unemployment
Before the 18th Amendment to the Constitution passed to prohibit the transport, production and sale of beer and liquor, the alcohol industry was flourishing in our country. In 1916, just four years prior to the enforcement of the Volstead Act, there were nearly 1,300 breweries nationwide. The United States documents a total of 318 wineries in 1914, but just about a decade later no breweries existed and only 27 wineries remained in production. The number of distilleries was reduced by 85% (Blocker, 236) and the distilleries that did remain open were limited to the production of certain beer with small amounts of alcohol and which resulted in a minimal profit. Because of the elimination of so many alcohol production companies and the reduction in the quality of the finished product, employment rates plummeted and many people lost their jobs.
The United States' current unemployment rate as of March of 2013 is 7.6% (U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics). Many hypothesize that the legalization of marijuana would further decrease the unemployment rate and possibly open the door to other small business enterprises that would be considered illegal under the current marijuana laws.
The United States' current unemployment rate as of March of 2013 is 7.6% (U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics). Many hypothesize that the legalization of marijuana would further decrease the unemployment rate and possibly open the door to other small business enterprises that would be considered illegal under the current marijuana laws.
Tax revenue
Besides the impact to joblessness, the reduction of 1300 breweries to 0 and 318 wineries to 27 also hurt the tax revenues collected by the federal, state, and local governments. Lower tax revenues generally resulted in furthering the devastation of the American people by weakening defense, slowing advancements in technology, and hindering our nation's ability to further expand its infrastructure. From 1919 to 1929, federal tax revenues from distilled spirits dropped from $365 million per year to less than $13 million per year and revenue from fermented liquors dropped from $117 million annually to virtually nothing (Bureau of Internal Revenue, 1929).
Based on information that is available regarding today's production, sale, and distribution of marijuana and the assumption of tax rates comparable to our government's current taxes on alcohol and tobacco, the legalization of marijuana is estimated to yield $46.7 billion annually in tax revenue (Drug Policy Alliance). According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, the state tax collections for alcoholic beverages in 2012 were nearly $6.02 billion and tobacco tax collections for the same period were nearly $17.1 billion. These combined statistics indicate that a government regulated marijuana industry could easily surpass the tax revenue currently being brought in by tobacco and alcohol. In addition, the present day tax revenues could be spent even more productively given that government regulation of marijuana would result in a lower demand and would likely result in a decrease in federal spending on the War on Drugs, at least concerning enforcement of marijuana laws.
Milton Friedman, a leading United State economist, has endorsed a Harvard University report backed by 500 other economists which recommends legalizing and taxing marijuana rather than prohibition. He states, "there is no logical basis for the prohibition of marijuana. $7.7 billion is a lot of money, but that is one of the lesser evils" (Hardy, 2005).
Based on information that is available regarding today's production, sale, and distribution of marijuana and the assumption of tax rates comparable to our government's current taxes on alcohol and tobacco, the legalization of marijuana is estimated to yield $46.7 billion annually in tax revenue (Drug Policy Alliance). According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, the state tax collections for alcoholic beverages in 2012 were nearly $6.02 billion and tobacco tax collections for the same period were nearly $17.1 billion. These combined statistics indicate that a government regulated marijuana industry could easily surpass the tax revenue currently being brought in by tobacco and alcohol. In addition, the present day tax revenues could be spent even more productively given that government regulation of marijuana would result in a lower demand and would likely result in a decrease in federal spending on the War on Drugs, at least concerning enforcement of marijuana laws.
Milton Friedman, a leading United State economist, has endorsed a Harvard University report backed by 500 other economists which recommends legalizing and taxing marijuana rather than prohibition. He states, "there is no logical basis for the prohibition of marijuana. $7.7 billion is a lot of money, but that is one of the lesser evils" (Hardy, 2005).
Prison overcrowding
The number of prisoners in federal prisons, reformatories, and camps grew from 3,889 in 1920 to 13,698 by the year 1932 (Thornton, 1991). This major positive fluctuation in convictions was not due to violent offenders, gang member, and bootleggers. Instead, the government was arresting people on alcohol possession and consumption charges. This seemingly indicates a waste in taxpayers money.
Similar to the increase of alcohol-related incarcerations during the prohibition era, exclusions of marijuana have displayed crowding in US jails. According to the Drug Policy Alliance, prison overcrowding from 1985 to 1995 was attributed largely to convicted drug offenses. More than 80 percent of the increase in the federal prison during this time was because of drug charges. In addition to the limited amount of space in our jails, tax dollars are, too, going to waste. Over the past 40 years, $121 billion has been spent to arrest more than 37 million non-violent drug offenders; about 10 million of them for possession of marijuana (FoxNews, 2010).
Similar to the increase of alcohol-related incarcerations during the prohibition era, exclusions of marijuana have displayed crowding in US jails. According to the Drug Policy Alliance, prison overcrowding from 1985 to 1995 was attributed largely to convicted drug offenses. More than 80 percent of the increase in the federal prison during this time was because of drug charges. In addition to the limited amount of space in our jails, tax dollars are, too, going to waste. Over the past 40 years, $121 billion has been spent to arrest more than 37 million non-violent drug offenders; about 10 million of them for possession of marijuana (FoxNews, 2010).
$pending
Recorded in the 1930's by the Bureau of Prohibition, government spending on the Coast Guard increased significantly throughout the prohibition era, specifically the waters immediately outside the harbor of New York. Starting in April of 1924, the government dramatically increased spending to combat smuggling operations in what was called "Rum Row". According to the reports of the Bureau, the instigation of military intervention came with a cost of nearly $12,000,000 in equipment funding. At this point in the "war on drugs" for alcohol, the government was annually investing about $24.6 million in this division of the Coast Guard. Just five years later, spending increased by nearly $5 million (Schmeckebier, 1929).
The War on Drugs being waged by our government today is and example of a similar costly drawback to government intervention. In 1970, President Nixon enacted the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act. His first budget for this drug prevention act was $100 million. Today, the United States' expenditure on the War on Drugs has reached nearly $15.1 billion. This expenditure is approximately 31 times President Nixon's original budget, even when adjusted for inflation (FoxNews, 2010). Presumably, if marijuana were to be legalized, the government could control the types and chemical concentration of THC, how the crops are being harvested, and the distribution/sales operations rather than spending enforcement time and tax dollars prosecuting those who already perform these tasks.
The War on Drugs being waged by our government today is and example of a similar costly drawback to government intervention. In 1970, President Nixon enacted the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act. His first budget for this drug prevention act was $100 million. Today, the United States' expenditure on the War on Drugs has reached nearly $15.1 billion. This expenditure is approximately 31 times President Nixon's original budget, even when adjusted for inflation (FoxNews, 2010). Presumably, if marijuana were to be legalized, the government could control the types and chemical concentration of THC, how the crops are being harvested, and the distribution/sales operations rather than spending enforcement time and tax dollars prosecuting those who already perform these tasks.