Carnevale John T, Kagan Raanan, Murphy Patrick J, Esrick Josh
Carnevale Associates, LLC., P.O. Box 84085, Gaithersburg, MD 20883 USA.
Carnevale Associates, LLC., P.O. Box 84085, Gaithersburg, MD 20883 USA.
Int J Drug Policy. 2017 Apr;42:71-85. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.03.001. Epub 2017 Mar 31.
Despite the federal prohibition against marijuana, state-level recreational use appears to be moving forward. Public opinion is shifting. Following well-publicized state-legalization in Washington and Colorado, states across the US have begun considering similar measures. Since the 2016 election, over 21% of Americans now live in places where recreational marijuana is state-legal, and over 63% of the country permits medical or recreational use at the state level. This paper does not consider whether states should legalize marijuana nor does it weigh all regulatory options available to states. Instead, it considers how states can create a practical framework to regulate recreational marijuana, particularly in a climate of federal uncertainty where marijuana remains illegal. We draw lessons from Colorado and Washington-assuming that other states will adopt similar models and employ commercial, for-profit systems. Considering both the variety of goals that states could adopt and how they interact, we offer recommendations in five areas: cultivation, production, and processing; sale, consumption, and possession; taxes and finance; public health and safety; and governance. We recommend that states implement a relatively restrictive regulatory approach, with a single market for recreational and medical marijuana, if appropriate. This should make marijuana laws easier to enforce, help reduce diversion, and satisfy federal guidance. Moreover, drawing from Colorado and Washington's experience, we suggest a flexible system with robust data collection and performance monitoring that supports a thorough evaluation. This should allow states to "learn as they go"-a must, given the uncertainty surrounding such policy shifts. Of course, a tightly regulated approach will have drawbacks-including a significant illegal market. But political experience teaches that states will be better off loosening a tight market than attempting to tighten a loose one. We also consider a potential role for the federal government under the status quo.
尽管联邦政府禁止大麻,但州级别的娱乐性大麻使用似乎仍在推进。公众舆论正在转变。在华盛顿州和科罗拉多州大麻合法化被广泛报道之后,美国各地的州都开始考虑类似的措施。自2016年选举以来,超过21%的美国人现在生活在娱乐性大麻在该州合法的地方,并且超过63%的州允许在州一级进行医疗或娱乐性大麻使用。本文不考虑各州是否应将大麻合法化,也不权衡各州可用的所有监管选项。相反,它考虑的是各州如何创建一个切实可行的框架来监管娱乐性大麻,尤其是在大麻仍属非法的联邦不确定性环境中。我们从科罗拉多州和华盛顿州吸取经验教训——假设其他州将采用类似模式并采用商业性、营利性系统。考虑到各州可能采用的各种目标以及它们之间的相互作用,我们在五个领域提出建议:种植、生产和加工;销售、消费和持有;税收和财政;公共卫生与安全;以及治理。我们建议各州实施相对严格的监管方法,如果合适的话,为娱乐性和医用大麻建立单一市场。这应该会使大麻法律更易于执行,有助于减少大麻转移,并符合联邦指导方针。此外,借鉴科罗拉多州和华盛顿州的经验,我们建议建立一个灵活的系统,进行强有力的数据收集和绩效监测,以支持全面评估。这应该能让各州“边做边学”——鉴于此类政策转变的不确定性,这是必须的。当然,严格监管的方法会有缺点——包括一个庞大的非法市场。但政治经验表明,各州放松一个严格的市场比试图收紧一个宽松的市场会更好。我们还考虑了在当前情况下联邦政府可能发挥的作用。