A poll of California voters conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California released Sept. 21, shows that 60 percent of voters favor legalizing marijuana for adult use — 21 years and older — as proposed by Prop. 64, the consensus measure based on recognized best practices to control, regulate and tax responsible adult use, sale and cultivation of marijuana in California on the Nov. 8 ballot.
According to its web ite: The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan think tank. We are dedicated to informing and improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research.
California has been a leader on marijuana policy in the past. In 1996, California became the first state to establish a medical marijuana program after voters passed Proposition 215 (56 percent yes). Since then, 22 other states have passed medical marijuana laws. In September 2010, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed SB 1449 into law, which made the sanction for possessing small amounts of marijuana (less than an ounce) equivalent to a parking ticket. That November, voters narrowly defeated Proposition 19 (53 percent no), which would have made California the first state to legalize recreational marijuana. Other states have since passed legalization measures: Colorado and Washington in 2012, and Alaska, Oregon, and the District of Columbia in 2014.
The Public Policy Institute poll of registered California voters covered a variety of election races and policy initiatives and provided the following political analysis of its polling results regarding Prop. 64, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act.
Proposition 64. A majority of likely voters (60%) would vote yes on this measure to legalize marijuana use under state law by adults 21 and older and tax sales and cultivation (36% no). Most Democratic (65%) and independent (64%) likely voters support the proposition. Republicans are divided (46% yes, 52% no). Just over half of Latinos would vote yes, while support among whites and other racial/ethnic groups is slightly higher. Support is higher among those 18 to 34 years old (74%) than among older voters (59% 35–54, 54% 55 and older). Half of likely voters (50%) say the outcome on Proposition 64 is very important. Those who would vote yes are much less likely to say the outcome is very important than those who would vote no (46% to 59%).
“Californians view the outcome of Proposition 64 as the most important of the four initiatives that we tested,” Baldassare said. “It’s interesting that the opponents of the marijuana legalization initiative are more likely than its proponents to say the outcome is very important to them.”
Prop. 64 proponents claim that the proposed ballot box initiative will address a variety of social justice issues related to the prohibition and criminalization of marijuana users that disproportionately discriminate against and penalize minorities leading to overcrowded jails and prisons for nonviolent drug offenses. They believe the four-decade-long, trillion dollar so-called “War on Drugs” has been an abject failure and claim to offer a comprehensive public policy approach that will tax and regulate marijuana from “seed-to-sale” in California.
According to the Yes on 64 website:
Adults aged 21+ will be allowed to possess marijuana, and grow small amounts at home for personal use. Sale of marijuana will be legal and highly regulated to protect consumers and kids.
This measure brings California’s marijuana market out into the open – much like the alcohol industry. It will be tracked, controlled, regulated and taxed, and we will no longer be criminalizing responsible adults or incarcerating children.
Includes toughest-in-the-nation protections for children, our most vulnerable citizens.
Protects workers, small businesses, law enforcement and local communities.
According to the independent Legislative Analyst and Governor’s Finance Director, these reforms will save the state tens of millions of dollars annually in reduced taxpayer costs – and raise up to $1 billion in new tax revenues annually.
Majority of revenues will be allocated to:Teen drug prevention and treatment
Training law enforcement to recognize driving under the influence of drugs
Protecting the environment from the harms of illegal marijuana cultivation
Supporting economic development in communities disproportionately impacted by marijuana prohibitionProp 64 includes strict anti-monopoly provisions and protects small farmers, so California’s marijuana industry isn’t overrun by mega-corporations.
The measure builds on the bipartisan legislation signed by Governor Brown to control and regulate California’s medical marijuana industry, and is modeled after national best practices, lessons learned from other states, and the recommendations of the Lieutenant Governor’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Marijuana Policy.
San Benito County and the City of Hollister empanelled ad hoc committees to consider revising existing ordinances that ban medical marijuana dispensaries in the respective jurisdictions. Committee representatives have visited both legal and illegal medical marijuana cultivation and processing sites in San Benito County as well as medical marijuana cultivation and dispensary operations in Monterey and Santa Clara county to better understand the potential benefits and negative impacts that may effect county residents if a new ordinance allowing medical marijuana cultivation, manufacturing and dispensary operations were approved by a voting consensus of either authority.
The San Benito County Board of Supervisors is expected to deliberate a new ordinance or moratorium before the Nov. 8 election while the Hollister City Council has tabled the issue until Nov. 21 in order for Mayor Ignacio Velazquez, who recently replaced Councilman Karson Klauer on the ad hoc medical marijuana subcommittee, to study the issue and meet with interested parties both for and against medical marijuana ordinance revisions in the city.
You must be logged in to post a comment.