If voters were to listen to the messaging of those who oppose the legalization of marijuana as proposed by Amendment 3, they would be filled with a deep concern for the future of Florida and the nation as a whole. Who wouldn’t be? Groups such as No On 3 are painting a bleak picture involving fentanyl overdoses, corporate monopolies, smoke-filled streets, and general lawlessness. The issue with these assertions is that they are primarily fueled by fear rather than fact.
Voting yes on Amendment 3 not only helps to expand individual freedoms and access to safer, quality-controlled cannabis products but also has the potential to enhance state revenue. The following are some of the fears of those opposing Amendment 3 and the facts that address them.
Fear: The prevalence of legal recreational marijuana will lead to an increase in minors smoking.
Fact: The amendment is clear. Amendment 3 allows people 21 years old and up to buy, hold, or use marijuana for personal use, which includes smoking and eating it. It also lets licensed centers and businesses grow, make, and sell marijuana products and related items
In other words, minors would be unable to legally purchase marijuana for themselves. In addition to this, according to the Journal of the American Medical Association, “Recreational cannabis legalization has not been associated with any increase in adolescent marijuana use.” That is not to say it will be impossible for minors to obtain weed. Some are already smoking it the same way that some smoke cigarettes, vape or drink alcohol. This issue is already pervasive and not specific to weed.
Fear: Amendment 3 could put people at risk of consuming fentanyl-laced marijuana.
Fact: Much of this stems from the horrific fentanyl epidemic we find ourselves in. While this fear of fentanyl-laced cannabis is understandable, it is also mostly unfounded. According to the Journal of Emergency Medical Services, in general, “fentanyl-laced cannabis products are a malevolent myth.” In fact, according to Medication for Addiction Treatment and Electronic Referrals, the ways people consume cannabis such as burning via smoking and ingestion through edibles breaks down fentanyl, preventing it from being absorbed.
Also, the amendment calls for the sale of marijuana to be limited to state-licensed entities which allows for regulation and quality control of the products used by the general public. Reduction in access to drugs does not eliminate their use, it eliminates safe usage.
Fear: Amendment 3 will allow for a corporate monopoly on marijuana and prevents the use of “homegrown marijuana.”
Fact: A monopoly implies control by a single company. As it stands, “Florida has 25 licensed medical marijuana companies,” and the Florida legislature would be able to extend licenses to additional entities, therefore not a monopoly.
However, the rest of the above statement is true. Amendment 3 does not currently have allowances for homegrown cannabis, but this is no different than current federal laws that govern us. Also, not allowing for homegrown marijuana allows for greater quality control and regulation which should help assuage fears of synthetic/fentanyl-based marijuana use.
In addition to quality control, prohibiting the use of homegrown marijuana means the state has the ability to tax the sale of legally obtained cannabis. This industry is estimated to bring in $195.6 million annually in state and local sales taxes.
Fear: Florida has a reputation as a family-friendly state, and the overwhelming smell of marijuana in the streets will negatively affect this.
Fact: Currently, there are no restrictions on smoking marijuana in public. However, there is a framework in place that could be used to implement time and place restrictions for smoking cannabis. Much in the way that Florida has banned smoking “in workplaces, restaurants and bars,” legislators could and should implement similar laws surrounding when and where people can smoke. These regulations could be built into the legislation surrounding Amendment 3 if it gets voted in.
There are also odorless ways to consume marijuana, such as tinctures and edibles.
Furthermore, in Colorado, a state that legalized marijuana, residents have the option to file formal complaints about the odor, which can result in hefty fines to discourage outrageous amounts of smoke and the associated smells. Also, “most grow facilities have ventilation systems and filters to prevent odors from escaping, even when marijuana cultivation is at its stinkiest during the harvest times.” The system isn’t perfect, but it does offer a framework through which other “smell solutions” can be explored.
Even I have to admit that marijuana can smell less than pleasant, and I certainly wouldn’t want my young nieces and nephews inhaling the aroma. Finding solutions to this problem will take time, but other states are already paving the way for Florida to base policies on.
I am not arguing that legalizing recreational marijuana will be a simple task or that it doesn’t raise issues, such as what to do for people currently incarcerated for marijuana-related crimes. We need regulations and guardrails in place to guarantee our citizens can enjoy their cannabis responsibly. However, many of the fears of those opposing Amendment 3 are not completely valid.
Voting yes on Amendment 3 allows us to explore safer options for marijuana consumption that allow for higher quality control while also generating revenue that can go towards taxpayer needs such as expanded civil services or infrastructure maintenance.
I am voting yes on Amendment 3; are you?