Legalize marijuana? Schwarzenegger says let’s debate it
By Jimmy Orr | 05.06.09

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (not actual size) on Tuesday said it was time for a discussion on the idea of legalizing and taxing marijuana. Although he said he doesn't support it now, he welcomed a debate on the issue.
(NEWSCOM/FILE)
It wasn’t as though Arnold Schwarzenegger held a press conference with Cheech and Chong in the back of a van and said, “Whoa, I have this awesome idea, man…”
The governor was asked if he would support the legalization and taxation of marijuana to help the state of California get out of its budgetary mess.
No, he doesn’t support that — at least right now. He said specifically, “No, I think it’s not time for that.”
Debate
It was the rest of his statement, however, that’s caused a stir around the pro-legalization world. The governor said it should be talked about.
“I think it’s time for a debate,” he said. “I think all of those ideas of creating extra revenues, I’m always for an open debate on it.”
As part of that debate, the governor said Californians need to look to the countries — like his native Austria — that have already relaxed drug laws.
“I think that we ought to study very carefully what other countries are doing that have legalized marijuana and other drugs, what effect it had on those countries, and are they happy with that decision,” he said. “Or, like for instance in Austria, I’ve heard that they are unhappy with that and they want to roll back some of the decisions that were made in European countries.”
Poll
Late last week, the director of a pro-marijuana legalization group praised a recent poll that showed 56 percent of Californians are OK with the legalization and taxation of marijuana.
“Right now people in the Capitol are laughing off the idea of taxing and regulating marijuana. This will show them there’s some serious voter support on the issue,” said Aaron Smith, the Marijuana Policy Project’s California policy director.
It’s not just a California poll. A WashingtonPost/ABC survey, also released last week, revealed that 46 percent of Americans support legalization of small amounts of marijuana for personal use — that’s double the support it had a decade ago.
Money
If it were legalized and taxed, how much of an impact would it have on California’s budget? According to the author of a bill in the California State Assembly, it could add $1.3 billion to the state’s coffers.
But Assemblyman Tom Ammiano said it’s not about the money.
“It’s also about the failure of the war on drugs and implementing a more enlightened policy,” he told the San Francisco Chronicle. “I’ve always anticipated that there could be a perfect storm of political will and public support, and obviously the federal policies are leaning more toward states’ rights.”
Reader comments
Regardless, there were plenty of comments from our readers on the topic.
Carolyn said there were two ways to look at legalization:
“Does CA on pot make the economy look better OR does the economy on pot make CA look better?”
CWB was touched:
“I almost cried with joy when I saw this.”
Tom has renewed faith in the government:
“Could it be possible that some rational thinking has entered national politics? If so, then I think I love that big goofy Austrian musclehead. Now, once the Governator has straightened out the great state of Cal-E-fornya, he can move on to get the cultivation of hemp as a food/fuel/textile on the ballots and into practice. GO Arnold!”
Matt94 said legalization will do more harm:
“Legalizing marijuana will have zero impact on cocaine, heroin and the like. So while it may let the pro-drug folks get what they want, it does nothing to help the hard core addicts of the “hard” drugs or the ever increasing prescription drug abusers. It doesn’t reduce crime in our cities (more personal and property crime is attributable to cocaine, meth and heroin users than marijuana). The Mexican drug cartels that currently smuggle drugs into the country will not suddenly stop smuggling, become law-abiding, tax-paying entrepreneurs, and cut their profit margin in the name of generating tax revenue for the U.S. government. They will continue to smuggle and traffic illegally, with the routes that have been long established as successful. The impact on law enforcement will increase, not decrease, as they enforce additional laws about who/what/where drugs are legal. The cost of regulation, licensing, etc will result in increased government expense at the local, state and federal levels.”
melissa
Debate is always a good thing. Making decisions in haste isn't.
1"California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (not actual size)"
I think it's good to talk about the possibility of legalizing. It's not just about people wanting to smoke it legally either. I don't touch the stuff and I'm for legalization.
2At least Governor Schwarzenegger (unlike out President)is open to debate on the subject. Even that seems to be a brave political move relative to what others are willing to risk.
3I agree Mich. No harm in talking!
4I don't see any harm in debating it.
5I would agree to an extint Mich, but I'm betting that a greater number of people in CA are interested in this debate than in other states around the country. I see this as more of a "get me re-elected" type of move for the governator.
6I wish the push for legalization could be clearly separated from California's budget issues.
7The debate is long overdue, but it should be on a national level. My own opinion is that it should be treated like we treat alcohol.
8I tend to look at medical proof. It is proven that the potential for good far outweighs risk, and that is the criteria used for every medication, treatment, or focus of treatment used in patient care. "Do no harm" has been ignored in favor of limiting laws.
Use you imagination...suppose...if some great remedy was discovered ONLY after the legalization, would we not look back and wonder about the stupidity of not exploring an avenue based on a bias? Is it not unfathomable that the key for cancer my be contained in a plant that has been outlawed? Who knows, we may never know.
There are herbal remedies offered right now in grocery stores and "health" stores all over our nation which if taken incorrectly destroys your liver...in a matter of weeks, yet it is still touted as a viable remedy. Alcohol is consumed by over 70% of our nation and it is one of the largest killers, directly and indirectly.
I am proud of Arnold and his gumption to stand up and say we should at least discuss it. We have already voted for it, the people in the state of California have already spoken on this matter. When do you suppose the government will listen? When they can make money off it and control it.
This is a conversation long overdue...I just hope this time they listen.
9"I tend to look at medical proof. It is proven that the potential for good far outweighs risk, and that is the criteria used for every medication, treatment, or focus of treatment used in patient care."
What medicinal potential does pot have?
10I want to know what the long term "recreational" effect of pot is as compared to Tobacco and alcohol. All things being equal, I would prefer to see taxed, and monitored as to the legal potency, much like we state the proof on alcohol.
11I believe marijuana has some use in treating glaucoma, helps control some symptoms of multiple sclerosis and offsets some of the effects of chemotherapy, helping with nauseau and depression.
12I've read the exact opposite. At least when it comes to pain... The doctors I've worked with that study chronic pain have said that when it comes to pain marijuana is not effective as an analgesic at all, as an anxiolytic it is somewhat effective (translated: it doesn't supress your pain, but makes you high enough to not care about your pain)
In fact, the studies in literature really have only shown marijuana to be good for getting cancer patients (and others) to gain weight.
13And lets not forget that ecstasy treated depression till the 80s and look what happened there...
14The medicinal argument has so many holes its unreal. There are really no scientific conclusions we can draw from the studies that have been done.
It irks me to no end that that's what a lot of people base the idea of legalizing it on. If you want get high, fine, say you want it legalized to get high, but don't hide behind medicine when there is no fact. (thats not directed at anyone here, btw)
15But lots of now-illegal drugs were originally used to treat some malady...when has the opposite happened?
16And I'm not saying it applies to everyone, to a certain extent I agree with you Haus. If you want it to be legal so you can get high legally, fine. But having a friend with breast cancer in her 20's who would've wasted away to nothing if she DIDN'T use marijuana to regain her appetite, I believe there is some evidence to support it.
17There are lots of drugs that help some patients and do nothing for others.
18Blue - Yes, I agree re: your friend, thats been the only proven effect so I have no problem saying it can be used for that.
Steph - Yes, there are, but they have to be statistically proven to have an effect on a certain population or else its just not effective. Marijuana does not have a statistically significant effect on the majority of the population for which its been tested.
19heroin was first made and distributed as a cure for opium addiction. That was the Bayer company in 1898. The most amazing thing is that before heroin was announced the discoverers used themselves as testers as to it's possible addictive effects. Yes, a miniscule number of people can actually use heroin, and not be addicted. I forget if it was 5 or 6 scientists who used the drug on themselves. But as astonishing as it sounds those particular group none were addicted. It is almost impossible such a coincidence. By the time folks realised the addictive effects of heroin, the genie was out of the bottle.
20In my opinion, if someone is ill, and their use of marijuana makes them not care about the pain, or makes their life bearable, I don't need scientific proof. Sometimes, its best to listen to the patient when they say something is helping them. Is it going to make their cancer go away? No, but it may help them gain their strength back. I would never tell someone with MS that they couldn't use marijuana to treat their illness, because a scientist hasn't proven it helps. If they are able to move better after inhaling, that's all the proof I need.
21Unfortunately we can't base medicine on that.
22Haus, I think there's a difference between saying marijuana can be legal so that (among other things) seriously ill people can choose to use it to ease their pain and suggesting that it should be widely prescribed by doctors.
You know I'm a huge proponent of legalizing marijuana, but I'm actually not sure that starting first with 'medical marijuana' is the right way to go. Like you said, there's not a lot of scientific evidence to back up using marijuana as a drug. If your only reason for legalization is medical, and there's no evidence, then you've got no argument at all.
I say allowing sick people to decide what makes their life easier is just one perk of allowing everybody to choose what do put into their own bodies.
23I agree, Mich. I'm a proponent of legalizing marijuana, but I don't think it's best to start with legalizing it for medicinal purposes.
24I think an unintended compromise of first legalizing for medicinal purposes is that people will be in the frame of mind that it's medicinal and, therefore should not be used by the general population. I know some medications (allergy medications come to mind) have switched from being prescription to over-the-counter, but that's a rare thing. Also, that would put marijuana in the "medicine" category rather than the "recreational" category.
This made more sense in my mind.
25I just think it is hilarious that it is a natural remedy which is overlooked--only because of a bias. Seriously...only because of a bias. Right now there are five studies being done (the ones I am aware of) financed by our government (your tax dollars)all with a focus on using THC for pain management, depression, anorexia, and bowel/stomach dysfunctions. Only the public which is still indoctrinated in the mysterious "evils" of THC are confused on this issue.
As a medical professional I have seen first hand how THC has improved the quality of life for people in chronic pain--and it is a fabulous miracle drug for those with stomach and bowel disorders.
This is more of an issue of educating people so they can overcome the ridiculous perception that the only use for this is recreational. Do people forget that alcohol is often a main ingredient in numerous cough syrups---and somehow manage to view that as an ok use for alcohol? Do they not understand that codeine...a miracle drug in cough medicine and pain meds originates as an opiate? Opiates are one of the most powerful addictive drugs used routinely today---much more of a threat than medical marijuana.
Most medicines originated within some natural occurring property either plant or mineral and then we build upon them and alter, even begin to synthetically create them. Today we use medications routinely without thinking about how they originated, we simply appreciate their ability to make us better.
It is a huge misconception that by legalizing the use of this product our nation will become a bunch of major pot heads sitting in circles and laughing at stupidity. Heck we do that already...they are using alcohol, or cough syrup, or Mom's pain pills that they grabbed from the medicine cabinet...but it is justified somehow because they are legal medications? Ridiculous and narrow-minded.
Perhaps the larger problem would be how we explain this to young people after telling them that this product is BAD. We would suddenly become revealed to be really big liars...and what would that in turn create? Wouldn't it simply be easier to set down and look at all the evidence together and then form your own opinions rather than rely on the many which would be all to happy to teach you some misconceptions and misinformation which "feels better" instead of what is truth?
26What kind of natural remedy is it? It impairs the senses. That's it. It's great for a pain killer, but it doesn't cure anything. I don't think it should be legalized until it can be proven that the benefits of marijuana far outway the consequences.
27UnDave, make it legal, control the potency, and tax it like alcohol. I am certain that there will be no more, and maybe even less "grass" addicts, as there are alcoholics. Alcohol can be a poison, and there is a direct link to liver failure. Let responsible adults be allowed to make responsible decisions, and stop this "nanny state knows best" crap that permeates every aspect of our society.
28And smoking has a direct link to lung cancer, and THC has been shown to kill brain cells. My question was "What kind of natural remedy is marijuana?" which was in response to cheeky's comment. I have no problem legalizing it and taxing it, once they've shown that it has some sort of benefit.
29UnDave, I think if you reread Cheeky's comment, you will discover that she did explain some of the medical benefits that she has observed first had. Haus admitted a few comments up that weed has been proven to help with the appetites of chemo patients. As some one who has seen the effects of chemo on a loved one, I can tell you that anything that can get them to eat is just fantastic.
I agree with others who say it should be released and controlled as a recreational drug like alcohol rather than a medicinal drug. The majority of people who want to use it legally, want to smoke for fun and not for treatment.
30Those confused and wayward minions....
The wonderful irony is that WHEN they are successful in synthetically creating THC, the pharmaceutical companies will simply give it a new name to elimate the stigma and market it, well regulated and covered by insurance companies. Of course then when you are given a prescription for it you can hold your head up high and hold onto the ridiculous notion that you are doing nothing wrong....which you wouldn't be...any more than you would today with it in its natural and familiar form.
Who cares how it is packaged? You would rather pay for something "synthetically created" than consider the prudence of using something God freely created...He did have a reason and meaning for everything. Who are we to decide which we will gladly take with open arms or turn our backs on. Apparently there are far too many that have no memory of people smoking opium, and now respectfully you can simply get that from a pharmacy under the name codeine.
There are still too many which cannot pull away from that ridiculous idea that thousands of Americans will suddenly be smoking right there in front of your church...which is exactly is happening today--you merely do not see it...you CHOOSE not to see it as well as CHOOSE to consider the values may outweight your concerns. There is more than one to deliver a bitter pill. One does not need to smoke it.
31Cheeky, opium can be smoked and give you the same relief as a prescription opiate. The difference is the Dr. can control the strength of the dosage, and the length of use.
32"And smoking has a direct link to lung cancer, and THC has been shown to kill brain cells. My question was "What kind of natural remedy is marijuana?" which was in response to cheeky's comment. I have no problem legalizing it and taxing it, once they've shown that it has some sort of benefit."
UnDave, have you ever had a beer? Do you, like many men, drink them purely for pleasure every now and then? What's the benefit of that?
33I think this is one of those fights that will never end. The studies that have already been done have shown marijuana to be ineffective for many treatments, but no one cares to buy that.... Why is that?
I think part of the reason is confusing being too high to care about whats happening to you with actually stopping your symptom.
I'm all for something if it can be proven to help a population, like all other drugs have to, but if it doesn't work, it doesn't work. Case closed. But I don't think it will be that way if those results were found.
34Well...it has been done. It has been synthetically replicated by a pharmacetical company in Southern California...and is in case trials for pain management and bowel disorders. They will never tell the public what it really is.
For those that question whether there is an actual medical need for the great MJ plant...just take the time to go visit your local chemotherapy office. I dare you to sit there for ten minutes and not reconsider your position. It has been proven to be excellent for nausea, encourages appetite for those that need nutrition, relaxes painful bowel problems, decreases blood pressure and hypertension, a muscle relaxant, pain relief and anxiety relief.....and you do not have to smoke it to get those benefits.
35I say do it. You're not going to have any more people smoke/eat it than we do now. We might a well get something out of it.
36Post A Comment
To post comments, please log in or register.