How Can Nevada Screw
Up Marijuana Legalization; Let Me Count the Ways
by Chuck
Muth
October
1, 2015
How
can a state that has so successfully handled legal gambling, legal 24/7
consumption of alcohol and legal prostitution have so fouled up legalizing
marijuana?
The
problems with legalizing medical marijuana alone in Nevada are legion. It was approved by voters over a dozen years
ago, but to this day I believe we only have two lawful medical marijuana stores
operating – one in Las Vegas and one in Sparks.
And
because the state has so fouled up the approval of licensed marijuana growers,
those stores are essentially selling home-grown “rag weed” until the
professionals are finally allowed to sell their crops.
Much
of the problem, unsurprisingly, can be laid at the feet of state legislators - with
the notable exception of State Sen. Tick Segerblom, who has been a mensch on
this issue - who have had to be dragged kicking and screaming to make a reality
that which the citizens of Nevada, in no uncertain terms, demanded.
And
they continued to abdicate their responsibilities in the 2015 session by
refusing to deal with the new issue of legalizing marijuana for recreational
use.
Make
no mistake. The handwriting is on the
wall. Government drug warriors have lost
the drug war. At least as far as marijuana is concerned. Legal, recreational marijuana is coming –
like it or not, one way or the other.
As
such, the people of Nevada, through the initiative process, put a petition to
legalize, tax and regulate recreational marijuana like alcohol in front of the
2015 Nevada Legislature, and the Legislature promptly “pulled a Pontius Pilot”
and washed its hands of the entire thing.
Cowards.
Supporters
of the initiative have proposed a long, complicated eight-page piece of
legislation for voters to vote on next November. The problem is, legalizing marijuana is
different from taxing and regulating marijuana.
So the proposed initiative is a mess.
For
example, it allows the government – through the Department of Taxation – to come
up with “reasonable restrictions” (speech control) for signage and advertising
with no definition of “reasonable.”
It
allows the government to “establish the fair market value” of marijuana at the
wholesale level.
Government
price control? When has that ever worked
in a free market economy?
And
why, by the way, would we shift the regulatory burden for recreational
marijuana from the state Department of Public and Behavioral Health – which is
already regulating the medical marijuana industry – to the Department of
Taxation?
Even
putting it under the supervision of the Department of Agriculture makes more
sense than the Department of Taxation.
It’s a crop, after all, right?
Meanwhile,
back at the ranch…
The
initiative prohibits the Department of Taxation from imposing regulations that
make the operation of a marijuana business “unreasonably impracticable.” But again, who gets to decide the definition
of “unreasonably”? A government
bureaucrat? No thanks.
It
limits the possession or use of marijuana to “persons 21 years of age or older.”
I’ve
always had a problem with that when it comes to liquor. I mean, if an 18-, 19- or 20-year-old adult
can vote, sign contacts and get his ass blown off by an IED in Afghanistan, why
can’t he fire up a doobie in the privacy of his own home?
But
I digress…
The
proposed initiative allows people to grow and possess small amounts of
marijuana for personal use – but only if you don’t live within 25 miles of a
marijuana store and only if you grow it in a locked closet or other room.
Um,
doesn’t that defeat the purpose of legalization? I mean, we don’t tell people they can only
brew their own beer or ferment their own wine in a locked closet at home if
they live 25 miles away from a liquor store.
Why would we treat legalized pot differently?
It
limits the number of retail marijuana stores that can operate in Clark County
to 80, while a quick check of my online Yellow Pages indicates there are 161
retail liquor stores in Las Vegas alone – not counting North Las Vegas,
Henderson or unincorporated Clark County.
This
is government control and restraint of free trade. The market itself is a far better judge of
what the market needs and will bear.
And
why shouldn’t licensed marijuana retail stores be able to open multiple
locations - like Lee’s Discount Liquor Stores in Las Vegas?
The
initiative sets the cost of an annual license for a retail marijuana store at
up to $6,600 per year, whereas my quick Google search for the annual cost of a
retail liquor store license in Clark County is only $1,800.
There’s also a hidden “excise” tax of 15
percent tacked onto marijuana at the production level.
I
could be wrong here because I took public school math as a kid, but by my
calculations the cost of that hidden excise tax on an ounce of marijuana will
be around $14, whereas the excise tax on alcohol, I believe, is set at around
$3.60 per gallon.
“Sin”
taxation on marijuana at that high (pardon the pun) of a level is a sin in and
of itself.
And
if we’re not careful, the cost of taxed and regulated marijuana will be so high
that people will opt to continue buying it on the street from untaxed and unregulated
criminal “dealers” rather than go the legal route.
Is
that really in our community’s best interest?
The
initiative stipulates that people who have served “as an owner, officer, or
board member for a medical marijuana establishment” cannot be an “owner,
officer, or board member” for a recreational marijuana business.
Which
makes about as much sense as saying that the owner of a Mexican restaurant
cannot be the owner of a Japanese restaurant.
Already-approved,
experienced and licensed medical marijuana operators are the PERFECT
individuals to operate a recreational marijuana operation. I mean, come on.
Now
this is probably the most egregious aspect of the entire initiative…
There’s
a “special interest” clause in there that prohibits a marijuana grower from
selling its crops directly to a product manufacturer or retailer. Instead, it may sell its crops “only to
persons holding a wholesale dealer license pursuant to Chapter 369 of NRS.”
Chapter
369 of NRS means…a liquor wholesaler.
Why
in the world should a properly licensed MARIJUANA grower have to sell
his product through a LIQUOR “middle man” who is not required to get a
marijuana license like everyone else in the food chain?
This
is an outrageous provision that not only restricts the free market but can
potentially kill the businesses of lawful, licensed legitimate marijuana
growers. How in the world did this ever
get in there?
And
then there’s the most cynical provision of the entire initiative…
Any
extra revenue generated from the taxation of recreational marijuana in excess
of what’s needed for the regulatory operations of the Department of Taxation
are to be “deposited to the credit of the State Distributive School Account in
the State General Fund.”
So
toke up, dude! After all, it’s for the
children!
Good
grief.
Look,
I get it.
Supporters
of legalizing marijuana were forced to go the initiative route because the
Nevada Legislature abdicated its responsibility on the issue. But this is not the way to go – especially since,
after a cooling off period, the Legislature will be free to repeal the legalization
of marijuana.
No,
if the voters themselves are to make the decision and bear the burden of
legalizing marijuana, the proper and correct way to do so is through a constitutional
amendment - absent special interest clauses like that ridiculous liquor
wholesale provision.
Other
states have legalized or are proposing legalization of recreational marijuana through
a constitutional amendment, not a legislative initiative. So once again, at least when it comes to
marijuana, Nevada has done it wrong.
What
we ought to do is place on the November 2016 and 2018 ballot a short, simple
amendment legalizing marijuana that stipulates that the Nevada Legislature SHALL,
not may, do its job and pass appropriate regulations and taxation provisions
into statute.
Borrowing
from similar amendments I found that have been floated in Florida and Ohio, a
Nevada constitutional amendment might read something like this…
“All people in the State of Nevada of legal voting age and older shall have the right under state laws to possession, use, and cultivation of cannabis. This right shall not be infringed except that the transfer of cannabis by purchase or sale may be regulated as necessary to ensure health and safety. ‘Cannabis’ in this section is defined as all parts of any plant of the genus Cannabis, whether growing or not, and the seeds thereof.“Cultivators shall neither be permitted to sell their products directly to the public without a retail license, nor shall they be required to sell their products through a wholesaler.“The provisions of this section are self-executing and severable, and, except where otherwise indicated in the text, shall supersede all conflicting state and local laws, charters and regulations or other provisions of this constitution. The Legislature may pass laws implementing and facilitating the provisions of this section that are not in conflict with its provisions.”
Boom! If you’re going to legalize marijuana – and I
understand that many continue to object to such a move – but if we’re going to
do it, let’s do it right.
For
the children, of course.
(Mr.
Muth is president of CitizenOutreach.com
and the publisher of www.NevadaNewsandViews.com. You can reach him at ChuckMuth.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment