By Jacob Sullum

“Our opposition to legalizing marijuana is grounded not in ideology but in facts and experience,” say drug czar Gil Kerlikowske and his five predecessors in a Los Angeles Times op-ed piece that urges Californians to vote against Proposition 19. They argue that voters should listen to them because they are “experts in the field of drug policy, policing, prevention, education and treatment.” If this is the best case the experts can make against marijuana legalization, they had better call in the amateurs.

Kerlikowske et al. say it’s not true that “legalizing and taxing marijuana would generate much-needed revenue,” because everyone will grow his own, thereby avoiding sales and excise taxes. Although “people don’t typically grow their own tobacco or distill their own spirits,” they say, marijuana is different because it is “easy and cheap to cultivate, indoors or out.” If growing pot were as easy as the Six Drug Czars imply, there would not be much of a market for all the books and periodicals that explain how to do it properly. In any case, one could also say that tomatoes are “easy and cheap” to grow, or that beer is “easy and cheap” to brew. I’ve done both, but I still buy tomatoes and beer in stores. The supply is more reliable and varied, and it’s a lot easier. Accounting for the time and effort required to grow tomatoes and brew beer, buying them in the store is cheaper too, even though I have to pay taxes on them.

Californians will vote this fall on whether to legalize marijuana – and the measure has a real shot at passing

By Ari Berman

In 1996, California became the first state in the nation to legalize marijuana for medical use. Now, with a ballot initiative up for a vote in November, it could become the first to ratify an even more striking landmark: the legalization of pot for recreational use. Proposition 19 — the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 — treats pot much like alcohol after the repeal of Prohibition, allowing each city and county to decide whether it wants to approve and tax commercial sales of the drug. And regardless of what local jurisdictions do, any Californian over 21 could possess up to an ounce of marijuana, smoke it in private or at licensed establishments, and grow a small amount for personal consumption. “We’re not requiring anyone to do anything,” says Jim Wheaton, a prominent First Amendment lawyer who drafted the ballot initiative. “We’re just repealing the laws that prevent it.”

By Paul Elam

O.K., so you found some weed in your teen-agers room.

Depending on the kind of parent you are, your reaction to that can range from mild amusement to thermonuclear. But assuming you are not going to smoke the stuff yourself, you are confronted with making some decisions on what to do about it. Perhaps you think it is time to call a counselor, or maybe even the thought of a treatment center for young people with drug problems crosses your mind.

As someone who worked in the chemical dependency treatment field for two decades, and who wrote and directed several treatment programs, let me make a suggestion about that.

Don’t.

Don’t even think about it.

To clarify, let me tell you some things you won’t hear from the staff at treatment programs, or anyone else interested in making a buck off your child’s “problem.”

First, there‘s this funny thing about teenage drug addicts. There aren’t any. Or at least they are so far and few between that I can count the ones I have seen on two fingers. So for your benefit, an understanding of addiction is in order.