Skip to main content

California Governor Signs Marijuana Decriminalization Bill

Submitted by Phillip Smith on (Issue #652)

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) Thursday signed into law a bill that decriminalizes the possession of up to one ounce of marijuana. The bill reduces simple possession from a misdemeanor to an infraction.

schwarzenegger.jpg
Currently, small-time pot possession is "semi-decriminalized" in California. There is no possible jail sentence and a maximum $100 fine. But because possession is a misdemeanor, people caught with pot are "arrested," even if that means only they are served a notice to appear, and they must appear before a court.

That has happened to more than a half million Californians in the last decade, and more than 60,000 last year alone. Every one of them required a court appearance, complete with judge and prosecutor. That costs the cash-strapped state money it desperately needs.

Under the bill signed today, SB 1449, by Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), marijuana possession will be treated like a traffic ticket. The fine will remain at $100, and there will be no arrest record.

In a signing statement, Schwarzenegger said he opposed decriminalization for personal use -- and threw in a gratuitous jab at Proposition 19, the tax and regulate marijuana legalization initiative -- but that the state couldn't afford the status quo.

"I am signing this measure because possession of less than an ounce of marijuana is an infraction in everything but name," said Schwarzenegger. "The only difference is that because it is a misdemeanor, a criminal defendant is entitled to a jury trial and a defense attorney. In this time of drastic budget cuts, prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement, and the courts cannot afford to expend limited resources prosecuting a crime that carries the same punishment as a traffic ticket."

"Gov. Schwarzenegger deserves credit for sparing the state's taxpayers the cost of prosecuting minor pot offenders," said California NORML director Dale Gieringer. "Californians increasingly recognize that the war on marijuana is a waste of law enforcement resources."

The law goes into effect January 1. Even if Prop 19 passes in November, it leaves in place misdemeanor charges for smoking in public or in the presence of minors. Those misdemeanors would become infractions under the new law.

Permission to Reprint: This content is licensed under a modified Creative Commons Attribution license. Content of a purely educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise noted.

Comments

drafterlady (not verified)

In reply to by ReformCannabis (not verified)

I disagree with you about the statement, "cops will be stopping you over the smell of pot or entering your home for just the smell of it"...as I spoke to a Sheriff's Deputy just this week about this subject and some neighbors who are growing and I have to smell it from my yard.  He stated that they will answer a call/complaint but they can't really do anything, even if they are smoking it, unless they are selling or have intent to sell.  

Sun, 10/03/2010 - 3:42am Permalink
Catrina (not verified)

In reply to by ReformCannabis (not verified)

If P19 passes, it would be legal to sell only if you have a license to do so.

If P19 passes, it creates new crimes. If P19 passes, who is going to come in and inspect your grow area to give you the ok? How much will taxes be? If taxes are a lot, does it not stand to reason that there will be a lot of tax evasion? Where will California's money be then? And remember, tax evasion is a federal offense. Remember too, that P19 STILL does nothing to make it federally legal to consume marijuana. We would still be criminals in the eyes of our government. Get it out of the classification it's in...now that is something worth voting for. It shouldn't be a schedule I drug. That would solve the problem across the board would it not? Would the efforts to do that, not be better spent?

We don't need yet another bad law. Please understand this. There is no reason not to wait for a good law.

I'm a cannabis patient, I'm not some sort of profiteer. I've read the proposition, it's not a good law. No on 19.

Tue, 10/05/2010 - 5:02am Permalink
HairyBikini (not verified)

In reply to by You're dumb (not verified)

  To think these incompetent idiots who couldn't manage their check books are looking to venues they once deemed vial and punishable with prison is beyond stupid! What gives you so much confidence they have been utilizing our tax dollars for the better and we just happen to need this to bail us out and all will be sunny, with fluffy smiley clouds? The simple fact is these goons in Sacramento cannot balance their check book, now they are acting the hypocrite in order to support their special interest and social programs. This will only increase the value in the "legal" market while the Black Market (the truly free market) will continue to thrive based upon buyers going to the less mandated and un regulated costs. Decriminalizing and keeping the government at bay is the best scenario! How about we as voters hold our elected accountable and how about we PAY ATTENTION after the vote is cast!!!!!!

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 3:40pm Permalink
Jakesprogress (not verified)

In reply to by You're dumb (not verified)

We don't need the STATE to tax and regulate everything we do.  This pathetic need to be taxed and regulated is sickening. How hard is it to see what Prop 19 passing would mean to small growers and the tobacco companies that will put them out of business?  The economic recovery of this STATE depends on taking it back from corrupt Democrats.  And cutting government by a third.  For starters.

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 3:41pm Permalink
Dylan K. Allard (not verified)

In reply to by Jakesprogress (not verified)

The economic recovery of this state depends on us getting the hell out of debt. Prop 19 both cuts down on government expenditure (much like this recent bill does) and increases state revenue through taxes. Also, prop 19 will set a valuable precedent for the other 49 states, and maybe help people realize that alcohol is a much worse drug than marijuana.
Fri, 10/01/2010 - 4:08pm Permalink
jana (not verified)

In reply to by Dylan K. Allard (not verified)

Don't tax medicine! What kind of place do we live in that thinks taxing medicine would be a good idea?  There are some many ways to save this state, go green, balanced budget, living within our means!

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 5:20pm Permalink
Eric the Chartruse (not verified)

In reply to by jana (not verified)

Marijuana is to medicine as Californians are to fiscal reality - an oxymoron.  Prop 19 taxes cannabis which has no medicinal properties, Jerry Brown's "moonbeams" not withstanding.  Are cigarettes medicine?

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 5:36pm Permalink
JukeLegend (not verified)

In reply to by Eric the Chartruse (not verified)

is percocet a medicine? It metabolizes in your liver to be the same chemical as heroin. Now, cigarettes contain nicotine. Its a drug, all drugs are medicine as Our wonderful pharmaceutical companies will tell you. They figured out a way to release heroin to the masses, but we cant smoke a plant's flowers?? so yes Cigarettes are medicine, and so is Pot!

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 6:06pm Permalink
mlang52 (not verified)

In reply to by JukeLegend (not verified)

Oycodone metabolizes to oxymorphone.  Although, similar to heroin, and probably just as strong, it is, still, not diacetylmorphine. (heroin)

Sun, 10/03/2010 - 3:13pm Permalink
Non-pot smoker (not verified)

In reply to by Eric the Chartruse (not verified)

Including some that were funded by the federal government:

"In response to passage of California’s medical marijuana law, the White House had the Institute of Medicine (IOM) review the data on marijuana’s medical benefits and risks. The IOM concluded, “Nausea, appetite loss, pain and anxiety are all afflictions of wasting, and all can be mitigated by marijuana.” While noting potential risks of smoking, the report added, “we acknowledge that there is no clear alternative for people suffering from chronic conditions that might be relieved by smoking marijuana, such as pain or AIDS wasting.” The government’s refusal to acknowledge this finding caused co-author John A. Benson to tell the New York Times that the government “loves to ignore our report … they would rather it never happened.” Joy, JE, Watson, SJ, and Benson, JA. Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. National Academy Press. 1999. p. 159. See also, Harris, G. FDA Dismisses Medical Benefit From Marijuana. New York Times. Apr.
21, 2006"

http://bluehoney.org/2010/01/18/top-10-cannabis-studies-the-government-wished-it-had-never-funded/

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 6:09pm Permalink
Non-pot smoker (not verified)

In reply to by jana (not verified)

Prop 19 allows everyone to grow their own. Taxes on what you grow yourself will not exist. Also, no medical marijuana patients will have to pay more for their medicine, as this is explicitly stated in the proposition itself. Please realize that this Prop will make it easier for everyone to use cannabis as medicine, or as recreation, on their own terms.

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 6:01pm Permalink
Wayne27 (not verified)

In reply to by Non-pot smoker (not verified)

This is a fallacy. You can brew your own beer too, make your own wine and distill your own spirits relatively easily. I'm sure the tax on these three forms of alcohol comes to more than $0. And FYI, I'm much more likely to succeed at doing one of those than I am at ever being able to keep a plant long enough to be able to harvest it.

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 9:01pm Permalink
woodjawoo (not verified)

In reply to by Non-pot smoker (not verified)

Dude...you are so naive.  Prop 19 enables your local authorities...your local City Council...to tax and regulate. 

I guarantee you, that there will be all sorts of harebrained schemes to raise the promised tax, including taxing you for what you grow in your backyard, or prohibiting it outright, in your town.  Oh yes.  And if you grow it, without paying their tax, woe unto you...you could end up in way more trouble, than if you had simply grown a few plants, under the old system!

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 9:14pm Permalink
Cal Damage (not verified)

In reply to by Jakesprogress (not verified)

Yea, we should get our roads and sidewalks for free. Those guys checking for air pollution and sewage dumps should be doing it for free. And police and fire should be a pay-as-you-need service. Especially when the small growers use those grenades and tiger traps to keep people off their farms in the state parks that rangers should manage for free.

Your comment demonstrates why we need some kind of regulation for quality control. The stuff you've been smoking may be laced with paraquat, or bleach, or some other toxic substance. It's the simplest explanation for your comment.

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 4:25pm Permalink
Leroy (not verified)

In reply to by Cal Damage (not verified)

 

"Yea, we should get our roads and sidewalks for free. Those guys checking for air pollution and sewage dumps should be doing it for free. And police and fire should be a pay-as-you-need service. "

 

If you think your roads, sewage, fire and police are the majority of Cal's expenditures, perhaps you should go educate yourself before posting again.

" Especially when the small growers use those grenades and tiger traps to keep people off their farms in the state parks"

Which would not be necessary if it were not for the drug war making marajuana illegal.  There is no need to set a grenade trap for a plant in your back yard.

"Your comment demonstrates why we need some kind of regulation for quality control. The stuff you've been smoking may be laced with paraquat, or bleach, or some other toxic substance. It's the simplest explanation for your comment."

Your comment illustrates very well how the many people are very uninformed on the realities of their state, the country and the world.  Go educate yourself.

 

 


Fri, 10/01/2010 - 5:06pm Permalink
woodjawoo (not verified)

In reply to by Cal Damage (not verified)

That's what the medical market is for bro...regulation and quality control. 

And they're doing a damn fine job of it, too...

And they're their generating sales tax, to help pay for your roads and sidewalks.

And employing people in legal grow operations, undermining the demand for the guerilla mexi weed you're complaining about...

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 9:23pm Permalink
Eric (not verified)

In reply to by Jakesprogress (not verified)

OK... so we'll keep it illegal then. Nice. 

Ya see... there is a point to getting taxes from these type of self destructive FREEDOMS. Liquor taxes go to help paying for Health Care and programs to get off substance abuse. Don't you like those services? Maybe you should move to Somalia where they won't tax you at all. Let us know how you like it there.

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 5:20pm Permalink
Leroy (not verified)

In reply to by Eric (not verified)

"Liquor taxes go to help paying for Health Care and programs to get off substance abuse. Don't you like those services? Maybe you should move to Somalia where they won't tax you at all. Let us know how you like it there."

I have no problem with those services, but I also do not believe they are most efficiently provided by the government.  So no, I do not think I should be taxed to provide those services.  Private organizations and the free market will deal with them just fine without any government interference.

 

Also, do not equate limited government with no government.  

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 5:34pm Permalink
PabloKoh (not verified)

In reply to by Celton Manx (not verified)

YES, Decriminalization?.  A stimulus plan for the Mexican Drug cartels!  Proposition 19 is more relevant now than ever.  Arnold just gave the Zetas a hundred million dollar bonus.  Allowing increasing demand without allowing a legal supply chain is stupid and dangerous for California.  I agree people should not be caged for abusing their own body, but giving cartels millions in new revenue, by keeping cannabis gardening criminal is STUPID, STUPID, STUPID.  Proposition 19 allows responsible, regulated and legal California businesses and every individual to shut out the cartels by growing cannabis here in California.  Decriminalization does not! YES on 19!  YES for ending the cartels.  YES for making California safer.

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 3:08pm Permalink
WaDeN (not verified)

In reply to by PabloKoh (not verified)

Legalization in any form would have no measurable impact on supply OR demand.  While some people, like you I suppose, wouldn't consider smoking pot UNLESS it was legalized, most of us out here  in the real world realize that anybody who wants it can get it.  If that confuses ya, that means that legalization in any form would have no measurable impact on supply OR demand....period!

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 4:01pm Permalink
Kyle (not verified)

In reply to by WaDeN (not verified)

The entire *point* of legalizing pot is that you then have a state-set price point, which makes it much harder for any cartel to make a profit. It also means you're not dealing with someone who may decide that it's easier to give you substandard cannabis cut with any number of possible compounds used to either disguise it for transport purposes or just to pad it out.

Anyone who wants it now can get it - but they have to conduct a transaction with a dealer. If they can instead get it for the same price but with a quality guarantee and a stable price from a reputable, legal source, why would they go to a dealer? Do you see people choosing to buy bootleg vodka if they can get the real thing at the same price on a regular basis? Or bootleg cigarettes? Nope, in both cases the bootlegs only thrive when the cartels selling them can afford to significantly undercut the legitimate sales outlets.

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 4:34pm Permalink
Leroy (not verified)

In reply to by WaDeN (not verified)

It would have a huge effect on WHERE the supply came from.  It would no longer be necessary to have a criminal enterprise smuggling it into the country when it can be grown in your own backyard.

 

So the cartels will lose tons of $$.

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 5:08pm Permalink
RevolverBoy (not verified)

In reply to by Celton Manx (not verified)

You call yourself George Washington, but that great man would have burned down any government that would have interfered with a man growing and cultivating a plant or that would prevent a man from smoking, injecting, consuming, or sniffing whatever and whenever and wherever he wishes. Additionally, George was smart enough to realize that criminalizing something is a sure way of making it extremely profitable for a select few - i.g., elements within certain governments benefitting from the war on drugs as well as the Big Pharma, which are using their congressional puppets to now demonize the private use of herbal medicine in a bid to control the market and/or destroy any access the general public has to a natural source of healing rather than their nightmarish mountain of fake dope.

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 3:49pm Permalink
guyritchie (not verified)

In reply to by Celton Manx (not verified)

Incorrect.  Where do you think the "dumb stoners" get the marijuana from?    Non-medical marijuana is grown, distributed, and sold by criminal groups, in some cases very bad people indeed.

 Prop 19 would have the same effect as repealing prohibition of alcohol did on the gangsters of Chicago in the 20s.  It would take their monopoly and put it into the hands of legitimate business, who typically don't shoot each other quite as much. 

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 4:18pm Permalink
Jillian Galloway (not verified)

In reply to by Celton Manx (not verified)

Not only is that not good enough but it's created an even worse situation than before!

Less punishment on marijuana may lead to an increase in use, and because sales of the stuff are still illegal that'll mean *more* money going to the Mexican drug cartels and a subsequent *increase* in their violence and the number of innocent people they kill.

Since we can't stop people smoking we MUST legalize the production and sale of marijuana to adults with after-tax prices set too low for the cartels to match. We *have* to eliminate the cartel's marijuana incomes and end the incentive and ability to continue murdering innocent people!

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 4:49pm Permalink
Cody m (not verified)

In reply to by Celton Manx (not verified)

Did you not read the story? It said smoking in public AND smoking in front of minors will be a misdemeanor under prop 19. If prop 19 fails it's because idiots like you read the first two sentences of an article and decide you know everything the story has to tell. Supports prop 19, legalize, regulate, tax.
Fri, 10/01/2010 - 4:50pm Permalink
Jr. (not verified)

In reply to by Celton Manx (not verified)

The Governor passed this with a signing statement. It can be withdrawn with another one by him or any subsequent Governor. Would you not rather have this be a matter of law? Laws must be repealed by a majority vote.

 

I'm not a Californian, but if I was I would vote for Prop 19. No, I don't smoke. It's a matter of personal liberty.

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 7:08pm Permalink
mimi (not verified)

In reply to by Celton Manx (not verified)

ITS NOT OBSOLETE.

 

we desperately need it as the FIRST REAL STEP to ending drug the useless drug war! 

only an idiot would think it was obsolete now--you've fallen right into the trap that they hoped you would. you have to have more than an ounce at some point to get people less than that. they can still bust the farms where it grows. this law still allows Mexican drug cartels to control marijuana sales. 

 

if you don't like prop 19, because it makes it a felony to smoke around a minor, then you really are an idiot.

Sun, 10/03/2010 - 3:45pm Permalink
St. Bartholomew (not verified)

In reply to by Celton Manx (not verified)

  To Mr. George Washington,

  Seems to me that you've had a bad experience in your life that has made you hate the herb that comes out of the ground that so may of people like myself like to smoke. It also seems that you need to calm down and smoke a fatty yourself =) Only someone relying on pure air would call someone a "dumb stoner" Where do you get off on calling my fellow Americans dumb? Not to mention that you automatically think that your smarter than half the population of America when you say that.  If Prop 19 would've passed, this country of "ours" would not be in the position that we are in right now. Marijuana is a cash crop! It will never go away. And people will never stop smoking it. In 1919 through 1933.... Do you know of this era??? Mr. I call the stoners dumb =) This was the era of the prohibition, When Wilson passed the act he didn't know what he was doing, he thought that he could sober up America by putting his name on a piece of paper. When really all he did was make certain people wealthier than he could ever be in his life as president. By the end of the prohibition they realized that they were wasting their money and time trying to uphold this act of law. Marijuana has been illegal since about 1913 I believe and our country wastes more money on trying to uphold this law than they should. They could use that money for so much more! Our country needs the money, and by having it illegal, we are making other countries money by having to import brick weed. Especially when the Christmas Buds in some parts of the country run out. Anyhow there some information from one of your countries "Dumb Stoners".

 

                                                         Sincerely,

                                                              St. Bartholomew

 

                        PS, You need to be nice to people!!!         =)

Fri, 01/14/2011 - 8:57pm Permalink
What? (not verified)

How can a state tax something that is illegal to have or sell at the federal level?

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 3:17pm Permalink
Nullification (not verified)

In reply to by What? (not verified)

Where did the federal government get the power to impose marijuana prohibition, anyway?  It took a constitutional ammendment to ban alcohol, and I'm pretty sure one was never passed for cannabis.  California has the right to nullify unconstitutional federal laws within its borders.

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 4:01pm Permalink
Badgers (not verified)

In reply to by What? (not verified)

Because the Constitution says so.

The product is being grown and sold locally, therefore the Federal Government has no say thanks to the 10th Amendment.

Of course Franklin Rosevelt had his puppet Supreme Court rule that any thing that COULD effect Interstate Commerce could be controlled at the Federal Level.

So a court decided that the 10th Amendment doesn't count when it comes to farming.

 

This is what Democrats give us. Tyranny.

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 4:11pm Permalink
gb8898 (not verified)

In reply to by What? (not verified)

The better question to ask is this: How does the federal government have the right to enact any drug laws at all? When alcohol was prohibited, it required a constitutional amendment.

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 4:13pm Permalink
Tax Man (not verified)

In reply to by What? (not verified)

According to tax law, earnings from illegal enterprises are subject to income tax. At the federal level, drug dealers are required to pay taxes. The law allows them to deduct their cost of goods sold, but nothing else.

Fri, 10/01/2010 - 6:46pm Permalink

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.