Yesterday, I once again made the argument for legalizing marijuana and taxing the hell out of it. Today, Publicola reports that Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson is collecting co-sponsors on a bill that would do exactly that.
How’s this for a magical pot of revenue to help fix the state’s $2.6 billion shortfall? Seattle state Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson (D-36) is collecting co-sponsors for a bill that would legalize marijuana. And tax it.
This is not a fringe proposal folks, and it’s past time to seriously debate it.
UPDATE [Lee]: The bill can be read here. I’ll be posting more about it later this week.
If pot were legal and taxed, could one still grow their own, like people today in WA make their own wine and beer? Or would it only be legally available if bought at a state store?
And would the Feds have to go along with this plan for it to really work? Or would the DEA raid the state stores?
I haven’t seen the proposed bill, so I don’t know how the tax is structured, but let’s say for illustration purposes the state slaps a 25% tax on Mary Jane. That means we pot-smokin’ hippies would only have to puff $10.4 billion of pot a year to wipe out the budget shortfall. We should be able to manage that if we get some help from our conservative friends. They could use a few tokes to calm them down.
This will be a better world if puddykins is stoned 24/7.
@2…given our govts spending history, they would just blow that money as well – and we would still be in debt up to our ears.
I might might have to take back a few of the nasty remarks I’ve made about the state Ledg.
I hope I have to take back a few of the nasty remarks I’ve made about the state Ledg!
Haha, you silly people. This isn’t going to move an inch in Chris Hurst’s committee. It’s DOA.
For any law in WA to hold water, the Feds would have to drop cannabis off Schedule One classification. As for home grown, I would hope that such activity would be the same as home brew. No tax or regulation for that, unless you wish to sell it.
The state would require registration and licensing for growers and retailers – state stores, etc. Don’t look for the price to go down much. If an eighth oz was $40 before, it may still be $40 afterward, with as much as $15 to the state. Still, growers could rake in the ducats with craft strains, specialty bud, and golden oldies (Acapulco Gold – trademark owned by one of the tobacco giants)
Sign me up! I retired ‘Buddha Bhab’ 30 years ago (long story…I lost, they won. I stopped gardening) I would bring it back with bells on!
How messed up is our federal and state government?
They float the idea of legalizing drugs NOT because of individual liberty and the right of citizens to be free to choose, NOT because it might have some health benefits, and NOT because the drug war is failing……..they float the idea because they fucking need money!
How in the hell did we get into the bizzaro land our govt has put us in.
damn pathetic that laws/public policies regarding individual liberty are determined not because they are right/wrong/good/bad, but because our inept government needs cash. what a joke.
mary lou should change her name to mary jane, man.
mary lou brings the reefer, jane brings the wine, gonna tripe your guacamole, baby, just one more time. it’s a hype case boogie, look out!
#4 and #8 – True. If they do this (and they won’t…because it makes sense) but they’ll immediately come up with some ‘new’ spending to use this money. Remember when lotteries were introduced (or riverboat gambling in Iowa/Illinois where I used to live)? All that was passed because this FLOOD of new money would be “for the children” and our schools would have gold plated drinking fountains and everything would be great. Of course, what happened is the lottery money DID go specifically for schools (in Iowa at least), at which point they took that much OUT of the general funds targeted for schools, spent that money on something else and the schools were in no better shape than when it all started.
I think pot should be legalized, not because of the tax revenue, but because of liberty and science. There is NO rational scientific reason for vodka to be legal and sold BY the state (in state run stores) but pot illegal. Vodka is simply more harmful biologically and more costly (domestic violence, drunk driving, etc). No argument, they’re not even close, CLEARLY pot should be legal (or alcohol illegal).
@4 You need a joint, man! You have unsteady nerves.
@7 Back in the bad ol’ days in Nam a G.I. could buy a kilo of Thai Gold for 5 bucks. Looks like there’s been some inflation since then.
@11 They tried making vodka illegal. Remember how that worked out? For that matter, remember how the Bush administration’s $1 billion initiative to teach abstinence to teenagers worked out? Unwed pregnancies went UP. Talk about wasting taxpayer money … Republicans do that better than anyone.
Yeah, but we wouldn’t care…
wait….
what?
2. Roger Rabbit spews:
I think the HA Leftist Pinheaded KLOWNS could puff their share and then some!
The problem is THEY WON’T PAY THE 25% TAX!!
Few will Rog. Why? Because they are deadbeat losers like ylb & Rujax…always looking for the free ride.
It will be interesting to see how it is structured AND THE PENALTIES FOR THOSE WHO FAIL TO PAY THE TAX!
If there is no enforcement or consequences, it will just be another Leftist Pinheaded KLOWN wetdream….which this will be.
@7
I suspect the price of pot would likely go down rather dramatically. Currently the retail price of marijuana is $4500 or so a pound, even imported Italian white truffles or saffron aren’t nearly as expensive.
Marijuana is relatively easy to grow and wouldn’t command such prices if legal. Even with the government taking a huge cut for taxes I suspect the eventual retail prices would be no more than 1/10th of what they are now.
9. notaboomer spews:
Funny stuff
Mary Jane Reefer Madness….nice name.
Assume, if passed, which it won’t….this is a zero revenue producer and the cost is the continued deterioration of our Youth and the empowerment of the PINHEADS. What is the cost of that??
@18
Why would this be a zero revenue producer? The state manages to collect taxes (and markup in the case of hard liquor) off of the sale of alcohol and tobacco. You really think a grow light in a closet can compete with large scale production? Even with high black market prices most people don’t try to grow their own pot. With legalization the prices would almost certainly fall even if distribution was limited to state liquor stores.
@16
You seem to have dropped a huge logical paradox, Cyn.
If all pot smoking libs are lazy, would they be more likely to get in touch with their illegal dealer, wait til the dealer is ready to see them and pay an inflated price, or would they just be lazy and go to the state regulated dispensary?
Ever buy a six-pack of beer or a bottle of the demon Alky-hol? How’d you manage to not pay the tax?
Depending on how many new growers enter the business. No doubt lots will grow for themselves.
If prices went down dramatically wouldn’t many of the growers decide to stop growing especially that now they have gone from all profits to paying city pot taxes, state pot taxes, federal income tax. The cash crop became a real taxing job.
This is a fringe proposal…
Love this Web site but this issue is completely out of touch with even the liberal base.
Only your pot smoking friends want to see it legalized. It is a fringe of people.
22
I don’t smoke pot, but I’m a strong advocate of legalizing it. In fact, I’m not aware of a single justification for keeping it illegal that stands up to any scrutiny. The criminalization of pot causes disruption in the countries that grow it for market, results in too many incarcerated young Americans, is hypocritical, sucks law enforcement resources from activities more deserving of enforcement attention, and deprives governments of a source of tax revenue. Other reasons for legalization exist as well. The only reason for criminalization, when you get down to it, is “we don’t like pot smokers.”
David —
It’s not fringe. According to Zagat 55% of “west coast” residents want it legalized and 36% of Americans:
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chro.....poll.shtml
You know what is said, though? People who experience ignorance plus fear while they think about this subject.
If you grow your own, you just took a customer from a large scale production. You share with a friend that helped water, 2 lost customers.
If legal to grow, how many people with the space wouldn’t grow for their own. Consider how many grow their own vegetables.
If legal to grow and prices stay higher than corn/lettuce/etc., how many big farm vegetable farmers turn to pot. You mentioned $4500 a pound of pot, here in lala land potatoes sell for $1 a pound. If the farmer ONLY made $500 per pound for pot, that’s over $499 he would make for a pound of potatoes.
Probably because of the law. If someone can grow a house plant, they can grow a pot plant.
Yeah.
And clinton didn’t inhale.
Considering by 2012, we will have had 20 years of presidents that smoked and didn’t change the law. Or 12 if you believed that clinton didn’t inhale.
pot might not be as easily taxed as alcohol or cigarettes. if it was legal, it would be too easy to grow pot in your back yard.
liberals are barking up the wrong tree if you’re thinking about the tax possibilities.
legalize marijuana simply because ITS NOT THE GOVERNMENTS FUCKING BUSINESS WHAT YOU PUT IN YOUR BODY!
@27
Yup. We should be focusing on the incredible savings from not incacerating people for possesing an easily cultivated plant. As HA has pointed out, those costs include law enforcement (divert the money to a modern computer network for law enforcement or community policing, or you know things that studies show actually reduce crime), municipal courts (dockets too full, stop hearing pot cases), encarceration and on and on.
But the tax possibilities are real. If a casual user can get the chronic at a reasonable price they will. They won’t wait for the growing season, peak harvest and suffer without in the dead of winter. Do you stop eating produce when you can’t grow it in your backyard?
@21 & @25
So what are you arguing here? Sure plenty of people grow their own vegetables. But just because my neighbor has some tomato plants doesn’t mean there isn’t enough demand to sell them pretty much everywhere that sells produce. For that matter having an apple tree in my front yard doesn’t mean I don’t buy apples at the grocery store.
My point is commercial farmers will undoubtedly get into the pot growing business if it is legalized, their cost of production will be far lower than that of any home grower even if they use grow lights and hydroponics to ensure year-round production.
Sure some pot smokers might choose to grow their own but I don’t think it would be a significant percentage of the market. Any more than those who choose to grow their own vegetables, brew their own beer, or even roll their own cigarettes are a significant percentage of those markets.
Still there likely is a fair bit of money to be made for producers, those who process and package it (marijuana cigarettes anyone?), retailers (though in WA that probably is the state liquor stores) and state tax agencies (or the Feds once they pull their heads out of their ass).
This is a revised cross-post from SLOG.
Washington’s cigarette tax is $2.025 per pack of 20. It’s the 6th highest in the country. So how many joints does $1 billion buy?
Well, webhigh.com says pot is selling for around $10 per gram in Tacoma – right in line with Chris @17’s figure of $4500/lb. That translates to about 100,000,000 grams per year. If a small joint contains .5 grams, then there are 200,000,000 joints. At the cigarette rate, that comes to 10 million packs.
10,000,000 packs x $2.025 per pack = $20,250,000 in tax revenue. Of course at the current street rate, a pack of 20 joints would cost about $100 plus tax.
On the other hand, considering a joint costs about $5, you could argue that a $1/joint tax means a joint would cost $6 – around what a mixed drink costs in a bar.
A $1/joint tax would then raise around $200,000,000 per year.
On the other hand (yeah, i know — three hands now, so call this the reach around option) the state tax on liquor is 51.9%. If we tax pot at the same rate, then the state potentially be looking at up $500,000,000 per year in new tax revenue. I agree with folks who say it would almost certainly be less, but even $100,000,000/year would be huge.
@28
the less our state does to “help” the happier i am so i agree with you. the savings are incredible!
the tax possibilities are not real. for every pothead who does not want to grow his own pot in his own backyard greenhouse, there are plenty more who would be willing.
of course, the state could maintain the illegality of growing and selling your own marijuana.
To think the state would only get tax cut on teh action is HILLARIOUS!!
C’mon, man. Where’s the common sense???
Why would anyone believe that if pot were legalized the price would fall? Have you ever bought liquor at the state run stores?
That’s why you pay $25 for a 1/5th of bottom shelf booze that you can get for $15 in any other state.
If the state run liquor stores begin selling pot you can believe it will be at the street value people are already accustomed to paying.
Commercial growers are still going to get the $500 per pound price they’re getting now. Not less. While the law may be off the growers asses, you’d still have to contend with pot pirates and outlaws like the Banditos wanting to steal your cash crop.
If the state is the ONLY legal purchaser and distributor of pot then this is how the law, if passed, should break it down.
Sell pot in state run stores @:
1/8 oz = $40
1/4 oz = $80
1/2 oz = $160
1 oz = $300.
The vast majority will purchase pot in the 1/8 or 1/4 oz rate.
There are 64, 1/4 oz to a pound.
64 x $80 = $5,120 per pound.
If the state buys a pound of bud for $500 sells it as described above they have a realized gain of $4,620 per pound.
Less distribution, warehouseing, stocking, employee costs etc.
Still WAY more than the 25% tax rate.
Legalizing pot would be the supreme cash cow of cash cows.
Easily the #1 cash “anything” produced in Washington state.
It would only be a matter of months, perhaps even weeks before other states followed suit and the Fed just gave up on enforcing MJ drug laws.
The pot laws haven’t anything to do with drugs and every thing to do with the people who use them. Originally Marijuana prohibition was all about giving Mexicans and black musicians a hard time. Now it’s about the dirty fucking hippies and blacks and Mexicans. I know a few of my generation who spent the late ’60s and early 70s stoned out of their gourds who now take the constipated Republican position on weed. When the Jesus crazies in the ’20s wanted to crack down on the suspicious, dangerous Irish and Italians booze was banned. Thus it has been, thus it always be.
34:
Agreed. I remember reading that during the crusade against MJ, certain lawmakers would spell it as ‘marihuana’ to play up the racial angle. Then there was the ‘Reefer Madness’ clone ‘Marihuana’. And then there’s the old term ‘loco weed’. Sounds pretty racist to me.
@32
Mary Lou Dikerson estimates the revenue would be similar to what the state receives in liquor revenue or around $300 million per year. Now I assume the state would do something similar to liquor sales where they kept the markup for themselves. I’m not sure what that would work out to in retail price but I assume it is less than the current black market price. You’d want to undercut the black market as you want to drive it out of business and keep as much of the revenue for the state as possible.
Would the price of weed fall if legalized?
In California, where it is nearly legal, the price has gone up a tiny bit and stabilized at $400/oz.
Meanwhile, the QUALITY has gone way up. Dispensaries test the weed for fungus and chemical contamination. The only sell severely trimmed bud (i.e., the good part, not the leaves). Growers face an intense competition to get their product on the dispensary shelves.
Even though I haven’t smoked in about a decade, I have a little knowledge about what I speak…
@31
I guess I wasn’t clear. I’m not suggesting that there wouldn’t be any Homegrowing/sharing. But the growing season here is highly limited and a full on basement growing or hydroponic system is really expensive. If high quality bud were readily available, the underground market wouldn’t disappear but the incentive would really be hindered.
The potential tax revenues being tossed around, I agree, are pie in the sky but there is a pretty significant untapped revenue stream.
@32
So prices don’t come down. Not the issue. If good quality pot were available to every pothead at exactly the same price on demand, the incentive for underground dealers to go legit is really heavy. Once a network of legit dispensaries is in place there may be demand for illegal supply. But that will most likely be what you see in Los Angeles today. People who don’t have the bullshit skills to get a medical card buying an eighth from their friends who have a card who got it from a dispensary. The state still gets their cut and the seller marks it up a bit. That’s capitalism.
@37, thank you. Better product from legit sources even further depresses the demand for underground sources. When was the last time you heard of anyone distilling bathtub hooch? It doesn’t happen ’cause good hooch is available.
Mr. Cynical @ 18
A libertarian who opposes maximizing personal liberty because he believes it would cost too much. Very interesting.
So tell me…
In your libertarian utopia, who pays for the administration of elections and the courts?
(You’re nothing. If not inconsistent.)
Legalizing or decriminalizing marijuana is all well and good.
As a treehugger, I’d be thrilled if hemp was legalized.
Hemp is better than wood pulp for paper. Hemp is better than cotton for many textiles. Grows faster, higher yields, costs less, less burden on the topsoil, less irrigation. Etc.
If anyone has any news about hemp becoming legal, please post here. Thank you.
(The cotton growers rode the anti-marijuana hysteria to also get hemp outlawed.)
Jason @ 39
I used to try to reason with Cynical. Liberals do such things. We believe that if you marshal the facts, then apply a little inductive reasoning, you know, be empirical, that we can persuade others. Alas, that technique does not work with the likes of Cynical. He is immune to reason. But, let’s give him his due. He is perfectly happy with being a blind pig occasionally finding an acorn, even if his general foolishness amuses the rest of us.
In a libertarian utopia shouldn’t you be able to smoke what ever you want? Would the state be mandating that everyone must speak english or banning same sex marriage?
Sounds like us Happy Hooligans are a bunch of libertarians! I mean, we want be able to smoke (or not smoke) what ever we want, marry (or not marry) whom ever we want and speak in the manner of OUR choosing, without state interference.
19. Chris Stefan spews:
Because ANY substantial tax will lead to an Underground Economy. You KOMMIES have already developed Barter Groups and other Kommunal avenues with Farm Veggies & fruit…to avoid/evade income taxes.
Why not on pot?
There is an active Underground Ecomony already.
A high-taxed item like pot will only increase it.
proud @ 41
I hear you. But I actually want an answer. I’ve met lots of libertarians. It never occurred to me to ask this question. I’m pretty sure I know the answer. But I want to hear one of them say it in public.
@43
Serious projection there. Right, everything anybody does is about avoiding income taxes.
You are aware that if you get an organic farm share box delivery you pay sales tax right? And the farm pays that sales tax to the state right? So the state has a pretty damn good idea what the farmer’s total income is, right? And you’re aware that there is no income tax in the state of WA, right. You’re lack of a point would be irrelevent, if such a point existed.
Oh wait, I get it. Freecycle, the kommie plot to pass largely useless goods that we’re planning on tossing is a huge unreported income stream for us tree huggers. I gave away a phone just last week. Lets see, cordless Panasonic, bought in 1998 for around $100, still working, subtract standard depreciation….damn I hope that woman in the Carolla reports the $2 it was worth to the I.R.S.
Growing pot is easy, growing good pot isn’t. Sure, you can eventually get a decent strain but the time and effort versus going to the local smoke shop will send only the dedicated to Home Depot for equipment.
I can make beer at home for a fraction of the price of microbrews at the pub but how much effort do I want to spend on it?
If, and it’s a big freaking IF, cannabis gets dropped from Schedule One and we can all enjoy the herb in peace, I suspect there won’t be as many serious growers as folks think. Names like Purple Kush, Strawberry Cough, Mary’s Lamb will be tossed about like Cabernet, Merlot, and Syrah. Smoke shops and special ‘tastings’ will be in vogue.
I just hope that they serve more than cheese at the ‘tastings’.
As for the ultimate price of Ghanj…I’ll leave that up to the market!
@44–
Oh come on…do you really think most share boxes collect sales tax and if they do, remit them??
No they don’t.
I’m very aware of specific many cases where they do not collect…and I’ve check a couple that collect BUT DON’T EVEN HAVE DEPT. OF REVENUE ACCOUNTS!!
My you are naive.
Your Obam-Mao Utopian Marxist wetdreams are based on seriously flawed assumptions.
Plus share box deliveries are a minute portion of the organic business.
Roger Rabbit said:
“@11 They tried making vodka illegal. Remember how that worked out?”
Yeah, all Prohibition did was to give organized crime its start. Now we have more organized crime than we can shake a stick at!
Our problem is that we always want to make whatever might be a problem illegal. It’s a knee-jerk reaction that doesn’t work, either in the short or the long run.
Cyn, still projecting.
Really, you’ve taken the time to order organic produce from a supplier and then cross-checked Dept. of Revenue accounts? Uhhhh, I beleive you’re full of shit. And even if you did check, (again, if it smells like bullshit, looks like bullshit and comes in a steamin’ pile, it’s usually bullshit), I can tell you straight out the the public name on the front of my business is not the same as my LLC under which I pay taxes. Ever see a DBA statement?
Lets look at the most basic form of produce, the farmers market. You need a city business license to sell at the University, or any other market in King County. To get a city business license you need a UBI from the state. Now you could, theoretically get all those and claim no income but you won’t last more than six months before the Dept. of Revenue certified letters start coming, then they’ll start calling and eventually pay you a visit. Now think about a delivery service either to the general public or to restaraunts. You could do that without a business license but you have a truck. Probably want to insure that in case your driver is on the hippie lettuce and gets into an accident. You’ll probably want to roll all your costs/income into an LLC so you can legitimately deduct and keep your personal assets shielded.
Man, for a conservative, you sure are uninformed about the value of incorporation…
Projection Cyn. You MUST be cheating on your taxes. You assume everyone else is.
Damn, we’ve strayed WAY off topic here. I think I’m done now.
Mary Jane Replaces the Marijuana Man
The greatest effect of legalization would be to free the forces of marketing.
Coffee sells in huge amounts for three reasons … it is not regulated for its psychoactive effects and those effects are pleasant. Add to these the power of marketing and we have everything from Maxwell House to Starbucks. Imagine marijuana sales on that scale!
There is a huge marketing advantage of mj over coffee. People buy coffee for its taste. If “marijuana” were legal, there would be no reason to restrict the use of THC, the active ingredient in mj, to reefers.
Now imagine M&Ms as M&M&Ms. Chocolate already contains low amounts of an mj like ingredient. Lace the M&M with THC and the marketers would go wild! Imagine Valentines Day!
But wait, like one of those TV ads, “there is more.” M&M&Ms could be made LOW calorie! The sweet taste of sugar in chocolates could be replaced with other sweeteners. The result … a product with more effect than chocolate but with no weight gain!
The marketers would go wild inventing new marijuana based products. As long as these did not involve inhaled smoke, the government would have no reason regulate this new market. In fact, if mj were a state monopoly, the government itself would have huge reasons to promote sales. Imagine, printing the state lottery number on individual M&M&Ms!
My favorite marketing tool for Marijuana, however, would be sex, Lets call her Mary Jane and imagine MJ, dressed in a seductive low cut gown in a bar or wearing a smartly feminine business suit at a conference table at Gates, Bogle, Harumph and Smits. The MJ lady, sips her marijuana laced sweet chocolate, the camera sweeps to a head shot, her mascara-enhanced eyes look out .. the men are high, very high.
Victoria’s Secret models replacing the Marlboro Man! l
Yup.
It allowed a family to get filthy rich illegally.
And then using that money to make sure the family got into politics.
Then how come the state (and Feds) is able to collect tobacco and liquor taxes? Due to the high tax rate, if your theory is true, everyone should be getting their tobacco and alcohol on the black market.
@51
So what are you saying? We never should have re-legalized alcohol? We never should have prohibited marijuana? We shouldn’t legalize marijuana because a family who got rich off of trafficking in it might go into politics?
@38
aye. makes sense. i think we agree more than we know. taxes alone don’t justify legalization but there is the possibility.
as a freedom loving liberal, i would stick to the ‘because its not the governments business’ argument.
@52 Then how come the state (and Feds) is able to collect tobacco and liquor taxes? Due to the high tax rate, if your theory is true, everyone should be getting their tobacco and alcohol on the black market.
i wonder if quality alcohol is as easy to manufacture than quality marijuana?
Lots of families got rich during Prohibition. Like the Mafia.
Hell, there’s one family that got rich by financing the Nazis in WWII. Wonder what happened to them?
only one family financed the nazis?