much more THC than they planned.

Edibles also take longer to have an effect than smokable marijuana, and if consumers are impatient or think the drug is not working, they might eat more and ingest too much THC. Edible marijuana is also sometimes packaged like candy, cookies, or brownies, and many have voiced the concern that children can mistake them for regular treats.

In 2014, a visiting college student in Denver jumped from a hotel balcony after eating six times the suggested amount of edible marijuana, and later that year a man allegedly shot and killed his wife after eating marijuana candy. Some authorities have also reported incidents of children going to the hospital after accidentally ingesting marijuana. In May 2014, Colorado implemented rules requiring edibles to be easily divided into single servings and required single-serving edibles and liquids to be sold in child-resistant packaging.

The taxation of marijuana has also prompted debate. In 2014, marijuana sales in Colorado totaled $700 million and generated $44 million in tax revenue. Colorado taxes recreational marijuana at a higher rate than medical marijuana, a discrepancy that, some observers argue, can be problematic. Legalization was in part intended to move so-called gray market purchaserspeople who bought medical marijuana without truly needing it for medicinal purposesto the recreational market, but the two-tiered tax policy undermines this aim. "Higher taxes on legal pot drive users toward the medical market," Washington Post journalist Niraj Chokshi wrote in August 2014, "defeating part of the purpose of legalized recreational use."

Washington, meanwhile, has instated more restrictive rules on legalized marijuana than Colorado. The state does not allow residents to grow marijuana in their homes and has been slower to distribute licenses for retail marijuana sales.

As marijuana legalization has spread in recent years, the cannabis industry has boomed. AbbVie, for example, an Illinois-based biopharmaceutical company that produces Marinol, a synthetic cannabis-based drug to relieve nausea for patients undergoing chemotherapy, is valued at $133 billion, while Terra Tech, a California-based agricultural company that cultivates strains of medical marijuana, is valued at $83 million, and declared earnings of $8.6 million for the first quarter of 2018. MedMen, another cannabis company, has production facilities and dispensaries in three states and employs nearly 700 workers. Several other businesses, such as General Cannabis Corp (Colorado) and Innovative Industrial Properties (California), are also investing in the marijuana business by providing cultivators and producers ancillary services such as real estate, consulting, and security.

In February 2018, the Cronos Group, a Canadian company, became the first marijuana business to trade on NASDAQ, a major U.S. stock exchange, and in May, Canopy Growth, another Canadian company, became the first such business on the New York Stock Exchange. Owing to the uncertainty surrounding marijuana regulation in the United States and the risk of federal intervention, several U.S. businesses have looked to Canada to sell their stock and expand their business. "I have a strong pipeline of Canadian and U.S. companies that have applied to list on the exchange," Richard Carleton, the chief executive officer of Canadian Securities Exchange, told CNBC in January 2018. "That tells me that there is a lot of room to grow in terms of build-out of the legal cannabis structure in the U.S."

On November 4, 2014, voters in Alaska and Oregon approved measures legalizing the possession, sale, and use of marijuana. Alaska marked the first predominantly Republican state to approve the drug. The same day, voters in Washington, D.C., a heavily Democratic city, endorsed a measure to legalize marijuana. The vote came eight months after Mayor Vince Gray signed a law decriminalizing possession of up to an ounce of marijuana. The new law established a "grow and give" regime, under which residents are allowed to grow and possess, but not sell, marijuana.

Marijuana legalization has raised new questions regarding inmates convicted of drug crimes. Some observers, for example, have argued that legalization should prompt authorities to pardon prisonersmany of whom are of minority descentincarcerated for nonviolent marijuana crimes. If business owners in Colorado, Washington and elsewhere are now able to profit from selling marijuana, some contend, no one should still be in jail for having done the same thing before it was legal.

Questions have also arisen over the enforcement of federal drug laws in states that have legalized marijuana. In August 2013, U.S. deputy attorney general James Cole sent a memorandum to all federal prosecutors directing them to allocate resources only for cases involving federal priorities, such as "preventing the distribution of marijuana to minors" or "preventing revenue from the sale of marijuana from going to criminal enterprises." Yet many banks and financial services firmsfearing federal intervention or investigationhave refused to handle profits derived from marijuana. Some marijuana business owners have reportedly taken to hiring armed guards to escort tax payments in cash to local and state agencies.

On Election Day in November 2016, voters in four statesCalifornia, Maine, Massachusetts, and Nevadaapproved ballot initiatives to legalize recreational marijuana. A similar measure was defeated in Arizona. Each of the new laws allows people to possess up to an ounce of marijuana for personal use.

The same day, voters elected Republican Donald Trump president. During the presidential campaign, Trump had argued that marijuana policy should be left "up to the states," and asserted that, as president, he would not support a federal crackdown in states that had legalized the drug. After winning the election, however, President Trump tapped Senator Jeff Sessions (R, Alabama) to become attorney general. Sessions, who would be in charge of the U.S. Department of Justice's policies regarding marijuana prosecutions, had long criticized efforts to legalize marijuana. In January 2018, he circulated a memo to federal prosecutors stating that "marijuana activity is a serious crime." Rescinding the Obama administration's 2013 guidance on the drug, Attorney General Sessions stated: "[S]tricter enforcement by prosecutors will help tackle the growing drug crisis, and thwart violent crime across our country."

More states, meanwhile, were implementing legalization as a result of the November 2016 referendums. Legalization took effect in Maine in January 2017, but opposition by Governor Paul LePage (R) delayed moves by the state to begin licensing retailers. Legalization took effect in Nevada on July 1, 2017, and in California on January 1, 2018. Legal marijuana sales in Massachusetts began in July 2018.

In Vermont, meanwhile, legalization took effect on January 22, 2018, with the law allowing possession of an ounce of marijuana by adults over the age of 21, who can also grow up to two plants of their own at home. "I personally believe that what adults do behind closed doors and on private property is their choice," Governor Phil Scott (R) said, "so long as it does not negatively impact the health and safety of others, especially children." The Vermont statute, however, did not allow legal sales of the drug, "Until we have a workable plan," Scott added, "I will veto any additional effort along these lines, which manages to reach my desk."

More states began legalizing medicinal and recreational marijuana in 2018. In June, Oklahoma voters approved a referendum on medicinal marijuana. In November, voters in Missouri and Utah followed suit, legalizing medicinal marijuana, and Michigan legalized recreational marijuana. On November 7, Attorney General Sessions resigned from office. Although the reasons for his resignation were unrelated to his drug policies, marijuana advocates rejoiced, and cannabis stocks rose sharplyCanopy Growth's stock jumped by 8.2 percent, Cronos Group's stock surged by 8.4 percent, and Tilray's by 31 percent.

On January 15, 2019, William Barr, President Trump's new nominee for attorney general, testified before the Senate. Unlike his predecessor, he said, he would not interfere with legal marijuana businesses. "I'm not going to go after companies that have relied on [the] Cole memorandum," he stated, referring to the memo that Sessions had revoked in 2018. "However," he added, "we either should have a federal law that prohibits marijuana everywhere, which I would support myself because I think it's a mistake to back off marijuana. However, if we want a federal approachif we want states to have their own lawsthen let's get there and get there in the right way." He also stated at the hearing that he would support the expansion of cannabis cultivation for scientific research. On February 14, the Senate confirmed Barr as the new attorney general.

Supporters Argue

Legalize Marijuana to End Unjust Prohibition

Supporters of legalizing marijuana argue that the ban on the drug has proven ineffective, expensive, and unjust. "The time is long overdue for us to remove the federal prohibition on marijuana," Senator Bernie Sanders (I, Vermont) said during a speech at George Mason University in October 2015. "In my view, states should have the right to regulate marijuana the same way that state and local laws now govern the sale of alcohol and tobacco."

Advocates contend that the legalization of marijuana in Colorado and Washington has not, as some critics predicted, led to an increase in crime or substance abuse. "The ominously predicted harms from legalizationlike blight, violence, soaring addiction rates and other illsremain imaginary worries," New York Times journalist Lawrence Downes wrote in an op-ed in August 2014. "Burglaries and robberies in Denver, in fact, are down from one year ago. The surge of investment and of jobs in construction, tourism and other industries, on the other hand, is real."

Indeed, supporters contend, the data show few negative effects stemming from marijuana legalization. A working paper issued by the Cato Institute, a nonprofit, libertarian think tank, in 2014, found that "changes in Colorado's marijuana policy have had minimal impact on marijuana use and the outcomes sometimes associated with use."

The costs of prohibition, proponents contend, are unsustainable. "The truth is, whether one likes it or not, it's financially and practically impossible to enforce existing marijuana laws against even a small percentage of marijuana users," Laurie Constantino, former chief prosecutor for the state of Alaska, wrote in an editorial in Alaska Dispatch News in October 2014. "Arresting and prosecuting all Alaskans who use marijuana would quadruple prison costs and require many new prisons."

The actual dangers of marijuana are far lower, advocates insist, than the impact of having a lifelong criminal record for using the drug. "The potential harm associated with smoking marijuana pales in comparison with the harm suffered by the millions who have been arrested, jailed and branded criminals simply because they were caught with the drug," Ohio State University professor Michelle Alexander wrote in the New York Times in May 2014. "[A]s a parent of black children, I can tell you that I'm far more worried about my kids going to jail and being relegated to a permanent second-class status than getting high."

Indeed, supporters argue, the enforcement of drug laws in the United States is racially biased. Journalist Glenn Greenwald, writing on Twitter in January 2018, pointed to statistics that indicate that, while the same numbers of whites and blacks use marijuana, far larger numbers of blacks are arrested for using the drug. "Imprisoning marijuana users is an inherently evil policy," Greenwald wrote. "But in the US, it's also an overwhelmingly racist one."

It makes no sense to outlaw marijuana, proponents charge, when alcohol and tobacco, which have much more insidious effects, remain lawful. "[M]arijuana is far less harmful to human health than most other banned drugs and is less dangerous than the highly addictive but perfectly legal substances known as alcohol and tobacco," New York Times editor Philip Boffey wrote in July 2014. "Marijuana cannot lead to a fatal overdose. There is little evidence that it causes cancer. Its addictive properties, while present, are low, and the myth that it leads users to more powerful drugs has long since been disproved."

Many supporters concede that smoking marijuana may not be healthy, but insist that the laws against it are disproportionately harsh. "I smoked pot as a kid, and I view it as a bad habit and a vice, not very different from the cigarettes that I smoked as a young person up through a big chunk of my adult life," President Barack Obama (D, 2009-17) told the New Yorker in January 2014. "I don't think it is more dangerous than alcohol."

The federal guidance issued by Attorney General Jeff Sessions in January 2018, advocates of legalization argue, will cause mass confusion in states that have already moved to allow recreational marijuana. "This is going to create chaos in the dozens of states whose voters have chosen to regulate medical and adult use marijuana rather than leaving it in the hands of the criminals," Neil Franklin of the Law Enforcement Action Partnership, a group that supports the legalization of marijuana, argued in a statement in January 2018. "If enforcement of laws are subject to the whims of individual prosecutors, no one will have any idea what is legal or what isn'tbecause it could change from day to day."

Opponents Argue

Legalization Encourages Harmful Drug Use

Opponents of legalizing marijuana argue that the substance is harmful and addictive. "No, marijuana is not as dangerous as cocaine or heroin," Kevin Sabet, former senior adviser in the White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy and founder of the group Smart Approaches to Marijuana, which advocates marijuana policy reform but not legalization, wrote in the Daily Signal in 2014, "but calling it harmless or non-addictive denies very clear science embraced by every major medical association that has studied the issue."

Critics point to scientific reports that document the negative repercussions of habitual marijuana use. "[T]he rush to legalize marijuana gives usand we hope votersserious pause," a Washington Post editorial argued in September 2014. "The active ingredient in marijuana has been linked to memory problems, impaired thinking and weakened immune systems, not to mention it acts as a gateway to more dangerous drugs."

Such ills can be particularly detrimental to children and teenagers, opponents warn. "Dangers are more pronounced for young people," the Post asserted. "A study just published...reported that teenagers who smoke marijuana daily are 60 percent less likely to complete high school."

Legalization, critics maintain, provides a veneer of acceptance that will encourage more young people to try marijuana. "Where marijuana is legal, young people are more likely to use it," Governor Charlie Baker (R), state attorney general Maura Healey (D), and Boston mayor Martin Walsh (D) wrote in the Boston Globe in March 2016. "Regular use that starts in adolescence has been shown to impair brain development, shrink school and career outcomes, and even lower IQ. With the high THC levels in marijuana todayit's up to seven times more potent than it was in the 1970sabout one in six users who start as teenagers become physically dependent."

Legalization, critics charge, has already had negative consequences on public health and public safety. "I think, by any measure, the experience of Colorado has not been a good one unless you're in the marijuana business," Sabet told the New York Times in May 2014. "We've seen lives damaged. We've seen deaths directly attributed to marijuana legislation. We've seen marijuana slipping through Colorado's borders. We've seen marijuana getting into the hands of kids."

Some opponents have questioned whether treating marijuana like alcohol, as some supporters have urged, is the best alternative to prohibition. "[T]he commercial imperative to move the product in volume will give the cannabis industry the same incentive the alcohol industry now has to encourage excessive use," Mark A. R. Kleiman, a public policy professor at the University of California in Los Angeles, wrote in Slate in November 2014. "And we can also expect the legal cannabis industry to lobby as fiercely against adequate levels of taxation and regulation as the alcohol lobby does, very successfully, today."

Others argue that just because alcohol and tobacco are legal is no justification to make another drug legal. "Marijuana is a dangerous, mind-altering drug," a report released by the DEA in 2010 stated. "The same can be said of alcohol and tobaccoboth legal drugs.... How could anyone argue that adding a third substance to that mix is going to be beneficial?"

Opponents also argue that Attorney General Jeff Sessions was right to instruct federal prosecutors to take a more aggressive stance in pursuing marijuana offenders. "This is a good day for public health," Sabet argued in a statement in January 2018. The Justice Department's move, Sabet contended, "will slow down the rise of Big Marijuana and stop the massive infusion of money going to fund pot candies, cookies, ice creams, and other kid-friendly pot edibles."

Conclusion

The Future of Drug Policy in the United States

Many drug policy reform advocates predict that several more states will choose to decriminalize or legalize marijuana in the near future. Substantiating this viewpoint are polls showing that increasing numbers of Americans support changing laws to make marijuana legal and taxable.

Resistance to decriminalizing and legalizing marijuana, however, remains strong. A federal law legalizing the substance would eradicate uncertainty surrounding the operation of dispensaries in states that have legalized recreational marijuana. Many legislators, however, have argued that the issue should continue on a state-by-state basis, and congressional action remains unlikely. It remains up to the discretion of federal prosecutors whether to target marijuana activity in states that have legalized the drug.

Answer questions:

1. What is the issue? Why is it an issue? Why did you choose the issue? Why is it significant to social welfare policy and social work practice?
2. List a summary of the main arguments of both sides.
   1. Pros
   2. Cons
3. Give a summary of NASW's policy statement on it. (The National Association of Social Workers (NASW) publishes a policy text, Social Work Speaks, which provides frameworks from which to view the issues and values. It includes updated policy statements on topics. For this assignment, you need to check the policy statement about the issue in Social Works Speaks.)
   1. What is NASW's position and how does the organization justify this position
   2. Which side is the most convincing and why?
   3. What is your position on the issue and why? (*Neutral position is not allowed.)
   4. How is your position congruent with social work values?
   5. Whether you agreed with the NASW prior to the assignment or not, had reading the position statement on the issue changed your way of thinking? How? If you have a conflict with one of NASW's policy statements, how will you handle it in your career as a social worker?