Pubdate: Fri, 06 Sep 2013 Source: Register-Guard, The (OR) Copyright: 2013 The Register-Guard Contact: http://www.registerguard.com/web/opinion/#contribute-a-letter Website: http://www.registerguard.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/362 A SOUND MARIJUANA LAW Legislature Should Get Ahead of Initiative Efforts One of the safest predictions in politics is that Oregonians will consider a proposal to legalize recreational use of marijuana next year. Rep. Phil Barnhart, D-Eugene, shows foresight in suggesting that the Legis=ADlature write the proposal in its session next February. State lawmakers are best equipped to ensure that a marijuana measure would be legally sound, would avoid conflict with federal authorities and would be consistent with state interests. Legalization advocates have proved they can place a marijuana initiative on the ballot =AD they did it last year. Measure 80 was defeated by the voters but received 47 percent of the vote despite its poor wording and over-reach. More carefully crafted proposals passed in Washington state and Colorado. At least two pro=ADlegalization initiatives are in the early stages of the process of qualifying for next year's ballot, and one or more will go to the voters unless the Legislature takes on the issue. The Washington and Colorado measures passed in the face of the federal Controlled Substances Act, which flatly prohibits the use of marijuana for any purpose. A U.S. Justice Department memorandum recently indicated how it will respond to state marijuana laws =AD including those in Oregon and 18 other states that have legalized marijuana for limited medical uses. The memo provides useful guidance in how to write a state marijuana law without triggering enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act. Barnhart says an Oregon marijuana law should focus on breaking criminal organizations' control of the drug, establishing a system of regulation and taxation, and keeping marijuana out of the hands of children. Those aims are consistent with some of the Justice Department's priorities. The Legislature could write a proposal that would attempt to serve the state's interests while at the same time furthering the federal government's goals. Any marijuana legalization law must deal with several aspects of the issue. How much of the drug would a person be allowed to own, grow or sell? What types of retailing would be allowed, and how would retailers be regulated? How would marijuana be taxed, and what public services would the revenues support? What would be the punishment for violations such as exporting marijuana to other states and driving under the influence of marijuana? The Legislature could do a better job of answering these questions than advocacy groups whose primary interest is in legalization. Oregon voters will ultimately decide whether to legalize marijuana. When they face that decision voters should have before them a sound and carefully drafted proposal, one that has been the subject of public hearings and legal analysis. Other=ADwise, Ore=ADgon could end up with a marijuana law that either invites federal interference or sets up problem-=ADridden systems of taxation, regulation and enforcement. Barnhart is right: This is a job for the Legislature. - --- MAP posted-by: Matt