Spokane7
61°
February 9, 2011 in City
Washington lawmakers debate marijuana’s legal status
OLYMPIA – Washington state could collect about $200 million a year by legalizing marijuana, then regulating, taxing and selling it in state liquor stores, a legislative panel was told Tuesday.
But Rep. Christopher Hurst, chairman of the House Public Safety Committee, doubted the state would keep any money as long as federal laws remain in place: “The federal government will seize every penny of that revenue. Employees in liquor stores that sell marijuana will be arrested and face five years in federal prison.”
The committee spent about two hours Tuesday considering House Bill 1550, a version of the perennial push for the state to legalize marijuana. Under the plan, any adult could smoke marijuana or grow it in a plot no bigger than 50 square feet, and the state would regulate and sell the drug at liquor stores. Farmers could also grow hemp, which comes from the plant.
If passed, the bill would put the state at the forefront of efforts to legalize marijuana, which remains a controlled substance under federal law. That would be a good thing as other states follow suit, said Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson, D-Seattle, the prime sponsor.
“Why shouldn’t Washington reap the benefits of legalization?” asked Dickerson, who estimated the state could collect $400 million per biennium from taxes and sales. She likened homegrown marijuana to homemade beer and wine.
“We grew up with cannabis. We have to grow up about it,” said Rep. Roger Goodman, D-Kirkland, a co-sponsor.
State Rep. Charles Ross, R-Naches, said he doubts claims by supporters that legalizing marijuana would reduce use among teenagers, even though it would still be illegal for anyone under 21. It’s illegal for teens to drink, but they still do, he said.
Legalization will take the “cool” factor out of marijuana, Goodman insisted: “If grandma’s using it for cancer (treatment) it’s not cool anymore.”
Supporters of the bill likened current law to Prohibition and said legalizing marijuana will remove profits for criminals. Opponents said making marijuana more readily available will lead to more abuse.
Supermajority for taxes unconstitutional, judge rules 
DHF on February 09 at 5:36 a.m.
What a way to generate revenue. Legalizing Marijuana. What next Cocaine, Meth, Heroin etc. The liberal demo. legislature and Chrissy the Gov. would come up with a idiotic way to spend it. Thats if the Fed’s dont seize all the money. Get rid of DSHS if you want to save money. We have elected Idiot’s.
Orange on February 09 at 12:50 p.m.
Agree, Fed’s would take all monies. Why are Representatives wasting time with this topic? This, I’m sure isn’t why we vote you into office.
If you want to smoke something really bad, roll up HB1550 and smoke that.
By the way, I bought the paper you’re rolling with. I want a tax rebate.
Ed Byrnes on February 09 at 3:06 p.m.
Actually most people don’t know that half of all drug arrests in Washington are for marijuana and 90% of those marijuana arrests are for simple possession, which carries a mandatory minimum sentence of one day in jail. This is just plain and simple a waste of law enforcement and corrections resources. If you believe in liberty, personal choice, fiscal responsibility and reducing government intrusion into our private lives then support HB 1550.
The only people who benefit from the current policies are law enforcement officers who would rather face stoners than actual criminals, and the corrections and treatment industries. Chris Hurst is deeply in bed with the law enforcement and corrections lobbies.
We have a choice, liberty for all adults or benefits for the few.
Ed
Orange on February 09 at 3:15 p.m.
LE Officers and business owners. I don’t want a Pot Head (although entertaining to watch) running a machine or even walking through one of my plants. Forget it, law or not. The pee quizzes will continue and terminations will be handed down even faster if Pot is legalized.
So here’s your future, stoned and unemployed.
Ed Byrnes on February 09 at 5:41 p.m.
Orange,
You are making assumptions about me (e.g.; “stoned and unemployed”) and my personal behavior on the basis of a political position I am taking. Rather than discuss how offensive this is I will get to the substance of the matter.
As someone who engages in self employment activities as part of my work I concur that business owners have a right to use urinalysis and have clear policies in place about drugs, including alcohol, in their work places. I would not want a drunk working on any of my data sets, or anything else of mine.
If we want to be serious about safety we would be wise to recognize the extensive hazards that alcohol presents to our society.
Ed