Q4: Legalize Recreational Marijuana

[aldend123]

I was of the understanding that it's not "Vote yes to legalize pot" it's "Vote yes if you want MA to consider legalizing pot"... ie, start the process of legalization and work on the best way to do it.

Elections: 2016 Ballot Questions

The proposed law would take effect on December 15, 2016.

A YES VOTE would allow persons 21 and older to possess, use, and transfer marijuana and products containing marijuana concentrate (including edible products) and to cultivate marijuana, all in limited amounts, and would provide for the regulation and taxation of commercial sale of marijuana and marijuana products.

However, you might be referring to:

The measure would create a Cannabis Control Commission of three members appointed by the state Treasurer which would generally administer the law governing marijuana use and distribution, promulgate regulations, and be responsible for the licensing of marijuana commercial establishments. The proposed law would also create a Cannabis Advisory Board of fifteen members appointed by the Governor. The Cannabis Control Commission would adopt regulations governing licensing qualifications; security; record keeping; health and safety standards; packaging and labeling; testing; advertising and displays; required inspections; and such other matters as the Commission considers appropriate. The records of the Commission would be public records.
The proposed law would authorize cities and towns to adopt reasonable restrictions on the time, place, and manner of operating marijuana businesses and to limit the number of marijuana establishments in their communities. A city or town could hold a local vote to determine whether to permit the selling of marijuana and marijuana products for consumption on the premises at commercial establishments.

[e30addict]

I find it interesting that they have storage requirements and the ounce on your person is subject to the open container laws if in your vehicle.

[Spooler]

I voted yes today.

[Imbeek]

I was of the understanding that it's not "Vote yes to legalize pot" it's "Vote yes if you want MA to consider legalizing pot"... ie, start the process of legalization and work on the best way to do it.

My understanding...and it is ONLY that, i could be totally full of misinformation here...is that question 4, if passed, instructs legislators to put the law into place on December 15 with all kinds of conditions that should appeal to users...just winging it by memory, but, including legal home growing of up to six plants, ok to keep 10 ounces on hand (LMAO that's a lot), and legal transfer of up to an ounce to a friend as long as you dont charge him.

However, the law that the public votes on cannot prevent the politicians from voting in a modified statute to replace the one voted on by the public, which could eliminate those tax "loopholes" mentioned above. The assholes in power have pretty much promised to gut it one way or another if passed. Or, alternatively, even the public bill as written puts enough power in the committee it creates (that anti-pot Baker gets to staff, btw) where THEY can gut those portions of the bill.

My kitchen table oddsmaking puts the odds of question 4 passing at around 85% and the odds of it going into effect as written on 12/15/16, and remaining in effect for any significant amount of time with those user friendly features mentioned above, at somewhere around the snowball in hell range. because fuck what the public wants, we are in power and we like money to spend and steal.

[SteveM]

I voted today and am in the minority of NO voters here on this issue. I know there's an inconsistency with alcohol and cigarettes and other things, but I think taxing vices that tend to be consumed more by those with less money is a truly punitive, regressive tax. I know there will always be drugs in our society, but I can't get to the point of saying what the heck other vices are legal, so let's make another one legal too.

Not looking for an extended NESR debate on this, just adding a data point to the poll. This is an area where I can see both sides, I just personally land on no.

[jasnmar]

... but I think taxing vices that tend to be consumed more by those with less money is a truly punitive, regressive tax.

I don't have a dog in this particular fight, but is your argument that putting them in jail is less harsh than taxing them?

[Imbeek]

Colorado and other states with legalization show that total of cost of weed, including tax, will go down quite substantially with legalization. So while people of all incomes will pay more TAX, they will pay less total. Benefit to all, including those you'd rather not regressively tax.

Secondly, facing criminal charges for a low harm plant is a worse tax than any monetary scheme ever developed by government in this country...

[Spooler]

Colorado and other states with legalization show that total of cost of weed, including tax, will go down quite substantially with legalization. So while people of all incomes will pay more TAX, they will pay less total. Benefit to all, including those you'd rather not regressively tax.

Secondly, facing criminal charges for a low harm plant is a worse tax than any monetary scheme ever developed by government in this country...

Beyond just paying less there's the huge benefit of not having to buy from criminals, some of whom are involved in or at least connected to much worse stuff than selling weed.

Also, I'm not sure pot use is concentrated among lower income individuals.

[Pigman]

WTF? Taxing pot (or anything else) does not create revenue, value, or wealth; it just transfers money from some people to government. This will, by definition NOT save everyone money; it will cost additional money to those that the tax is applied to.

PhilB

UMMM…..So butts, booze, gas and food is something you do not pay tax on either? Same concept....we all pay one way or another bud. I just want to see the people benefit from the positive side and not have fear prosecution. And sales tax....you don't pay for that just opt Out....

[TheIglu]

Here we go, more PhilB lectures. Great.

[loudbeard]

Here we go, more PhilB lectures. Great.

It's about time you brushed up on your Austrian school economics.

[tsorfas]

I voted today and am in the minority of NO voters here on this issue. I know there's an inconsistency with alcohol and cigarettes and other things, but I think taxing vices that tend to be consumed more by those with less money is a truly punitive, regressive tax. I know there will always be drugs in our society, but I can't get to the point of saying what the heck other vices are legal, so let's make another one legal too.

Not looking for an extended NESR debate on this, just adding a data point to the poll. This is an area where I can see both sides, I just personally land on no.

I unfortunately think you didn't think this through well at all.
Sucks because it looks like an uneducated vote on a pretty important subject

I'm not voting this year (first year I'm allowed to) and the reason is because I didn't have the time to educate myself enough to make a good use of my vote.

[Chippertheripper]

I unfortunately think you didn't think this through well at all.
Sucks because it looks like an uneducated vote on a pretty important subject

I'm not voting this year (first year I'm allowed to) and the reason is because I didn't have the time to educate myself enough to make a good use of my vote.

Do you think all voters took the time to really examine everything?
If you missed the window to register that's one thing, but it doesn't take months to make a decision.

[tsorfas]

Do you think all voters took the time to really examine everything?
If you missed the window to register that's one thing, but it doesn't take months to make a decision.

I did miss the window to register because of work and some personal stuff, but I also didn't put too much effort because I wasn't educated enough on most topics. The school one still confuses the fuck out of me.
As far as presidential elections, even if I was registered to vote I would sit that one out.

[tsorfas]

And I'm not talking make a 50 page research paper on each topic. But a basic understanding of pros and cons and how some systems work if you gonna vote on them.
If you don't have that I think you shouldn't vote (just my personal opinion)

[aldend123]

You don't have to vote on every issue. In fact, you could just vote on one. I'm glad you're not willing to vote randomly, but you could put a quick understanding together on some of these issues.

I think taxing vices that tend to be consumed more by those with less money is a truly punitive, regressive tax. I know there will always be drugs in our society, but I can't get to the point of saying what the heck other vices are legal, so let's make another one legal too.

I'm not sure I understand. Is it that you want weed to be legal but untaxed? Or that you don't want it legal at all? The reason many people compare it to alcohol and it's legal status is that alcohol arguably has a worse negative social impact. So, if that's not the end of the world and viewed as a personal decision, why shouldn't this be?

I'm with you in that we shouldn't have a vice tax. But I'm willing to vote yes because I see it as a compromise. People are still spending money now on it, and the state is spending money jailing those people. I'd rather make it all above board and worry free. We could work on the vice tax next, but I think people will only be worried about that if weed prices go up from street price now. I'm outta the loop on that, but does anyone know how that's played out in the states where it's legal now? I'm sure high-end stuff is very expensive. But is whatever people bought from dealers comparably priced in the store now?

[nhbubba]

Not looking for an extended NESR debate on this...

If that were true, you would not have posted at all.

[nhbubba]

This is an easy, no brainer yes to me. Were I in MA I'd be on the YES side w/o remorse. I agree pot should have been legalized decades ago. Victimless "crimes". Getting caught up in who gets taxed, the impact of those taxes and so forth is a cop out, an excuse for ulterior motives.

[Chippertheripper]

And I'm not talking make a 50 page research paper on each topic. But a basic understanding of pros and cons and how some systems work if you gonna vote on them.
If you don't have that I think you shouldn't vote (just my personal opinion)

I share your opinion, but don't think that lesser informed people aren't voting just the same.

[Imbeek]

We could work on the vice tax next, but I think people will only be worried about that if weed prices go up from street price now. I'm outta the loop on that, but does anyone know how that's played out in the states where it's legal now? I'm sure high-end stuff is very expensive. But is whatever people bought from dealers comparably priced in the store now?

According to multiple "credible" sources, legalization causes the prices to go way, way down. So, something interesting happens to weed after it’s legal - The Washington Post

Without government interference, there's no reason weed should cost any more than any other hearty crop, like tomatoes or corn....

[Falko]

I wonder if you'll be able to get farm subsidies for your pot crop?

[aldend123]

According to multiple "credible" sources, legalization causes the prices to go way, way down. So, something interesting happens to weed after it’s legal - The Washington Post

Without government interference, there's no reason weed should cost any more than any other hearty crop, like tomatoes or corn....

In theory, I agree that prices should be cheaper when legal. But I'm curious if there's good data on that, or anecdotal. In part because I never trusted a lot of government estimates on street price. I think it was almost always in their interest to estimate prices to be high anyway. A $250k drug bust easily becomes $1M, a impact assessment says users spend $5M a year instead of $1M, etc. The region has $12M in drugs instead of $2.5M, so they need more SWAT teams than that other region.

[PhilB]

UMMM…..So butts, booze, gas and food is something you do not pay tax on either? Same concept....we all pay one way or another bud. I just want to see the people benefit from the positive side and not have fear prosecution. And sales tax....you don't pay for that just opt Out....

I didn't say I don't pay taxes on other things. (Although there is no sales tax in NH.)

I agree that weed should be legal. I even agree that taxing it is far preferable to ruining people's lives over using it.
I was just objecting to your statement that taxing a thing would save *everyone* money. That's a false statement.

PhilB

[cdovego]

According to multiple "credible" sources, legalization causes the prices to go way, way down. So, something interesting happens to weed after it’s legal - The Washington Post

Without government interference, there's no reason weed should cost any more than any other hearty crop, like tomatoes or corn....

I did not see this in CA. Prices stayed relatively the same if not slightly more to cover the retail business expenses.

[scottieducati]

Went down in CO, or more specifically quality went up for similar cost.