Pubdate: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 Source: Vancouver Sun (CN BC) Copyright: 2010 The Vancouver Sun Contact: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/letters.html Website: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/477 Author: David Harrison POT IS A POTENTIAL REVENUE GOLD MINE, POLITICIAN ARGUES Lawmaker Says Taxing Marijuana Could Undo Deep Cuts To Drug, Alcohol Programs Mary Lou Dickerson had seen enough. After wrenching cuts to Washington's state drug and alcohol treatment programs, Dickerson, a Democratic representative, introduced a bill this year to sell marijuana in state liquor stores -- and tax it. Dickerson is an unlikely crusader for marijuana legalization. A 63-year-old grandmother who doesn't use it, she says money was the reason for proposing her controversial bill. "According to the state's own estimates, it would bring in an additional $300 million per biennium," she says. "I dedicated [in the bill] a great deal of the proceeds from the tax on marijuana to treatment." The proposal died in committee, but Dickerson, who chairs the state's House Human Services Committee, expects to reintroduce it. Other advocates in almost two dozen states have been making similar efforts to loosen marijuana laws. This has been a bumper year for marijuana legislation, according to state policy observers. Crushing state budget deficits gave advocates in California, Washington, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New York and elsewhere an opening to pitch marijuana as a new source of tax revenue. At the same time, the Obama administration gave users and distributors some breathing room by signalling in October that it would scale back on prosecuting them as long as they comply with state law. Eighteen states discussed medical marijuana through legislation or citizen initiatives this year. California election officials announced on March 24 that this year's ballot would include a question to allow local governments to legalize and tax marijuana, casting a spotlight on the state that first legalized medical marijuana in 1996. While most state legislative efforts are likely to fail, a victory in California could encourage other states to follow suit just as they did when California approved medical marijuana. States shouldn't count on a revenue bonanza from marijuana since distributors still risk federal prosecution by emerging from the shadows, according to Robert Mikos, a Vanderbilt University law professor. 2009 poll found 56 per cent of California voters support outright legalization. Estimates from California's Board of Equalization peg the amount the state could raise from legalization at $1.4 billion. But those projections rest on shaky assumptions that the state could keep track of growers and that distributors would accurately disclose their sales, if at all. And since marijuana is still illegal under federal law, it's unclear how the Obama administration would react to more permissive state laws. States shouldn't count on a revenue bonanza from marijuana since distributors still risk federal prosecution by emerging from the shadows, according to Robert Mikos, a Vanderbilt University law professor. Ideally, the thousands of small-scale marijuana farm operations would consolidate into larger groups that would be easy for states to tax, but the federal ban makes that unlikely, he says. "If you get too big, you attract the attention of the federal government. If you're a mom-and-pop marijuana distributor in California right now, you have almost no concern about the federal ban," Mikos says. Also, states would have to keep track of growers who have paid taxes. "That's a gold mine of information for the federal government," Mikos says. "If California requires marijuana distributors to keep records of all their sales, the federal government could sweep in, take that information and use it to prosecute these people." - --- MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart