The proposed tax and regulate initiative in Washington State has created a firestorm of contrasting opinions within the marijuana-reform community. Below, proponents and opponents weigh in on the controversial I-502 measure, sponsored by New Approach Washington, which will be on the November ballot.

Rick Steves (Rick Steves' Europe): "Washington State, I believe, will be the first state to legalize, tax and regulate marijuana. This will be the beginning of the end of our country being able to dictate global drug war laws through the United Nations. I believe that the awareness raising value of this and the normalization value of this is hard to overstate."

Vivian McPeak (Seattle Hempfest): "Rick Steves is totally correct when he says that impaired drivers should have the book thrown at them. However, his statement is ironic considering that I-502 does not deal with impairment! The initiative clearly will create an environment where non-impaired drivers can be prosecuted and convicted of driving under the influence of cannabis (a brand new crime created by I-502). Presently, if you're charged with a DUI in Washington State, you can mount a defense. Under I-502, if you have over five nanograms of inactive THC in your system, you're convicted. No defense. Currently, if you're charged with a DUI, the state has to prove you were impaired to drive. Under I-502, IMPAIRMENT IS NOT EVEN AN ISSUE! How is this justice? How is this better? How is this fair?

"We have not been fighting in the trenches for decades so that citizens of our state will forfeit any form of defense and get convicted on a technicality. As far as I know, no reform group has ever promoted a bill that included a per se DUI provision. I have tremendous respect for Rick; he's a great American. I greatly respect almost every person involved in I-502. That's why I can't understand why they would advance a bill that is a Trojan horse for law enforcement. If you think the Washington State Patrol won't exploit this loophole to the hilt than you haven't been paying much attention. The proponents say that we are all worked up over nothing, or better yet, that the law can be fixed later. When is the last time you recall a DUI provision that was relaxed?

"The only ethical answer is a field sobriety test which tests for impairment until science can provide a definite blood level that guarantees impairment. Driving a car is the most dangerous activity that most people routinely engage in. Driving impaired is categorically wrong and it should be a crime, as it already is. But to criminalize having inactive THC in one's bloodstream does not protect anyone, and to do it to gain votes is just plain wrong. They need to fix the initiative language so that the reform community can back this effort.

"And regarding 'baby steps': with national polling finally at 50%, we need a bill that's already learned to walk that can take us somewhere better. It's painful for me to take this position, but at the end of the day I must do that which my conscience dictates. We need reform badly, but, sadly, this New Approach is the Wrong Approach."

Keith Stroup (NORML Board of Directors): "The Board has been discussing it, and it is likely that we will endorse it, although none of us really like the DUID provisions. Nonetheless, it has a lot of serious in-state support, some money behind it and will almost certainly qualify for the ballot. For most of us, we try to look at the big picture, and having a state actually legalize marijuana (not just for medical use) is a terribly important step politically, and right now Washington looks like the state most likely to do that in 2012. Colorado is also a distinct possibility. So while we've not yet taken a formal position (although NORML Advisory Board member Rick Steves is one of the primary sponsors), and admittedly at least one, and possibly two, of our board members oppose the initiative, once it qualifies for the ballot, NORML will almost certainly endorse the measure."

Update: NORML has officially taken a position in favor of I-502. Executive director Allen St. Pierre writes: "We fully recognize the per se DUI marijuana provisions in I-502 are arbitrary, unnecessary and unscientific, and we argued strongly with the sponsors for provisions that would require proof of actual impairment to be shown before one could be charged with a traffic safety offense. NORML, arguably more so than any other drug law reform organization, has a long track record of opposing the imposition of arbitrary and discriminatory per se traffic safety laws for responsible cannabis consumers. But we failed to persuade the sponsors of I-502, and now we must decide whether to support the initiative despite those provisions. We believe the overall impact of this proposal, if approved by voters this fall and enacted, will be overwhelmingly helpful to the vast majority of cannabis consumers in the state, and will eliminate tens of thousands of cannabis arrests each year. Thus, NORML’s Board of Directors voted unanimously (including the two members from Washington) to endorse the initiative, while maintaining our opposition to per se DUID provisions in principal.

"Additionally, at NORML we also support the right of consumers to grow their own marijuana, and there is no such legal protection in the Washington initiative. However, qualified patients already protected under existing law will be able to continue to grow cannabis, as I-502 does not alter existing medicinal cannabis laws. The sponsors found through their polling that the inclusion of the right to cultivate marijuana for personal adult use would reduce their level of public support below that needed for approval. Again, while we continue to support personal cultivation, we believe the initiative still deserves our support, despite this calculated omission by I-502’s sponsors."

Douglas Hiatt (Sensible Washington): "This initiative is a piece of shit. It changes the DUI law to establish a five nanogram active THC limit for  those over 21, and for those under 21 it is zero tolerance; any amount and you're guilty. Both standards are per se or strict liability, which means no defense and no arguing about impairment. Our current standard, which no one has asked to change, requires proof of impairment. The Colorado legislative working group looked at this issue and refused to set a number after reviewing all the evidence and talking to the researchers, because there's no scientifically valid number. None. They've set a limit that will snag patients and recreational users as well as totally fucking over the kids under 21 with no tie to impairment at all. This was done purely for politics, based off of polling responses. This is the first time any reform group has advocated what the ONDCP is advocating; NORML and MPP and others have stood against any per se strict liability DUID laws for years, as has the criminal defense community.

"The initiative is totally preemptible. What no one wants to acknowledge is that the Feds will be in court to get an injunction two minutes after it passes, and they will get it. This initiative will be in positive conflict with federal law and the initiative's own author, Alison Holcomb, knows it. This means that the initiative is a giant waste of time and money. If the federal court applies "savings clauses," it's possible that the only thing left will be the bad DUI law and decrim of an ounce with nowhere to buy it.

"The initiative sets up a distribution system that taxes at 100%, which will produce some pretty expensive pot. With only one ounce allowed and no change to any of the other delivery laws if you're not in the state-regulated (read: totally preemptible) system, it's all still a crime. It does not legalize hemp, although they claim it does. The Hemp Industry Association says it doesn't. Of the $215 million in taxes they say they will generate, they have $185 million of it 'earmarked' (their word) for programs they have created, some to reward sponsors. So $185 million goes not to the general fund but to special interests they have identified for rewards in the middle of the worst budget crisis the state has ever seen.

"Plus, no home growing! End justifies the means is not where we want to be at. It could really fuck us up with the upcoming fight against ONDCP and others pushing the per se DUID laws. This just continues the worst of prohibition and is nothing more than pot for the privileged."

Roger Goodman (Washington State Representative): "I'm not endorsing any initiative, but I support any step forward for cannabis reform. In the legislature, I and my other pro-cannabis colleagues await Initiative 502 as it is presented to us and we'll move it as far as we can. It will certainly attract a lot of attention and do some important education of our colleagues and the public at large. We'll see what happens when the measure goes to the ballot in 2012. I realize the impaired driving threshold and other provisions in I-502 are too much to bear for many in the cannabis community. I'm more confident that flaws in the new law could be addressed by a legislature that is already sensitized to cannabis reform (remember, it's our lame-duck Governor who vetoed our great dispensary bill earlier this year). The bottom line is that Washington would be repealing prohibition (and maybe the very first state to do it), and that would be a major step forward, despite the measure's shortcomings."

Jeffrey Steinborn (NORML Board of Directors): "I-502 is a government sting disguised as reform. The proposed law has no chance of surviving a court challenge based upon its requirement that all participants incriminate themselves by registering. The case law on this issue is plentiful and unanimous. This issue is not subject to debate. I'm astounded that so many intelligent, well-meaning people are able to ignore this glaring flaw and support the proposed initiative.

"What’s wrong with a state law that attempts to legalize and regulate cannabis through a system requiring that participants register with the state or be licensed by the state? One federal judge recently called the idea delusional. Confidential records held by state authorities can and will be subpoenaed by federal law enforcement. In the most recent litigation of the issue, records reflecting registration by persons participating in Michigan’s medical marijuana program were subpoenaed by the DEA. Michigan adopted a medical marijuana law which included registration provisions. The law provided confidentiality for those who registered. The DEA subpoenaed those records. The federal judge who heard the case not only upheld the validity of the subpoena, he ridiculed the people who'd imagined that a state law could trump the federal law.

"On page 13 of his opinion the judge writes: 'The nationwide federal law against marijuana, and the nationwide federal organizations that enforce that law, were the same the day after Michigan adopted the MMMA (Michigan Medical Marijuana Act) as they were the day before. They did not go away. Thus, no reasonable person can expect to have a right of privacy from federal investigation when they violate federal laws. The MMMA card affords its holder no greater cloak of privacy than did the emperor’s new clothes. To believe the contrary is simply to close one’s eyes to reality. But when you open your eyes, the emperor is still naked; the elephant is still in the room.'

"The reference, of course, is to Hans Christian Andersen’s fairy tale about an emperor who was convinced by swindlers to believe he was wearing beautiful clothes, when in fact he was naked."

"I-502 is quite specific about this issue. It modifies RCW 69.50.500 to require that the Liquor Control Board cooperate with federal law enforcement agencies. This is the same agency that's given the responsibility to license and regulate cannabis. If that’s not a sting operation, I respectfully await some other explanation."

Morgan Fox (Marijuana Policy Project): "When considering whether to endorse an initiative, MPP's first consideration is whether it is an improvement over the status quo. I-502 would implement some very solid improvements, such as the removal of penalties for adult marijuana use and the establishment of a regulated distribution system. While there are portions of the initiative that we would've written differently, I-502 represents a chance to stop most adult marijuana users from being arrested and would be a launch pad for further reforms. That's a step in the right direction."

Dominic Holden (The Stranger): From New York Times op-ed: "The opposition doesn’t have a compelling case. I haven’t found a single scientific study showing that even the heaviest of pot users would exceed the five-nanogram cutoff after 24 hours. And the civil liberties attacks are simply dishonest. The rules would remain the same as they currently are for medical marijuana - no registration requirements and no database.

"For their part, I-502’s critics insist that they have no financial motivation and that they support legalization, just not this initiative and its DUI. regulations. But it’s more than a little strange to defend the status quo, in which nearly 10,000 people are arrested in Washington for possession each year, on civil liberties grounds. And it’s not as if voters would accept a law that didn’t include restrictions on smoking and driving.

"Washington State has a chance this fall to siphon profits from cartels while stopping senseless arrests, or it can let the status quo prevail. It’s a simple choice, particularly given that concerns from the medical marijuana industry are, at best, red herrings."

Please let us know what you think about I-502.

Also see:
Washington's I-502 Splits Reform Community
California's Regulate Marijuana Like Wine Act
NORML Opposes Colorado's Amendment 40
More CelebStoner News