Keeping marijuana illegal is tantamount to taxing it—and that’s just fine with R. Gil Kerlikowske, federal drug czar, who says the high price discourages consumption by young people.
His bizarre logic also admits that the profits of pot go into the hands of criminals, instead of enriching government coffers, like standard taxes on alcohol and cigarettes. Let’s look at what the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy said in a March 4 speech in San Jose, CA, titled Why Marijuana Legalization Would Compromise Public Health and Public Safety:
Controls and prohibitions help to keep prices higher, and higher prices help keep use rates relatively low, since drug use, especially among young people, is known to be sensitive to price.
The relationship between pricing and rates of youth substance use is well established with respect to alcohol and cigarette taxes. There is literature showing that increases in the price of cigarettes trigger declines in use.
It makes little sense that we are doing something we know keeps prices, and therefore profits, very high for a product that can only be sold by criminals. But let’s move on to the really twisted logic of his argument.
Kerlikowske is saying we need to maintain marijuana prohibition because we need to keep marijuana prices high to reduce youth use. And his proof that keeping cannabis prices high through prohibition does that is how effectively we have reduced use of legal cigarettes among young people by using a simple system of legal taxation to keep the price high. Citing proof that taxation is also an effective way to keep prices high and reduce use is considered part of a legitimate argument against legalizing, regulating and taxing cannabis.
So he is saying we can keep the price of a product high (be it cannabis or tobacco) with prohibition or strong taxation. So why not legalize and tax marijuana instead of prohibiting it? A regulated taxation system would bring in much-needed revenue and allow the government to oversee the industry. Prohibition, on the other hand, is incredibly costly to the government, increases our prison populations, hurts people by giving them criminal records and enriches criminal cartels. Yet Kerlikowske argues continued prohibition is the right solution.



6 Comments








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
For years Government has been telling us that we need to keep things illegal like pot to reduce demand and keep the prices high.
The high price makes the supplying it worth while, because if the price was low no one would think it worth while to supply it.
Our Government is filled with ignorant people who sware they have all the right answers to everything.
The proof they have all the rights answers is in front of us. More drugs and pot available almost by the week, while millions are being spent to keep it from being supplied.
Remember our Government voted for prohibition, and as hard as they tried they couldn’t keep the people from drinking, and people suppling that want. Their efforts led to organized crime which to this day they have failed to get a handle on. It hurt many citizens and businessmen, and cut off the revenues that spirits could have supplied. It led to bootleg whiskey, rum runners, and moonshining. Yes it even killed American Citizens by them drinking bad booze.
Their answer was repeal, but never appoligize for what they did to the Country.
Our Government started forgetting about our rights, and doing what they thought long ago, and we will only see more and worse problems until the People stand up and revolt.
What’s the story with R. Gil Kerlikowske. When speaking he uses assertions and speculation as fact. I’m surely impressed with his appointment as National Director. Again, great job ‘O’.
Why does no one call this guy out on his Idiocy?
What a Putz.
(I have visions of Joe Kennedy Sr. handing this guy bags of cash to support prohibition – ick)
Another brilliant Obama pick.
(excuse the dripping sarcasm)
So, it’s the high prices and not the controls on the sale of cigarettes to people under 18 that has reduced the number of young smokers? Bush III’s minions strike again!
That would damage the banks, they’d loose the drug money that gets laundered and deposited into the banks.
That would be bad. As we all know the banks must be protected, at everyone’s expense.
Honestly unless they come up with some useful scare tactic, this law will get passed, at least in California.
At the very least if we do have to use some spin control, we can just say, well we don’t want the highlighted drug violence they seem to have in other boarder states, which legalizing it will largely prevent.
It would force growers to go legit like it did in The Netherlands.