Prop 19 picks up support at Midd

Proposition 19 did not pass in California. However, if it had been put to a vote here at Middlebury, it seems it might have found more success.

On Nov. 1 — the night before the election — a group of 33 Middlebury students and two professors congregated in Gifford Annex Lounge to debate California Proposition 19 (Prop 19. This act would have made personal possession and marijuana usage legal for those over 21-years-of-age and allowed the local and state government authorize other marijuana-related activities such as retail sale.

The event was initiated by Daniel Pulido ’11, who wanted to spur interest in the act. When asked why he was so interested in proposition 19, Pulido responded simply: “Because I am Columbian.”

The main cause for the war in Colombia is the cocaine trade,” said Pulido. “While Americans complain about gangs founded by drug dealing, in Colombia we have whole armies that control parts of the country and have their ranks full with child soldiers. I grew up with fear in a country terrorized by the violence fueled by the international drug trade.”

According to Pulido, Prop 19 is a step in the right direction to defeating the war on drugs.

“The only definitive way to finish the violence related to drug trade is with legalization,” Pulido said. “The war on drugs is a euphemism that actually means the war on the drug producers. The veracity of American nostrils for Colombian cocaine has destroyed my country. This is an especially unjust war considering that only a tiny little percentage of Colombians are drug dealers, but the country as a whole is affected by this ‘war on drugs.’”

While the war on drugs in the US is fought with posters, in Colombia [it] is fought with M-16’s and napalm,” said Pulido.

Even in America, some feel the law would not have done much to stop the drug-dealing business.

“This business attracts risk-takers,” said Professor of Political Science Mark Williams. “These are not people who are going to be deterred. It’s the same type of people who like to jump out of planes.”

Many see a law like Prop 19 as something that could do more harm than good, and think that making marijuana illegal is not stopping people from smoking it. The marijuana grown legally in California, for instance, has found its way to every state except Alaska.

“The enforcement, time and money keep the police busy,” said Williams, “but it won’t do anything to eliminate the black market.”

At Middlebury’s debate, 31 of the 33 students supported marijuana legalization.

“Middlebury is this bubble of liberalism where most people supported Prop 19,” said Pulido. “We had a hard time finding people against it.”

However those who did oppose the legalization dealt with one main issue: morality. Because marijuana is considered a gateway drug, grouped with cocaine, heroine and other “hard drugs,” people worry about the effects of its legalization. However, proponents of Prop 19 think marijuana, when legal, would be appropriately separate from these drugs.

“I think marijuana is considered a gateway drug because it is grouped with other illicit drugs,” said Lynn Nobel ’11.5.  “If it was regulated by the government, these other drugs would no longer be available in the same places.”

Supporters also illuminated the contrast between marijuana’s effects and those of alcohol.

“Alcohol causes birth defects and addiction,” said Nobel, “but marijuana is not addictive.”

“I would group alcohol in with cocaine before marijuana,” said Leah Welch ’11. “But whether or not it’s a moral problem, maybe we shouldn’t care.”

Student proponents of the act are not ignorant of the importance of for morals in society. However, they believe that the effects of the law would have been more positive than negative.

“I am convinced that marijuana is indeed very dangerous, especially if consumed before the age of 18,” said Pulido. “I fully understand people that are against the legalization of marijuana based on moral arguments. But laws should not be judged purely on their intentions; they have to be considered also on their practical consequences.”

While discussion group attendees acknowledged that it seemed unlikely that Prop 19 would be passed, they reveled in the discussion that the act induced.

“Proposition 19 may be the best thing in that it could prompt discussion in Washington and Californian legislature,” said Charles A. Dana Professor of Political Science Murray Dry.

“It’s the only way to gain a national stage,” said Ben Blackshed ’12. “It can initiate the process.”

Even though Prop 19 failed in California, there is hope for further discussion and initiatives to fight the war on drugs.