4.1 Debate on Legalization of Recreational Cannabis

Affirmative Constructive

In 2012, Ronald Hammond was charged with the possession of 5.9 grams of marijuana. District Judge Askew Gatewood scoffed at the charge, informing the prosecutor that “5.9 grams won’t roll you a decent joint.” The judge asked the prosecutor why he would want to spend thousands of taxpayers’ dollars keeping him in jail for five dollars of weed. Believing he would receive a small fine, Hammond pleaded guilty at the suggestion of the court. However, Hammond’s crime took place while he was on probation for selling $40 worth of cocaine, and a different judge sentenced him to 20 years in jail for possessing the 5.9 grams of marijuana (Fenton 2015).

I affirm the resolution that the US should legalize cannabis for adult recreational use. Utility is my value premise. Legalizing cannabis would maximize the aggregate utility of Americans by promoting their happiness, wealth, and safety.

1. Most Americans support legalization of cannabis.

My first contention is that an overwhelming majority of Americans believe that cannabis should be legal. Marijuana is the most commonly-used illicit drug. More than 118 million Americans have reported using it at least once in their lifetime and about 24 million report current use (Gonzales 2020). In an April 2021 Pew survey of American adults, approximately 60% of the participants stated that cannabis should be legalized for recreational use. Support for doing so is spread across all ages, races, and political persuasions (Van Green 2021). There is no doubt that the total utility of Americans would be increased if cannabis were legalized since the majority of Americans presumably would benefit from increased access.

There are two other reasons why legalization would maximize utility. The first is that only about 10% of Americans are totally opposed to legalization (Van Green 2021). Their utility is not likely to be significantly diminished if it were to be legalized. There is no evidence that marijuana encourages people to commit other crimes or otherwise pose a threat to non-consumers. In Colorado, violent crime decreased 6 percent in Colorado since cannabis was legalized (Heuberger 2017). Second, existing marijuana users would no longer have to fear prosecution for their enjoyment of cannabis. Legalization eliminates the disutility from worry about discovery and arrest, not to mention the disutility from serving time in jail. If the majority of cannabis users would experience a significant gain in utility, and the minority of opponents would not experience much disutility, adopting the resolution would mean a big win in happiness for Americans. And no one else would experience what happened to Ronald Hammond.

2. Legalization will promote economic prosperity.

My second contention is that legalizing recreational cannabis marijuana will create thousands of jobs in the US. The current legal cannabis industry consists of 321,000 full-time jobs. In 2019 alone, 33,700 new jobs were created in the US cannabis industry. Since 2017, industry growth has averaged 27.5% every year. Due to the significant rise in cannabis purchases during the Covid-19 pandemic mass customer departure from the illegal market to the legal one, California’s cannabis employment grew by 24,000 legal jobs in 2020 (Barcott, Whitney and Bailey 2021).

In 2015, following legalization of adult-use cannabis, Colorado’s gross domestic product (GDP) increased by 4.4% (Marijuana Policy Project Foundation 2021). Increasing GDP in subsequent years proved that the marijuana industry continues to create significant economic gain. According to Colorado’s Department of Revenue (2021), between 2014 and 2021 cannabis sales produced upward of $11.5 billion in revenue. A study from New Frontier Data (Richesson and Hoenig 2019) assessed current cannabis industry and job growth rates to calculate future growth. The study reported that legalization could produce close to 1.45 million new industry jobs by 2025. The report also indicated that legalization would attract more legal business participation and collaboration with other industries. This will promote prosperity and significantly increase the utility of Americans throughout the country.

3. Legalization will decrease harms caused by alcohol use.

My third contention is that legalizing cannabis will decrease the number of traffic deaths and the use of more harmful substances because many people consider it a substitute for alcohol. The Cannabis Access for Medical Purposes Survey reported that 51.7% of respondents reported using cannabis as a substitute for alcohol with an additional 32.6% reporting they used cannabis is often a substitute for other illicit drugs (Lucas 2016). This proves that cannabis can be and is often used as a substitute for alcohol and more dangerous drugs.

About one-third of all traffic fatalities in the United States involve drunk drivers (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 2021). Based on data taken from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System, within the year after the use of cannabis was legalized, the incident of overall traffic fatalities decreased between 8 and 11 percent in those states that allowed its use (Anderson 2013). Reducing accident fatalities will significantly improve aggregate utility.

Cannabis is also safer for those who choose it over alcohol. While tens of thousands of people die every year because of alcohol consumption, there has never been a case of a documented death due to cannabis consumption. Unlike with alcohol, people do not overdose on cannabis. (Villa 2021). This means that overall health will improve to the extent that Americans substitute cannabis for alcohol. While it is difficult to measure the amount of substitution, there will undoubtedly be some, which will definitely increase aggregate utility.

In short, almost everyone will benefit from legalization, except perhaps those who operate prisons. But there will be plenty of new jobs to replace the cuts in prison employment. Therefore, you should support the legalization of cannabis.

Bibliography

Anderson, Mark D., Benjamin Hansen, and Daniel I. Rees.  2013. “Medical Marijuana Laws, Traffic Fatalities, and Alcohol Consumption.”  Journal of Law & Economics 56(2): 333–69.

Barcott, Bruce, Beau Whitney, and Janessa Bailey. 2021. “Jobs Report 2021 Legal Cannabis Now Supports 321,000 full-time American Jobs.” Leafly. https://leafly-cms-production.imgix.net/ wp-content/uploads/2021/02/13180206/Leafly-JobsReport-2021-v14.pdf.

Colorado Department of Revenue. 2021. “Marijuana Sales Reports.” https://cdor.colorado.gov/data-and-reports/marijuana-data/marijuana-sales-reports.

Fenton, Justin. 2015. “How 5.9 Grams of Marijuana Landed Man in Prison for 20 Years.” Baltimore Sun. May 7. https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/crime/bs-md-ci-twenty-years-marijuana-case-20150507-story.html.

Gonzales, Matt. 2020. “Marijuana Statistics and Facts.” Drugrehab.com. https://www.drugrehab.com/addiction/drugs/marijuana/statistics/.

Heuberger, Brian. 2017. “Despite Claims, Data Show Legalized Marijuana Has Not Increased Crime Rates.” Coloradopolitics.com. https://www.coloradopolitics.com/news/despite-claims-data-show-legalized-marijuana-has-not-increased-crime-rates/article_64dd25c9-bcb1-5896-8c62-735e953da28a.html.

Lucas, Philippe et al. 2016. “Substituting Cannabis for Prescription Drugs, Alcohol and Other Substances among Medical Cannabis Patients: The Impact of Contextual Factors: Cannabis Substitution.” Drug and alcohol review 35(3): 326–33.

Marijuana Policy Project Foundation. 2021. “Federal Collateral Consequences for Marijuana Convictions.” https://www.mpp.org/issues/criminal-justice/federal-collateral-consequences-for-marijuana-convictions/.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 2021. “Drunk Driving.” Nhtsa.gov. https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/drunk-driving.

Richesson, Douglas, Jennifer M. Hoenig. 2020. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Survey. “Key Substance Use and Mental Health Indicators in the United States: Results from the 2020 National Survey on Drug Use and Health”  Samhsa.gov. https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/2021-10/2020_NSDUH_Highlights.pdf.

Van Green, Ted. 2021. “Americans Overwhelmingly Say Marijuana Should Be Legal for Recreational or Medical Use.” Pewresearch.org. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/04/16/americans-overwhelmingly-say-marijuana-should-be-legal-for-recreational-or-medical-use/.

Villa, Lauren. 2016. “Marijuana vs Alcohol.” Drugabuse.com.  https://drugabuse.com/blog/marijuana-vs-alcohol/.

Negative Constructive

What started off as a normal day for Morgan McCoy turned into a death scare. Morgan discovered her once energetic toddler unresponsive, the life in her son’s body slowly fading away. At the emergency room, the doctors came across lethally high levels of THC in his bloodstream–the unfortunate aftermath of confusing marijuana gummies for candy. Although he survived, his family was aware there was a strong possibility that he wouldn’t. That heart-wrenching day will be forever embedded in their minds (Reece 2021). While some take pleasure in the temporary high, the lives of many others are forever changed. This pain will only amplify with increased access to marijuana.

I oppose the resolution that the US should not legalize cannabis for adult recreational use. I agree with the affirmative that the relevant value premise is utility. My position is that legalizing recreational use of cannabis will reduce overall utility, not increase it.

1. Legalization increases children’s risk of getting seriously ill from cannabis.

Legalization will make cannabis goods more accessible for vulnerable children as well as adults. A peer-reviewed study published in the medical journal Clinical Pediatrics found that states with more lenient marijuana laws saw young children being exposed at an increased rate of more than triple the general U.S population. These exposures can have severely negative consequences. Researchers at Nationwide Children’s Hospital noted that nearly 2,000 children have fallen victim to side effects such as slipping into comas, struggling with breathing, and suffering through seizures due to cannabis exposure. Many ended up in the emergency room, fighting for their lives. They explain that this is because young children tend to consume marijuana through foods like cookies and brownies (Nationwide Children’s Hospital 2015). Those tend to have very high levels of THC, often far more than their bodies can handle (Freeman and Winstock 2015). In Colorado alone, the department of public safety reported marijuana poisoning related to children rose over 200 percent after legalization (Smart Approaches to Marijuana 2016), and in Arizona, the department of health services noted that marijuana was linked to the death of over 60 kids (Polk 2015).

Legalizing cannabis it makes it more likely for children to be placed in dangerous and fatal situations. When a child wrestles with life-threatening situations, not only do they endure a tremendous amount of disutility, but their family and friends do as well. This disutility is only amplified in the unfortunate circumstances in which a child passes away. Considering a child has their whole future ahead of them, with the potential to contribute to the world in meaningful and impactful ways, the disutility faced by society from these losses is undoubtedly very high.

Unfortunately, most Americans are not aware of these harms. When surveyed about legalization, the likelihood is that they think only about how it will affect them, and if they are unaware of the harms to children, they believe legalization will improve utility. This means that the poll cited by the affirmative should be discounted as failing to reflect the disutility of all the people who suffer harms from cannabis, as the affirmative conceded in cross-x. The affirmative said that support is spread across all ages, which is nonsense. Children had no voice in the poll and by failing to take their welfare into account the first affirmative contention should be rejected. Utility measures the welfare of all Americans, not just recreational cannabis users, and the affirmative’s calculation seems to have wrongfully left out the people who did not have a chance to reply to the survey.

2. Legalization promotes addiction and will worsen the economy.

As drug abuse researcher Robert L. DuPont (2021) points out, high potency marijuana products are the most enticing to consumers, so producers offer products with high THC levels. Here’s why that’s concerning. A study done by Cambridge University (Freeman and Winstock 2015) found there is a direct link between potency levels and serious dependency issues, likely because of the addictive high that more potent strands offer. Despite the popular myth, marijuana is indeed addictive. The National Institute of Drug Abuse (2021) found that nearly 1 in 10 marijuana users will become dependent. The National Center for Drug Abuse Statistics (2021) provides data that translate this number into over 4 million addicted Americans. Marijuana going mainstream essentially means addictions will continue to grow as more people gain access to the drug.

Addictions aren’t pretty. WebMD (2021) lists distorted thinking, lowered inhibitions, reduced concentration, and impaired memory as some of the many side effects of marijuana usage. This can affect work, school, and personal relationships. Yet when people are addicted, they can’t just stop. Not only is quitting difficult, but withdrawal systems can be painful as well. The symptoms described by the American Psychiatric Association include onset feelings of depression and anxiety, disturbing dreams and nightmares, sweating, chills, and even suicidal thoughts (Crane 2021).

The tremendous disutility that nearly 1 in 10 marijuana users face due to addictions certainly outweighs the slight benefit others receive in the form of a temporary high. When we make marijuana more accessible, we’re feeding into this issue because we’re introducing far more people to this addictive substance. As a result, the utility gains the affirmative claims will disappear as more people suffer from cannabis-related harms. They will suffer more work-related accidents and get fired more often. The real gain will be to drug rehabilitation clinics and hospitals, not to the cannabis industry. A nation of stoners will not reach the economic heights that the affirmative claims. The initial job growth will peak and then diminish as productivity declines as more workers turn on and drop out.

Furthermore, the affirmative didn’t address how increasing cannabis consumption will affect other sectors of the economy. Let’s suppose it is correct that there is a substitution effect and that alcohol consumption will go down. Then so will tax revenue from alcohol sales and jobs in alcohol production and sales. Once again, the affirmative closes its eyes to how legalization will affect a major industry in the US.

3. Legalization decreases road safety.

Driving under the influence of a substance can have dangerous, even fatal consequences. As the National Institute of Drug Abuse notes (2021), marijuana is no exception, as it significantly impairs judgment, motor coordination, and reaction time. A peer-reviewed study published on the U.S National Library of Medicine points out that the public, specifically our youth, underestimates risks associated with cannabis (Greene 2018). As a peer-reviewed study by David Evans (2013) found that high school seniors were 30% more likely to drive under the influence of marijuana rather than alcohol. This can have unfortunate consequences. The AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety found that traffic deaths doubled in Washington state following marijuana legalization (Smart Approaches to Marijuana 2016), and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (2021) found an increased crash risk of 4-6% in legal marijuana states.

Crashes and road deaths serve not only as a devastating loss to the victim’s families and friends but also as a tremendous financial disutility through hospital bills and court costs. Legalizing marijuana would decrease road safety, serving as a significant disutility by making instances like these more prevalent. Consequently, utility will be decreased by the adoption of the resolution, which makes the negative side in this debate a better choice.

The affirmative claims there is a substitution effect, but admitted that there is no hard data on what will happen in the long run. It is quite possible that some of those who reduce alcohol use because they are excited by legal marijuana will decide they don’t like the effects of cannabis and switch back. There is also no reason why people won’t use both. If you grew up eating cake but not pie and someone offered you a piece of pie, you might initially switch over, but there is no reason why you can’t have cake and pie. Or pot and alcohol.

The studies the affirmative cited assume straightforward substitution so they claim greater safety. But what if drinkers like consuming cannabis and then get behind the wheel? Bet the affirmative has no numbers for how this multiplies dangers on the road.

Finally, the topic calls for national legalization. I don’t have to defend a ban on cannabis, just oppose national legalization. Let’s see what happens for another few years before we go the route of full legalization and hurt more children and suffer numerous other harms.

Bibliography

American Association of Poison Control Centers. 2021. “National Poison Data System.” American Association of Poison Control Centers. American Association of Poison Control Centers – Cannabidiol (CBD) (aapcc.org).

Crane, Martha. 2021. “Marijuana Withdrawal: Symptoms, Timeline & Treatment.” American Addiction Centers. Marijuana Withdrawal: Symptoms, Timeline & Treatment (americanaddictioncenters.org).

DuPont, Robert. 2021. “Marijuana Legalization Has Led to More Use and Addiction While Illegal Market Continues to Thrive. RiverMend Health. Marijuana Legalization Has Led to More Use and Addiction While Illegal Market Continues to Thrive – RiverMend Health.

Evans, G. David. 2013. “The Impact of Drug Policies on Our World.” The Journal of Global Drug Policy and Practice. Dfaf.org.

Freeman, T., & Winstock, A. 2015. “Examining the profile of high-potency cannabis and its association with severity of cannabis dependence.” Cambridge University Press. Examining the profile of high-potency cannabis and its association with severity of cannabis dependence | Psychological Medicine | Cambridge Core.

Greene, K. M. 2018. “Perceptions of driving after marijuana use compared to alcohol use among rural American young adults.” Drug and Alcohol Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.12686.

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. 2021. “Crash Rates Jump in Wake of Marijuana Legalization, New Studies Show.” IIHS-HLDA..Crash rates jump in wake of marijuana legalization, new studies show (iihs.org).

Nationwide Children’s Hospital. 2015. “National Study Finds Rising Rate of Marijuana Exposure Among Children 5 Years Old and Younger.” nationwidechildren’s.org. National Study Finds Rising Rate of Marijuana Exposure Among Children 5 Years Old and Younger (nationwidechildrens.org).

National Center for Drug Abuse Statistics. 2021. “Marijuana Addiction: Rates & Usage Statistics.”  Marijuana Addiction Statistics [2021]: Usage & Abuse Rates (drugabusestatistics.org)

National Institute on Drug Abuse. 2021. “Is marijuana addictive?” NIDA. https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/marijuana/marijuana-addictive.

Reece, Janay. 2021. “Mother Works to Draw Awareness about ‘Pot Poisoning’ in Children.” nbc12.com. Mother works to draw awareness about ‘pot poisoning’ in children (nbc12.com).

Polk, Sheila. 2015. “Safe pot? Tell that to the 62 kids who died.” The Arizona Republic. Safe pot? Tell that to the 62 kids who died (azcentral.com).

Smart Approaches to Marijuana. 2016. “Lessons Learned After 4 Years of Marijuana Legalization.”  SAM-report-on-CO-and-WA-issued-31-Oct-2016.pdf (in.gov).

WebMD. 2021. “How Pot Affects Your Mind and Body.” https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/addiction/marijuana-use-and-its-effects#2.

Affirmative Rebuttal

Since we agree on utility, this debate comes down to whether total utility will be increased by nationwide legalization. The negative worried about children and alcohol producers. But I will show you why there is no reason to worry about either.

First, the negative says that cannabis consumption is harmful to children, and that their interests are not counted in the poll I cited on recreational cannabis. Many things are harmful to children. Why are their childproof caps on prescription medicines? Children can get sick from a lot of things, like eating dirt and sand. Or eating bad food. Or drinking their parents’ alcohol! Do we ban these things? No, but we do urge home safety.

Every year people get hurt and die from kitchen knife accidents. Smith (2013) reported that every year 900,000 children are injured in knife accidents. The affirmative cites only 2000 people injured by cannabis. If we should ban cannabis, we should certainly ban kitchen knives! But life involves risk, and the gains from many things outweigh the risk of loss. If we wanted a safer country we would ban all cars and save 43,000 lives a year, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2022).

The affirmative admitted he has no evidence that children die from cannabis accidents. Risk to children can be reduced by better safety precautions and better education. As legalization takes place, adults will become more informed about risks from leaving cannabis gummies where children can get them. But there is no significant harm here. Rather, there is minimal harm, which is reflected in the study I cited.

It’s important to see that the negative never disputed the utility gain from legalization. Nor can the negative show that survey responders were ignorant of the risks to children. Yes, there may be risks, but cannabis is far safer than kitchen knives. Our evidence that utility will be increased trumps the negative’s claim that some children might be hurt.

Now let’s move on to contention two. The negative claims there are negative effects to cannabis use for some people, and that this will hurt the economy. Another argument is that the gains I cited are short-term and will disappear. I have two responses: So what, and show me some evidence.

I say so what to the fact that some will lose work due to cannabis use. Many more likely suffer from the use of alcohol or opioids. They also miss work due to sports injuries. Does this mean we ban alcohol, basketball and skiing? No. Risk is part of living. We trust people to be careful, but some accidents are inevitable.

The negative claims the economic effects will be short-term and that they will cut into alcohol sales. This is what is called an argument from ignorance since the negative admits that he has no facts to back that up. The negative has no evidence proving that the economic gain from cannabis is short-term. It certainly can’t dispute that nationwide legalization will increase cannabis sales, and that if it is legal the government will be able to collect taxes–which it can’t do if cannabis remains illegal. So that is a net plus.

The negative asks what about the loss in alcohol revenue. I say what about the loss in tax revenue from sales of typewriters, Blackberries and CDs? Do we worry when a better product replaces an inferior product? Yes, it causes some displacement, but why can’t those displaced take jobs in the cannabis industry? Remember, both alcohol and cannabis are plant-based products. Hops growers can switch to marijuana.

Third, what about road safety? I didn’t say that it is safe to drive under the influence of pot, just that it is safer than driving under the influence of alcohol. That is unrefuted. I can’t prove that everyone will stop drinking because they switch to pot, but some will, and that will make the roads safer. And education about the risks of driving will high can also mitigate the harm.

In short, the negative has no evidence that utility will go down. I have evidence that it will go up, it is basically unrefuted, and thus the resolution should be adopted.

Bibliography

Shelby Simon. 2022. “How Many People Die from Car Accidents Each Year?” Forbes. How Many People Die From Car Accidents Each Year? – Forbes Advisor.

Gary A. Smith. 2013. “Knife-related Injuries Treated in United States Emergency Departments, 1990-2008.” Journal of Emergency Medicine. 45 (3): 315-23.

Negative Rebuttal/Summation

Let’s go back to the resolution, which requires the affirmative to prove that recreational cannabis should be legalized throughout the US. It bears the burden of proving this, but it hasn’t done so. There are three voting issues that you should take into account in deciding whether to adopt the resolution.

The first voting issue is that the affirmative hasn’t demonstrated that nationwide legalization will produce greater utility. The negative says we should legalize nationally now based on a study of adults who may not have known all the facts about the effects of cannabis. My position is that the status quo gives us a great way for this knowledge to be increased–let’s see what happens in the states where it is legal now before we make what would likely be an irreversible step of nationwide legalization. We simply haven’t had enough experience with recreational cannabis to know whether we should take that step.

The affirmative says cannabis is safer than knives or cars, but there are two important differences. One, we need knives to cut our food, and cars to get around. We don’t need cannabis for daily life. The topic calls for recreational use, not medical use, meaning it is optional–and there are many other ways of gaining pleasure. We also know a lot about knives and cars, but not that much about cannabis. So the affirmative’s analogies prove nothing. While some risks are necessary, but why take unnecessary risks?

If we believe that politicians are responsive to what the voters want, then we should let the voters decide. People in California, New York, Massachusetts, Colorado, and Oregon want legalized pot. But voters in a bunch of southern and Plains states don’t. It would not increase their utility. If it would, they would tell their legislators to legalize it. But they don’t, so respect their choice. If you live in South Carolina and want to use pot, you can move or travel elsewhere.

The affirmative also has not refuted the fact that children are involuntarily harmed. Is it really better to allow harm to children from a recreational drug? The affirmative has conceded that they weren’t consulted in the poll, so their utility is left out. Overall, there is no proof of increased utility, so reject the resolution.

The second voting issue is the lack of proof that the economic effects are positive. The affirmative claims that my skepticism is unjustified, and that we know enough to legalize cannabis nationally now. But if cannabis is such a money maker, why are states refusing to legalize recreational cannabis? Maybe they are concerned about the health risks, the decline in worker productivity, the displacement of employees in the alcoholic beverage industry. Remember, the affirmative has to convince you that we should legalize nationally now. But if some states are not convinced, shouldn’t we wait?

The last voting issue is the lack of proof of substantial substitution. If we knew that most alcohol users would switch to cannabis, then perhaps the affirmative could prove the resolution should be adopted. But we don’t yet know this. Maybe people will love the double pleasure of drinking while smoking pot–many used to drink cigarettes and drink, but then cigarettes became seen as too dangerous. So maybe they will drink and smoke pot. Maybe cannabis will lead to experimentation with other drugs. But we don’t yet know, so we can’t count on the substitution effect, which means we can’t count on the affirmative’s claimed advantages from reduced alcohol consumption.

The affirmative asks you to take it on faith that the nationwide legalization of recreational cannabis will increase utility. But there is no proof that it will do so. Since there are plenty of other sources of pleasure that are already legal, and we still don’t know all the harms of cannabis, what is the harm in waiting until we know more? Since we don’t know so much, the affirmative can only speculate that utility will increase, which is not enough for it to win this debate.

Affirmative Summation

There are two voting issues in today’s debate: evidence and common sense. They both mean that adopting the resolution will provide greater utility than the status quo, so you should find in favor of the affirmative in today’s debate.

First, there is evidence showing that legalization will increase utility. I presented a poll; the negative mentioned a few sick kids. Not a lot, and with the education that would inevitably come with nationwide legalization parents will become more careful. The evidence says that utility will increase substantially if the proposal is adopted.

The negative never contradicted my point that cannabis receipts will grow, as will tax dollars. People will keep buying cannabis illegally, but the government won’t get the tax receipts. The negative has no evidence but a lot of skepticism. Don’t buy the story that cannabis will not help the economy. Adopt the resolution and you can buy cannabis to help the economy!

While the extent of substitution is unknown, common sense says that some will shift from alcohol. Since we know how much harm alcohol causes, and there is no evidence that cannabis causes similar harms to public safety, the only issue is how much safer the country will be. But there should be no doubt that utility will increase.

And common sense also says that state legislators don’t always listen to voters. Why don’t Kentucky and Tennessee allow recreational cannabis? They are the two biggest whiskey production states. Their distillers don’t want the competition. Don’t believe the negative’s statement that legislators do what the people want. Let the people of the whiskey states use cannabis as well, and utility will increase.

So there is evidence and common sense on my side, and fear of change on the negative side. More utility with more cannabis, less utility because of obsolete drug laws that push people to use alcohol, a more dangerous drug. Vote for evidence and common sense and adopt the resolution.