July 20, 2015

Stanton A. Glantz, PhD

California Tobacco Oversight Committee weighs in on marijuana initiative; Other health groups should follow

As part of the process of developing an initiative to legalize recreational marijuana use in California, the Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom  and the ACLU and have created the Blue Ribbon Commission on Marijuana Policy “to facilitate a comprehensive understanding of various policy questions related to the possibility of legalizing, taxing and regulating marijuana for adults in California.  The Commission has held several public meetings and will be preparing briefing papers on a range of issues.
 
While the Commission will not write the initiative – drug reform advocates will do that – the results of the Commission’s deliberations will likely be important in shaping the policy discourse around any marijuana legalization. 
 
One of the tensions of the discussion is whether a marijuana legalization initiative should be criminal justice reform (i.e., stop throwing people, mostly minorities, in jail for drug use) or creating a new industry (i.e., allow companies to make money).   Regardless of how the initiative is framed, however, there is no question that there is lots of money to be made and a rich industry (complete with campaign contributions) will emerge following legalization and will likely quickly dominate the legislature just as the tobacco companies do now.  (Indeed, the tobacco companies have considered getting into the marijuana business.)
 
This makes it very important that any marijuana initiative be written in a way to create a policy environment that deals with the criminal justice issues without creating a new public health disaster.
 
In particular, the Commission has expressed interest in how to prevent youth use of marijuana and other adverse health impacts.  In particular, they have been open to input from tobacco control experts and other health experts.  Surprisingly, the health community has been reluctant to engage in the process.  This reluctance is short-sighted, since it is a missed opportunity to shape the discussion early in the process.
 
On July 17, 2015, this situation started to change when the California Tobacco Education and Research Oversight Committee (the committee created by the California Legislature to oversee the state’s tobacco control program) submitted a thoughtful detailed letter to the Commission outlining health concerns, including how marijuana legalization could  jeopardize California’s successful tobacco control programs, and recommending how any initiative should be structured to avoid these problems.
 
Essentially TEROC advised treating the emerging marijuana industry like the tobacco industry.
 
Here are TEROC’s key recommendations:
 

  • In order to minimize the threat to tobacco control efforts, and the negative consequences associated with legalizing and commercializing recreational marijuana, TEROC recommends two broad recommendations.

 

  • First, a comprehensive marijuana education and prevention campaign should be funded and established to inform and protect young people, non-users, and the general public from the harms of marijuana use.

 

  • Second, marijuana use should be restricted consistent with clean indoor air and smoke-free laws restricting the use of traditional cigarettes and electronic cigarettes in indoor and outdoor settings.

 

  • Tobacco-related type policies, which protect the public and help prevent the uptake of tobacco products by young people and reduce tobacco-related disparities, should be applied to marijuana use.

 

  • These include age-of-sale restrictions, signage about age of sale restrictions, licensing retailers and zoning considerations for retailers, restrictions on youth marketing and advertising, restrictions on free sampling, child-resistant packaging, and strong warning labels to protect children and adults from accidental poisonings.

 
(This is verbatim from page 2 of the TEROC letter, but made a bulleted list to make it easier to read.)
 
TEROC also recommends:
 
1. Levy an adequate marijuana excise tax, comparable to tobacco products, and designate a portion of the tax for prevention and surveillance. Taxes should be levied by THC concentration in the marijuana product, rather than marijuana weight.
 
2. Require marijuana retailers to be licensed.
 
3. Restrict sales to persons aged 21 and over and require ID checking prior to sale.
 
4. Prohibit vending machine sales.
 
5. Prohibit self-service displays, with vendor assisted only sales.
 
6. Prohibit advertising on billboards, television, and radio, and no advertising in youth-oriented magazines, similar to the requirements of the Master Settlement Agreement between most states and the tobacco companies (1998).
 
7. Prohibit marketing to minors, including no advertising within 1,000 feet of schools and playgrounds, and no use of cartoon characters. This would decrease the visibility and impact the use by everyone, but especially children.
 
8. Prohibit free sampling, no sponsorship of sporting and cultural events, similar to the requirements of the Master Settlement Agreement (1998).
 
9. Prohibit payments to promote marijuana products in movies and other forms of media, similar to the requirements of the Master Settlement Agreement (1998).
 
10. Prohibit coupon redemption.
 
11. Require labeling of THC levels in marijuana products, and child resistant packaging to protect adults and children from accidental poisonings.
 
These are sensible, evidence-based policies.
 
It is time for all the major health and tobacco control advocacy groups to publicly endorse TEROC’s recommendations and make it clear that they would oppose an initiative that did not include these elements.
 
The full letter is available here.

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.