Pubdate: Thu, 26 Sep 2013
Source: Boulder Weekly (CO)
Copyright: 2013 Boulder Weekly
Contact:  http://www.boulderweekly.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/57
Author: Laura Kriho
Note: Laura Kriho has been a cannabis re-legalization activist in 
Boulder since 1992.

TAX DEBATE HIGHLIGHTS RIFT IN CANNABIS MOVEMENT

On Sept. 23, there was a "free joint giveaway" on the Boulder Pearl 
Street Mall that was organized by the "No on Proposition AA 
Committee." More than 1,000 cannabis cigarettes were given away to 
call attention to the marijuana tax issue that will appear on the 
Nov. 5 ballot.

Marijuana sales are already subject to a 2.9 percent statewide tax, 
along with other local taxes. Prop. AA would apply to retail 
marijuana sales that will be regulated under Amendment 64. Prop. AA 
asks voters to approve an additional 15 percent excise tax on 
wholesale transfers of cannabis to raise an estimated $27 million to 
fund school construction, and an additional 10 percent to 15 percent 
sales tax to raise an estimated $33 million to fund a new marijuana 
police force.

A64 was promoted to voters as a system to regulate marijuana "like 
alcohol." However, since taxes on alcohol are less than 1 percent on 
average, the "No on Prop. AA" campaign believes voters should be 
outraged at this bait-and-switch tactic to tax cannabis at a rate 
much greater than alcohol.

This tax debate highlights what has become a very clear division 
between cannabis supporters. There are those who support an expensive 
"strict regulation" model paid for by high taxes, and there are those 
who continue to support simple "legalization" with reasonable taxes 
and regulations.

To most people, "legalization" means that prohibition laws are 
repealed, people are no longer punished for cannabis use, and police 
resources are used to fight serious crimes. However, A64's "strict 
regulation" model does the opposite of this in many cases. The A64 
model allows some people to have some marijuana at some times, but it 
continues marijuana prohibition for other people with other amounts 
of marijuana at other times.

For example, under A64, you can possess one ounce and six plants. But 
if you possess 1.000001 ounces or 7 plants, you are still considered 
a marijuana criminal. In addition, since A64 passed, almost 300 pages 
of new marijuana law and penalties have been added to the books.

To enforce all the new marijuana crimes, Prop. AA would raise an 
estimated $33 million for the Department of Revenue's Marijuana 
Criminal Enforcement Division (MCED), the first police force in the 
nation dedicated solely to marijuana law enforcement.

The MCED's "seed-to-sale" tracking system, described in a Boulder 
Weekly article in the June 2, 2011, issue, is at the heart of A64's 
"strict regulation" model. This system, now called the Marijuana 
Inventory Tracking System (MITS), will require dispensaries to use 
expensive Radio Frequency ID (RFID) tracking technology to track 
their inventory through every step of the cultivation, production and 
sales process. If a gram falls on the floor or an ounce walks out the 
door, the MCED pot police will know about it in real time.

Now, instead of "legalizing" marijuana for everyone, A64 has created 
a new scenario of "good pot smokers" vs. "bad pot smokers." The "good 
pot smokers" are the ones willing to pay exorbitant taxes and allow 
the MCED to track their cannabis more strictly than plutonium. The 
"bad pot smokers" are the ones that will continue to purchase 
cannabis from their friends (or the evil "black market," as the Prop. 
AA supporters call them) because they value their privacy and are 
against over-taxation.

Under Prop. AA, marijuana consumers will pay almost $100 in tax on 
each $300 ounce. Ironically, the previous penalty for possession of 
two ounces or more (before A64 passed) was a $100 petty offense 
ticket (no jail time, no criminal record). And that was if you got 
caught (and very few people were.) Under Prop. AA's 30 percent-plus 
tax, you will be expected to pay that $100 penalty every time you 
purchase an ounce, and this money will be used to fund the MCED 
marijuana police to go after all the new marijuana crimes.

If Prop. AA passes, the "good pot smokers" will actually be funding 
the police to target and punish the "bad pot smokers," and we will 
have one more new, well-funded police force that will need to be 
dismantled in order to bring about true "legalization." When cannabis 
is finally really "legalized," all pot smokers will be "good pot 
smokers," no one will be punished, and there will be fewer laws and 
fewer police needed to enforce them. Voting for exorbitant taxes on 
marijuana consumption only continues the same prohibition tactics 
that have been used against cannabis consumers since the original 
Marihuana Tax Act was passed in 1937.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom