Marijuana advocates debate whether to legalize cannabis in 2014 or 2016

Many advocates for the legalization of marijuana have focused on this November’s ballot, but a greater debate also has sparked: whether or not proponents instead should zero in on the 2016 presidential election, when some say legalization has a stronger shot.

Two initiatives already approved by the secretary of state’s office for signature-gathering—the California Cannabis Hemp Initiative and the recent Marijuana Control, Legalization and Revenue Act—aim to land on the 2014 ballot. If passed by voters, they would legalize the plant in many forms.

CCHI’s Buddy Duzy says now is the time for legalization. “I think California wants to legalize marijuana,” he told SN&R. “General thinking says the 2016 election brings out more, and younger, voters. But we believe that 2014 will bring out the same demographics that others seek in 2016.”

In order to qualify, each measure needs to collect more than 500,000 signatures from registered voters within a 150-day period. CCHI’s signature deadline is this week, February 24.

According to Duzy, volunteers have gathered more than 200,000 signatures so far. MCLR began gathering its first round of signatures at the High Times Medical Cannabis Cup on February 8, in Los Angeles.

Meanwhile, the Drug Policy Alliance and also Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, with the support of the American Civil Liberties Union, oppose putting a measure on the 2014 ballot. Instead, these advocates say more research and education is needed in order to ensure marijuana prohibition ends in California the right way—in 2016.

In fact, Newsom just launched a two-year research plan focusing on how to best legalize recreational marijuana. He will lead a panel of 16 experts that include professors and medical professionals to study legal and policy issues.

Lanette Davies, who owns local dispensary Canna Care, warns that waiting for 2016 is a mistake.

“Keep it in the hands of the people. We need to take control. Relying on our politicians and the federal government to approve it for us has not gotten us anywhere,” she said.

Davies has collected “thousands of signatures” for CCHI and supports that initiative because “activists across the entire state” gave input on that legalization effort.

That said, both may have a good shot at becoming law, if they get enough signatures. In December 2013, a Field Poll showed that 56 percent of Californians favored the adoption of the proposed CCHI measure, also known among advocates as the Jack Herer Initiative, while only 39 percent would vote “no,” and a mere 5 percent had no opinion on the matter.

With Colorado and Washington’s support in the legalization of cannabis, backers of the proposed bill, like Americans for Safe Access’ Sacramento chapter’s president Richard Miller, hope for success.

“This is the first initiative that has come forward that addresses the needs of patients and the public,” he said. “I’m hoping that [it] goes through, because we need something for the patients and the public. Times have changed.”

Miller, an advocate for the medical-cannabis movement since the early ’90s, openly admits to his opposition of Proposition 19 in 2010, but says he fully supports this new initiative because it reflects a need for direct legislation at the Capitol, and ultimately forces state government to address the issue of cannabis for personal and medical use head-on.

Yet he also voiced concerns. Specifically, he worries legalization will impact medical-cannabis research and access for legitimate patients. “I’m worried … that patients may get dropped off,” he said, adding, “there’s going to be a lot of work involved … but I think it does give legitimacy to medical patients, and hopefully, it also gets the ball rolling for additional research.”

According to Americans for Policy Reform member and Sacramento NORML executive director Bob Bowerman, the MCLR Act would give the cannabis industry much-needed statewide regulation.

“We’re not saying just legalize it. Legalize it, and do it right,” Bowerman said. “To create an initiative and leave it up to the Legislature to regulate is pretty scary. If they haven’t been able to do it with medical [cannabis], how do you think they are going to do it with recreational?”

Although Bowerman is a co-author of the MCLR measure, he says he is a man of unity within the cannabis movement and supports both initiatives.

“For Sac NORML, we’re behind everyone that’s trying to make a positive difference in cannabis,” he explained. “We don’t look at either initiative as competition. We’re all going for the same basic thing.”