EFFECTS OF LEGALIZING MARIJUANA 1

Transcription

1 EFFECTS OF LEGALIZING MARIJUANA 1 Effects of Legalizing Medical On Illegal Use Professor Elizabeth Jacobs, PhD Psychology 230 November 29, 2010

2 EFFECTS OF LEGALIZING MARIJUANA 2 Introduction With the increasing number of states approving the legalization of medical marijuana, political parties and citizens alike are concerned about the effects of such legalization. Harvard professor Jeffrey A. Miron speculated that legalizing marijuana would have the effect of crippling overall marijuana enforcement (Egelko, 2003, p. A8). While the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2009) has done research on rates of marijuana use, based on age, gender, race and income, there has been no research based on whether they live in states with or without legalized medical marijuana. However, research has been done comparing San Francisco, which at the time had just been legalizing medical marijuana, to Amsterdam, which had fully legal marijuana, and no differences in drug usage were found, despite differing extents of legalization (Reinarman, Cohen, & Kaal, 2004). To be able to justify the arguments of those who are opposed to the legalization of medical marijuana, therefore, a study must be done to determine whether there is a significant difference in illegal marijuana usage between states with and without legalized medical marijuana. Findings from such a study would allow legislators and voters to have a better grasp on whether passing laws for medical marijuana would have a serious negative impact by increasing its illegal use. I hypothesize that legalizing medical marijuana will have a significant difference in the amount of illegal marijuana use. Method I used data from the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (2008) to determine state population and total amount of illegal marijuana seized, based on the most recent data available. Some states showed data from 2008 while others showed data from I then sorted the data into two categories: states with legalized medical marijuana and

3 EFFECTS OF LEGALIZING MARIJUANA 3 states without legalized medical marijuana, as of I calculated the amount seized per 100,000 in each state. Then I calculated the average for each group, and ran a t-test for independent means to measure whether there was a statistically significant difference between the average amounts of illegal marijuana seized by the two groups. I ran a twotailed test with the alpha set to.05. Results The results of the study are t(48) = , where the t crit = ± , p >.05. There is no statistical difference, therefore, in the average amount of marijuana seized by the DEA between states with and without legalized medical marijuana. As shown in Table 1, each of the two groups had some extreme outliers. Among the states which legalized medical marijuana, New Mexico had a large amount seized at over 1,767 kg per 100,000 people. In states which have not legalized medical marijuana, Arizona seized over 5,926 kg per 100,000, and Texas seized over 2,496 kg per person. Table 2 shows that in the t-test between the independent means, p = It also shows that states with legalized marijuana had much less variance at 244,638.8, while those without legalized marijuana had a greater variance of 1,111,422. Table 1. Rates of Seized in kg per 100,000 people States with Legalized Medical States without Legalized Medical Amt seized (in kg/100,000) Amt seized (in kg/100,000) AK AL CA AZ CO AR HI CT ME DE MI FL MT GA NV ID

4 EFFECTS OF LEGALIZING MARIJUANA 4 NM IL OR IN RI IA VT KS WA KY LA Average: MD MA MN MS MO NE NH NJ NY NC ND OH OK PA SC SD TN TX UT VA WV WI WY Average: Table 2. Statistical Analysis of a t-test for Independent Means t-test: Two-Sample Assuming Equal Variances States with Legalized Medical States without Legalized Mean Variance Observations df 48 t Stat P(T<=t) two-tail t Critical two-tail

5 EFFECTS OF LEGALIZING MARIJUANA 5 Discussion The hypothesis was not supported by the data collected in the study. There is no statistical difference between states with and without legalized marijuana in terms of the illegal marijuana seized. This could be due to several factors. One is that the data used for the study may not accurately represent the amount of illegal marijuana used, but rather the extent to which the police force is working to eradicate it. The political emphases of the states greatly influence the extent to which illegal marijuana is seized. However, it is interesting to note that there seems to be no significant difference between these two groups of states in terms of the results of law enforcement. Another factor to take into consideration is the extreme outliers. As shown in Table 1, the most extreme outliers for those with the highest amount of marijuana seized are New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas, all of which border Mexico. There seems to be a higher correlation between the amount of marijuana seized and the location of the state than between the amount seized and the legalization of marijuana. Again, this may be due to the political views held in these states rather than the actual illegal drug usage rates, but the data suggests the need for further study. The results of this study show that it is likely that the legalization of marijuana has no measured differences in the extent to which marijuana is illegally used. However, because the study relies solely on the amount of marijuana seized, it may be more accurate to study illegal drug usage in these states by surveying the people that live there. This would show whether there is a greater need for more effective law enforcement in states with legalized medical marijuana, and the government could allocate funds accordingly. From the data

6 EFFECTS OF LEGALIZING MARIJUANA 6 currently available however, there is no higher rate of illegal marijuana usage in states with legalized marijuana, and there may be fewer negative effects of passing such a law than its opponents had anticipated.

7 EFFECTS OF LEGALIZING MARIJUANA 7 References Egelko, B. (2003, June 6). Experts don t see Rosenthal pot case as landmark. San Francisco Chronicle, p. A8. Reinarman, C., Cohen, P.D.A., & Kaal, H.L. (2004). The limited relevance of drug policy: cannabis in Amsterdam and in San Francisco. American Journal of Public Health, 94(5), Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2009). Results from the 2008 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: National Findings (Office of Applied Studies, NSDUH Series H-36, HHS Publication No. SMA ). Rockville, MD. U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. (2008, March). State factsheets. Retrieved from