Photogprahy courtesy of Torben Hansen, Wikimedia Commons
Advocates of marijuana legalization in Missouri have decided to wait until 2016 to put a proposal on a statewide ballot. John Payne, executive director of Show-Me Cannabis, and Dan Viets, a Show-Me Cannabis board member and the attorney behind marijuana decriminalization in Columbia, Mo., have their reasons for opting of a vote this year. They expect Oregon and Alaska to follow Colorado and Washington in legalizing marijuana, and they're optimistic that Missouri will join those ranks with a vote during the presidential election in 2016.
Do you feel that support for marijuana legalization in Missouri is trending upward? Will support be more substantial by 2016?
Payne: Support is definitely trending upward, and that has been confirmed by every poll of which I am aware over the last three years. Ever since the Gallup Poll first indicated a majority of Americans supported legalizing and regulating cannabis like alcohol, in 2011, that finding has been confirmed in poll after poll. Even our poll of likely 2014 Missouri voters indicates that a majority of all Missourians support legalization. But, unfortunately, a lot of Missourians won’t show up at the polls on Election Day this year, and those people are disproportionately supporters of legalization. So it’s not just that support for legalization is growing over time, but that many people who already support it will actually vote during the presidential election in 2016. Younger voters are the most supportive demographic by age, and we expect that trend to hold.
Viets: We know that 2016 is different because of the difference in the demographics of voters. Those who vote in November 2014—with only one statewide race, for auditor, on the ballot—will be those who vote in every single election. These voters are much older, and therefore less likely to support our cause. Our strength is among younger voters who unfortunately tend to vote only when there is a race for president. All "progressive" issues do better in presidential elections for this reason. Polling clearly shows that a majority of Missouri voters favor our cause, just not a majority of those who will vote this November. Support is growing rapidly. Gallup, in October of last year, showed a 10 percent increase in support in just 12 months; they showed that nationally 58 percent of American voters support legalization, and support is growing fast. They showed that support is remarkably uniform throughout the country.
Are there lessons to learn from the decriminalization in Columbia?
Viets: What Show-Me Cannabis proposes is to tax and regulate marijuana like alcohol. Columbia decriminalized, but did not legalize, marijuana possession in 2004. That means no arrest, no bond, no jail, and no criminal-conviction record. The maximum fine is $250, but most get suspended imposition of sentence and probation, which means no conviction and no permanent public record. The ordinance requires the police to use it consistently and not send such cases to the county prosecutor for criminal prosecution. This feature is unique in the nation. When St Louis adopted an ordinance based on Columbia's last year, it left cops with the discretion to send cases to state court. Otherwise, the St. Louis law is almost verbatim what Columbia voters passed in '04. Because one loses eligibility for any form of federal aid to education if one is convicted in state court, this preserves such assistance for those charged under it. Most of the students at MU and other colleges and universities across the country cannot go to school without federal student loans. There have been no major problems with the policy here in Columbia, and we are working on expanding it to include not only possession of up to 35 grams, but also personal use cultivation of up to six plants as well.
Some historical accounts from the mid-1800s had Missouri and Kentucky as the two states growing the most hemp. Does the potential of marijuana as a cash crop help the chances of legalization?
Payne: I think it could be, and we certainly try to highlight that history as much as we can. However, for whatever reason, the Missouri Farm Bureau opposes industrial hemp, which now sets them at odds with the American Farm Bureau. They seem convinced that people grow marijuana amidst the hemp plants, but if you know anything about raising either of those crops, that is an incredibly stupid idea.
What's your answer to those who argue that legalization is another example of society’s crumbling ethics and lack of discipline?
Viets: I haven’t heard that argument made—at least not in those terms. But we all assume there are people who just think marijuana is "immoral," but think the use of alcohol and tobacco are "moral." This is, of course, obviously absurd and indefensibly inconsistent. Recent polls show that only 20 percent of voters now hold the view that marijuana use is "immoral.”
What was the logic of introducing a bill in the legislature?
Viets: The logic was, in part, to keep this issue on the public agenda. It was also to force legislators to confront this issue and give their constituents a reason to contact them. In Kirksville last week, I was on a panel with Rep. Nate Walker, a Republican who is very supportive of the need for reform. We are making inroads with both parties in Jefferson City.
Do you think some of the opposition to legalization will come from those who might lose drug forfeiture money from marijuana busts, as government budgets are tight?
Payne: Yes, but primarily only the narcotics agents and agencies. They are the only groups who rely almost entirely on asset forfeiture dollars for funding. It is possible to quantify how much money they gain through forfeitures and then to break down specifically by what type of drug seizure the assets were associated, but that is largely research that still needs to be conducted.
Can legalizing marijuana decrease underage access to it?
Viets: Just as [the alcohol] law does indeed reduce—but not eliminate—access to alcohol for those under 21, taxed and regulated marijuana will do so as well. Presently, marijuana dealers do not card. There is no regulation whatsoever. Dealers also pay no taxes. Most businesses would love to have a government price support program without any regulation and no taxes. So the only people who really benefit from marijuana prohibition are drug dealers, just as only bootleggers and speakeasy operators benefitted from liquor prohibition.
