Position Papers and Analysis
The Proponents have been repeatedly caught stretching the truth, and fudging the facts. On this page, we provide you with a series of analysis from groups that focus on the truth and real policy implications of Prop. 64.
Public Health Framework Versus States Marijuana Regulations
Prop 64/CA only meets five of the public health standards outlined
This is a tour de force by the neutral University of California, San Francisco. A withering analysis of how Proposition 64 is patterned after Big Tobacco, right down to watered-down standards that let them advertise marijuana smoking, gummie candies and brownies on television shows like The Olympics watched by millions of kids….
The San Diego District Attorney’s Office produced this sobering analysis of just how flawed Proposition 64 is when it comes to protecting our kids from career felons. The text of Proposition 64 actually makes it legal for convicted heroin and meth felons to apply for marijuana seller’s permits – even those who used children as drug couriers! There is no legitimate reason to have included this invitation to the cartels to set up shop in California, but there it is….
“It took several generations, millions of lives and billions of dollars to establish the harms of tobacco use on health, even though these harms are overwhelming. We should not consider marijuana “innocent until proven guilty,” given what we already know about the harms to adolescents.” Powerful words from the American Academy of Pediatrics. Do we really want to renormalize ads on television that promote smoking…?
While many oppose Proposition 64 as a threat to children’s health, here San Bernardino District Attorney Mike Ramos summarizes the challenge it creates for public safety….