The state’s voters legalized recreational use of marijuana by checking “yes” on Question 4 in last week’s election. But when it comes to making the law work in a way that allows personal freedom without compromising public safety and the health of our young people, much work remains.
We have to agree with state Senate President Stanley Rosenberg of Amherst, who supported passage of Question 4 late in the campaign but argues that voters approved legalization in principle, but did not necessarily sign off on every specific in the 9,000-word measure.
Lawmakers are empowered to tweak the law or even make wholesale changes. We encourage the Legislature to review the law to address the concerns raised during the campaign, particularly over public safety and taxation. Otherwise we could be doing more harm than voters intended.
As of Dec. 15, it will be legal in Massachusetts to possess small amounts of marijuana and to consume it privately, and for residents to grow pot at their homes. Retail sales are unlikely to begin until 2018.
Backers of legalization had argued that removing prohibitions on adult use would largely remove the drug from the black market and generate millions in new tax revenue. Opponents fear legal availability of pot will only lead more people to use harder drugs, could get marijuana into the hands of youngsters more easily and increase impaired driving.
Now those opponents on Beacon Hill are coming around to Rosenberg’s idea to modify the new law “to create a best-in-the-nation law that protects public safety while respecting the wishes of the voters.”
The measure approved by voters calls for creating a Cannabis Control Commission to regulate the industry, in the same way the Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission oversees alcohol. The commission is to be appointed by state Treasurer Deborah Goldberg, a legalization opponent. Gov. Charlie Baker, another opponent, will appoint a 15-person Cannabis Advisory Board to guide the commission.
Voters in Massachusetts, as well as California, Maine and Nevada all approved ballot initiatives Nov. 8 legalizing recreational marijuana. They will join Colorado, Washington, Oregon and Alaska as states that have legalized cannabis.
Using marijuana in public will remain illegal and smoking it still will be prohibited anywhere tobacco smoking is forbidden when prohibition ends Dec. 15, as will driving under the influence. But legalization foes fear an increase in intoxicated driving because there isn’t yet any credible roadside impairment test for marijuana, like a Breathalyzer is for alcohol, to deter it. We can’t believe that legalization proponents want more highway accidents, so this seems a reasonable area for the Legislature to refine the law’s implementation.
Voters OK’d a 3.75 percent excise tax on the sale of marijuana, on top of the state’s 6.25 percent sales tax. Cities and towns can add an additional 2 percent local tax on marijuana sales. Retail sales by the third year of legalization are expected to total $1 billion, generating about $100 million in annual revenue for the state. But that revenue must first go to pay for a regulatory system. Goldberg has suggested the tax be higher because she expects the costs of administering the law will be more than envisioned by the sponsors of Question 4.
At 12 percent, Massachusetts would have one of the lowest marijuana tax rates of any state that has thus far legalized the adult use of the drug. Colorado taxes marijuana at 29 percent, Washington 37 percent, Oregon 17 percent and Alaska 25 percent. California will tax marijuana at 15 percent, Maine is looking at 10 percent and Nevada at 15 percent.
Sales of edibles infused with pot’s active ingredient is growing in popularity in Oregon and Washington, and so it will likely here. But our law doesn’t say much about how the packaging and sale of such edibles will keep the drug out of the hands of children and teens.
While this is left to the cannabis commission, there’s no reason the Legislature shouldn’t consider how to address that potential danger as well. Lawmakers could offer their own specific language to override the ballot initiative’s wording or can make policy recommendations for the commission to consider.
All told, there’s plenty to consider before Massachusetts gets too far along the road to retail sales. Rosenberg has used the word “tweak” to describe what the Legislature may do. We’d recommend our lawmakers feel free to do more than tweak, while preserving the principle the voters approved.