Pubdate: Mon, 26 Nov 2012
Source: Washington Post (DC)
Copyright: 2012 The Washington Post Company
Contact: http://mapinc.org/url/mUgeOPdZ
Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/491
Page: A16

WHAT SHOULD THE FEDS DO ABOUT POT?

How the Obama Administration Should Respond to Colorado and Washington State

SMALL-TIME MARIJUANA use will soon be legal in Colorado and 
Washington state. Sort of. This month voters in those states approved 
ballot measures permitting possession of up to an ounce of pot. But 
the federal government has not changed its policy, which labels the 
drug an illegal substance. Members of Congress introduced legislation 
Nov. 16 that would allow state marijuana rules to preempt federal 
ones. But that, in effect, would resemble federal legalization, and 
it's unlikely to pass anytime soon.

So the states' leaders are asking for guidance from President Obama's 
Justice Department, which, NPR's Carrie Johnson reports, has a few 
options. It could enhance its own anti-marijuana enforcement in the 
states. It could sue to halt the laws' application.

Or the Justice Department could keep its hands off, perhaps 
continuing the approach the feds have largely taken for some time - 
focusing scarce resources on major violators, such as big growers 
that might serve multi-state markets, cultivators using public lands 
or dispensaries near schools. The last option is clearly best.

There is reason for caution about ditching federal pot restrictions. 
Marijuana can be harmful, and the Drug Enforcement Administration 
reports that potency levels are higher than ever. The possibly major 
effects on public health of more driving under the influence of 
marijuana is a particular concern. If the federal government removed 
its restrictions, other states would find it easier to follow 
Colorado and Washington's path. Dismantling current federal law, 
meanwhile, could have a range of effects on the U.S. relationship 
with Mexico that lawmakers should take time to consider fully, as 
drug cartels' involvement in U.S. medical marijuana markets indicates.

But it's unrealistic and unwise to expect federal officials to pick 
up the slack left by state law enforcement officers who used to 
enforce marijuana prohibitions against pot users and small-time 
growers. Unrealistic, because it would require lots more resources. 
Unwise, because filling prisons with users, each given a criminal 
stain on his or her record, has long been irrational. For the latter 
reason, we favor decriminalizing possession of small amounts of pot, 
assessing civil fines instead of locking people up. Also, for that 
reason and others, the Justice Department should hold its fire on a 
lawsuit challenging Colorado and Washington's decision to behave more 
leniently. And state officials involved in good-faith efforts to 
regulate marijuana production and distribution according to state 
laws should be explicitly excused from federal targeting.

It's not yet clear how a quasi-legal pot industry might operate in 
Colorado and Washington or what its public-health effects will be. It 
could be that these states are harbingers of a slow, national 
reassessment of marijuana policy. Or their experiment could serve as 
warning for the other 48 states.

For now, the federal government does not need to stage an aggressive 
intervention, one way or the other. It can wait, watch and enforce 
the most worrisome violations as they occur.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom