A Greener Outlook 1

A Greener Outlook: An Examination of the Pro’s and Con’s of Marijuana and its Possible

Legal Future

By

James Crawford

A Paper Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements of

Drugs, Justice, and Society CRMJ504

April, 2012
A Greener Outlook 2

Abstract

This paper will present the historical use of marijuana in the United States, the pro’s and
con’s of marijuana legalization, the beneficial and side effects produced by the drug, the
economic impact of marijuana prohibition versus regulation and taxation, and what
direction the country should take over the next twenty years.
A Greener Outlook 3

Table of Contents

History of Marijuana Use in the United States 4

The Social Pro’s and Con’s of Marijuana Legalization 5

The Beneficial Medical Effects of Marijuana 6

The Negative Side Effects of Marijuana 7

The Cost of Marijuana Prohibition 8

The Economic Impact of Marijuana Regulation and Taxation 10

The Next 20 Years 11

Conclusion 13

References 14
A Greener Outlook 4

History of Marijuana Use in the United States

Long before marijuana was ever used as a popular recreational intoxicant, it

served as a prevalent industrial product. Brought into the country by British settlers,

marijuana hemp was prized for its versatility. It was also used to make a variety of

products that include, paper, rope, cloth (Schwartz, 2008). The root word for canvas

originates for the word cannabis, thus it is the cloth produced from cannabis (Merriam-

Webster, 2012). In fact, it has been established that both George Washington was not

only the father of the United States and a cannabis plantation owners, but also a user of

the plant for relaxation and merriment (Schwartz, 2008).

The recreational use of marijuana began in the 1920’s when it was first imported

from Mexico as a cheap substitute for and companion drug to alcohol (Graves,

Fernandez, Shelton, Frabutt, & Williford, 2005; Lyman, 2011). The speakeasy clubs

established the days of alcohol prohibition catered to consumers of illegal alcohol also

sold marijuana as an alternate source of income and intoxication (Savran, 2006). Savran

(2006) even establishes that marijuana uses was one of the primary influences behind the

development of jazz.

Despite being labeled a taxable narcotic in 1937 by the Marijuana Tax Act that

resulted in making it illegal to possess or distribute untaxed marijuana, the 1950’s and

1960’s saw increases of marijuana use in high schools and college campuses (Yacobian,

2007; Lyman, 2011). In fact, it was the increased use of marijuana during this time that

caused President Richard Nixon to declare a war on drugs in the 1970’s by signing the

Comprehensive Drug Abuse and Prevention and Control Act into law (Yacobian, 2007).

Since then, marijuana has been the cornerstone drug for many counterculture groups as a
A Greener Outlook 5

personal and social relaxant, a means of expanding their consciousness, or simply

enjoying its use as an act of rebellion (Herzberg, 2005).

The Social Pro’s and Con’s of Marijuana Legalization

Many in law enforcement and the legislature see that repeated discriminatory

targeting of low income African American and Latino households has created undue

tension in communities thus counteracting any perceived benefit to society (Hall, 1998).

Street level enforcement of drug laws is like casting a wide tightly woven net that, while

catching some of its intended prey of traffickers and pushers, also captures and damages

the casual, non-addicted, non-recreation, socially and functional user (Lyman, 2011;

Nedalmann, 1998). Lee, Lee, and Lee (2010) have gone so far as to state that the

inequities of the drug laws has resulted in exacerbated racial and socioeconomic

disparities. Additionally, Dawkins (1997) reports marijuana users are involved in far

fewer violent and nonviolent crimes than people who consume alcohol thus supporting

the stance for legalization.

The problem with legalization and regulation of any drug is the fact that if a

restricted party, such as youths, want it the drug, they are going to find a way to get it

(Lyman, 2011). Thus, the black market trade will still be there, it just will not be a

prevalent as it one was due to massive regulations. It is very likely that the legalized

marijuana market will reduce the amount of marijuana being sold on the street. However,

there is the specter of greedy unlicensed and unregulated cultivators may attempt to

diversify by trying to sell to legitimate markets while also supplying street pushers

dealing for discreet and indiscreet sales as a means of undercutting the legitimate markets

(Lyman, 2011). Mikos (2009) proposes establishing state-operated marijuana farms as

A Greener Outlook 6

well as distribution and sales locations in order to avoid diversion of the marijuana

product.

Delisi (2003) mentions the incarcerating nonviolent drug offenders has done little

more than boosting conviction rates without adequately addressing the issue of drug

usage as the demand for illicit drugs in the U.S. In fact it has been suggested by Delisi

(2003) that movement away from incarcerating nonviolent drug offenders and to treating

the users demand for their drug(s) of choice as the best option in properly facing drug

abuse. Nedalmann (2004) points out, the war on drugs, especially marijuana, is a

political tool that no longer fully reflects the concerted will of the people. In fact,

Michigan, with its history of strict marijuana law enforcement, passed in 2008 a measure

for medical marijuana by a vote of 63 percent (Wade, 2010).

The Beneficial Medical Effects of Marijuana

Marijuana has been found to treat many medical problems. One such treatment

involves inhaling marijuana in order to relax the esophagus and diaphragm of those

suffering from intractable hiccups thus providing relief for the debilitating condition

(Gilson & Busalacchi, 1998). Individuals suffering from chronic pain, cancer,

fibromyalgia, arthritis, and HIV/AIDS are able to use marijuana as an appetite stimulant

to combat chemical and radiation treatments that result in appetite lose (McQuay, 2010;

Nadelmann, 2004; Lyman , 2011). Marijuana use has been shown to reduce fluid

pressure of the eyes in patients suffering from glaucoma and painful migraines while also

being used to reduce spastic or impaired muscle control brought on by multiple sclerosis,

seizures (Kuhn, Swartzwelder, & Wilson, 2008). Further beneficial effects of marijuana
A Greener Outlook 7

are unknown due to difficulties of obtaining the drug legally for testing purposes (Lyman,

2011).

The Negative Side Effects of Marijuana

Marijuana use enables cannabinoids to enter the blood stream where it is able to

permeate the fatty membrane surrounding the brain (Kuhn, et al., 2008). These

cannabinoids increase the risk of producing long term schizophrenia or psychosis in those

who are already predisposed to such conditions (Degenhardt & Hall, 2006). Buckner,

Heimberg, Matthews, and Silgado (2012) have established that persons with established

social anxieties that use marijuana to reduce the tension of social anxiety may be prone to

further developing enhanced long term anxiety.

Gruber, Silveri, Dahlgren, and Yurgelun-Todd (2011) report that studies

examining neuroimaging of marijuana users frontal cerebral activity shows alterations

produced in the brain result in a host of behavioral issues including impulsiveness and

excitability. Kuhn, Swartzwelder, and Wilson (2008) cite that marijuana uses will

typically experience drowsiness and sedation while also experience moments shifting

from of hilarity to serene contemplation depending on the users environment and

situations. Additionally, marijuana users encounter their ability to learn is retarded as

well as the loss of short term memory (Kuhn, et al., 2008). It is suspected that marijuana

use lowers the inhibitions that suppress violent reactions which can result in homicides

and other interpersonal violence; however, again, more research is needed to validate this

claim (Graves, et al., 2005). However, Zvolensky, Cougle, Johnson, Bonn-Miller, and

Bernstein (2010) have shown that there have not been enough concrete scientific studies
A Greener Outlook 8

employing a representative sample to support claims of marijuana induced panic

psychopathology.

Marijuana users under the influence tend to drive at slower speeds due to

heightened sense of paranoia and anxiety while at the same time experience reduced

complex coordination thus producing hazardous reaction times (Lyman, 2011; Kuhn, et

al., 2008). Graves, Fernandez, Shelton, Frabutt, and Williford (2005) have reported that

30 percent of fatally injured drivers and 50 percent or reckless drivers have cannabinoids

in their system even though further research is needed to fully explore these findings.

Lyman (2011) makes note that marijuana smoking can produce the same harmful

effects as tobacco smoking which can result in bronchitis, emphysema, and bronchial

asthma. It has been concluded that smoking the equivalent of 3-5 marijuana cigarettes

per day was enough to produce Chronic Obtrusive Lung Disease (COPD) and the risk of

contracting the disease increased if combined with tobacco smoking (Tan, Lo, Jong,

Xing, FitzGerald, et al., 2009). Increased stress is placed on the marijuana users heart

which can produce high blood pressure, arrhythmia, although there has been no clear link

established to heart attack or heart disease (Kuhn, et al., 2008).

The Cost of Marijuana Prohibition

The U.S. war on drugs is an all encompassing money pit draining national

resources for the cause of eradicating drugs at their source country, through interdiction

during transportation, and street level enforcement (Lyman, 2011). Per Miron and

Waldock (2010), the U.S. commits $8.7 billion annually through federal, state, and local

funding to combat marijuana. Interdiction, per Lyman (2011), involves the cost of

manning and dispatching naval cruisers which are only able to halt a suspected marginal
A Greener Outlook 9

amount of drugs that drug traffickers expected loses thus no meaningful impact actually

occurs. Interdiction may attempt to reduce foreign importation of illegal marijuana, but it

fails to address the issue that the majority of drugs consumed as a whole in the United

States come from within its own borders (Nadelman, 1998).

Internal eradication efforts by local law enforcement and the DEA across the U.S.

has resulted the destroying crops in given locations; however, elimination of one crop in

the country results in the ramping up crop production in another areas in other countries

filling the gap (Nadelmann, 1998). Thus, man-hours of eradication efforts only result in

further cash loss for the U.S. economy.

At the street level, police officers are seeing drug arrests clogging up the courts

and corrections facilities (Nadelmann, 2004). The cost of prosecuting marijuana felons is

estimated at $40 billion per year (Ostertag & Armaline, 2011). It is interesting to note

that the U.S. government frequently disregards its own drug prohibition policies when

addressing issue of national security or international interests thus sending conflicting

messages with its hypocritical inconsistency of policy enforcement (Lee, Lee, & Lee,

2010). This point further drives home the point of wasted funds when the very force

behind drug prohibition is violating its own stance which serves also as a slap in the face

to federal, state, and local law enforcement officers who are forced to follow the

hypocritical directive (Bullington, 2004).

According to Naim (2009), Members of the senate have agreed on the bold move

to legalize, or at least decriminalize, marijuana. Naim (2009) further states this move is

even being supported by the Pentagon which admits the war on drugs is a bankrupted

venture especially in the face of the global economic crisis. As a result, drug prohibition
A Greener Outlook 10

at any cost has become too costly with little to show for its efforts. Per Lyman (2011),

since the war on drugs began purity, potency, and availability of drugs have increased

while prices have decreased.

The Economic Impact of Marijuana Regulation and Taxation

Marijuana is a drug that should be legalized and regulated just the same as alcohol

and tobacco. One of the primary reasons for legalization boils down to a matter of

economics. Marijuana is a crop that can be grown in every state of the United States

(Nadelmann, 1998). The federal and state government can offer licenses to marijuana

growers that can be monitored and inspected and any time to ensure that they are

following established guidelines that apply to alcohol producers and tobacco growers

(Lyman, 2011).

The newly licensed marijuana growers will have to maintain plot maps of

growing sites, log the type and amount of marijuana grown and harvested, and samples of

each back should be sent to state and federal labs for testing in order to maintain

consistency of the product produced. The growers would be allowed to sell their product

to registered and regulated distributors who would in turn send the product out to

registered retail locations. The retail locations would have to sell the product under the

same scrutiny as alcohol and tobacco. During each step of production, distribution, and

point of sell, the product would be taxed. Miron (2005) estimated that $6.2 billion per

year could be generated is marijuana were taxed and sold the same as tobacco and

alcohol.

By legalizing marijuana, the federal, state, and local governments would be able

to divert a majority of eradication and interdiction funds back into social programs while
A Greener Outlook 11

tax income from the sale of marijuana funds necessary marijuana education and treatment

programs (Levinson, 2003; Lyman, 2011). In turn, what was once a financial burden to

fight will become a major source of revenue the not only produce needed funds to fuel

the American economy, but it would also be able to produce an entire new sector of

commerce thus creating new jobs. There will be a call for growers, distributors, and

points of sale/storefronts to operate the new business sector. This is what America has

been needing, actual job creation and a new taxable revenue source (Kennally, 2001).

An example of the job creating and revenue producing power of legal marijuana

sales can be observed by examining the California marijuana market. In California there

are well over 300 marijuana dispensaries that employ and train workers while at the same

time generating much needed state taxes that fuel the local and state economy

(Nadelmann, 2004). Colorado approved the use of medical marijuana in 2000 and since

then has received 809 applications for marijuana center licenses and 309 applications for

the manufacture of marijuana-infused products (Wade, 2010).

In addition to the economic growth that will be spurred on by the new industry,

the U.S. will be able to save approximately $7.7 billion per year that would have been set

aside for combating marijuana (Miron, 2005). Again, this is money that can be invested

into other vital programs

The Next 20 Years

Elimination of marijuana possession equals fewer arrests freeing up drug courts

and prison cells for violent offenders. The reduction of incarcerated nonviolent drug

offenders will allow more space for violent offenders. In addition, it would remove an

unnecessary, nonviolent population from the prisons that can be addressed through drug
A Greener Outlook 12

treatment centers and programs. This would allow drug offenders easier access to

support structures that can aid them in becoming clean from drugs or at least gain control

over their addiction. The treated offender would be able to continue to serve as a

productive member of society instead of a taxpayer burden when incarcerated.

According to Guydish (2009), new treatments will be developed by current drug

abuse researchers that will be used in offsetting the negative side effects of marijuana

usage and improved methods of addressing the effects of abuse as it relates to society and

families. Guydish (2009) continues by mentioning legalization of marijuana would result

in the need for further scholarly and medical research and expand the ranks of minority

researchers.

Should marijuana be legalized, the U.S. economy in the next 20 years will prosper

thanks to a new source of income fueled through the creation of an entire new sector of

commerce that creates new jobs. In turn, the new revenue will ease the financial burden

of combating drugs and educating the public about the harms of drugs while also

providing additional funding to treatment facilities and their staff (Guydish, 2009). The

legalization of marijuana would result in a huge relief of time, money, and effort from

law enforcement, the courts, and corrections alike. Additionally, the federal, state, and

local governments will be able to save billions of dollars that will be able to fund other

vital programs.

While there will be an initial increase in the consumption of marijuana, stepped

up education and available treatment will be able to address any medical issues that arise.

Once the glamour and mystique of marijuana has been eliminated through legalization
A Greener Outlook 13

and increased education, it will experience an in decrease sales the same as that

experienced by the tobacco industry.

Conclusion

Medical science has shown that marijuana is a drug that does produce harmful

side effects. However, these side effects are far less severe than those encountered by the

consumption of alcohol, a known legal drug that can be purchased anywhere it is sold by

legal adults. Marijuana legalization would help ease tensions between law enforcement

and minority communities and provide one less illicit drug that can be pandered by gangs

and pushers.

Not only would marijuana legalization fuel federal, state, and local economies and

drug education and treatment center funding through taxation, there would be growth in

the job market with the creation of new jobs. Legalization would also allow for

marijuana to be tested for further developments in drug testing, development, and

treatment options. In addition, it has been shown that the economic gain of marijuana

legalization far exceeds the costs associated with continued prohibition.

A Greener Outlook 14

References

Buckner, J., Heimberg, R., Matthews, R, & Silgado, J. (2012). Marijuana-related

problems and social anxiety: The role of marijuana behaviors in social situations.

Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 26(1), 151–156. DOI: 10.1037/a0025822

Degenhardt, L., & Hall, W. (2006). Is Cannabis Use a Contributory Cause of Psychosis?

Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 51(9), 556-565.

http://search.proquest.com/docview/222809001?accountid=8289

Delisi, M. (2003). The imprisoned nonviolent drug offender: Specialized martyr or

versatile career criminal? American Journal of Criminal Justice : AJCJ, 27(2),

167-182. http://search.proquest.com/docview/203518255?accountid=8289

Tan, W., Lo, C., Jong, A., Xing, L., FitzGerald, M., et al. (2009). Marijuana and chronic

obstructive lung disease: A population-based study. Canadian Medical

Association Journal, 180(8), 814-820.

http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/docview/204838203?accountid=82

89
A Greener Outlook 15

Gilson, I., & Busalacchi, M. (1998). Marijuana for intractable hiccups. The Lancet,

351(9098), 267-267.

http://search.proquest.com/docview/199057801?accountid=8289

Graves, K., Fernandez, M., Shelton, T., Frabutt, J., & Williford, A. (2005). Risk and

protective factors associated with alcohol, cigarette, and marijuana use during

adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34(4), 379-387.

doi:10.1007/s10964-005-5766-1

Gruber, S. A., Silveri, M. M., Dahlgren, M. K., & Yurgelun-Todd, D. (2011). Why so

impulsive? White matter alterations are associated with impulsivity in chronic

marijuana smokers. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 19(3), 231-

242. doi:10.1037/a0023034

Guydish, J. (2009). Drug abuse research: Today and tomorrow. Journal of Drug Issues,

39(1), 227-230. http://search.proquest.com/docview/208860849?accountid=8289

Herzberg, D. (2005). Drug wars and wonder drugs. American Quarterly, 57(4), 1231-

1241,1274. http://search.proquest.com/docview/223301462?accountid=8289
A Greener Outlook 16

Kennally, G. (2001). Regulating the trade in recreational drugs. European Journal of Law

and Economics, 11(1), 69-69.

http://search.proquest.com/docview/222649383?accountid=8289

Kuhn, C., Swartzwelder, S., & Wilson, W. (2008). Buzzed, the straight facts about the

most used and abused drugs from alcohol to ecstasy, 3rd ed. New York, NY: W.

W. Norton & Company

Levinson, M. (2003). An extensional approach to drug legalization. Et Cetra, 60(2), 125-

137.

Lopes, P. (2005). Signifying deviance and transgression: Jazz in the popular imagination.

The American Behavioral Scientist, 48(11), 1468-1481.

http://search.proquest.com/docview/214765056?accountid=8289

Lyman, M. (2011). Drugs in society: Causes, concepts and control, 6th ed. Burlington,

MA: Anderson Publishing.

McQuay, H. (2010). More evidence cannabis can help in neuropathic pain. Canadian

Medical Association, 182(14), 1494-1495.

http://search.proquest.com/docview/847407018?accountid=8289
A Greener Outlook 17

Merriam-Webster. (2012). The definition and origin of hemp. http://www.merriam-

webster.com/dictionary/canvas

Mikos, R. (2009). On the limits of supremacy: Medical marijuana and the states'

overlooked power to legalize federal crime. Vanderbilt Law Review, 62(5). 1419,

1421-1482.

http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/focview/198883387?accountid=828

Miron, J.A. (2005). The budgetary implications of marijuana prohibition. Harvard

University.
http://web.archive.org/web/20110718081437/http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/Mi
ronReport.pdf

Miron, J., & Waldock, K. (2010). The budgetary impact of ending drug prohibition. Cato
Institute. http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/DrugProhibitionWP.pdf

Nadelmann, E. (1998). Commonsense drug policy, Foreign Affairs, 77(1), 111-126.

Nadelmann, E. (2004). An end to marijuana prohibition. National Review, 56(13), 28-33.

Naím, M. (2009). Wasted: The american prohibition on thinking smart in the drug war.

Foreign Policy, (172), 168-168,167.

http://search.proquest.com/docview/224033234?accountid=8289
A Greener Outlook 18

Ostertag, S. F., & Armaline, W. T. (2011). Image isn’t everything: Contemporary

systemic racism and antiracism in the age of obama. Humanity & Society, 35(3),

261-289. http://search.proquest.com/docview/900717162?accountid=8289

Savran, D. (2006). The search for americas soul: Theatre in the jazz age. Theatre

Journal, 58(3), 459-476,546.

http://search.proquest.com/docview/216066581?accountid=8289

Schwartz, B. (2008). Collective memory and abortive commemoration: Presidents day

and the american holiday calendar. Social Research, 75(1), 75-110,354.

http://search.proquest.com/docview/209672803?accountid=8289

Ward, S. F. (2010). Up in smoke. ABA Journal, 96(12), 50-55, 64.

http://search.proquest.com/docview/817291284?accountid=8289

Yacoubian, G. (2007). Assessing the relationship between marijuana availability and

marijuana use: A legal and sociological comparison between the united states and the

netherlands. Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education, 51(4), 17-34.

http://search.proquest.com/docview/217439225?accountid=8289

Zvolensky, M., Cougle, J., Johnson, K., Bonn-Miller, M., & Bernstein, A. (2010).

Marijuana use and panic psychopathology among a representative sample of

A Greener Outlook 19

adults. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 18(2), 129–134. DOI:

10.1037/a0019022