Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

California Proposition 19, Marijuana Legalization Initiative (2010)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
California Proposition 19

Flag of California.png

Election date

November 2, 2010

Topic
Marijuana laws
Status

DefeatedDefeated

Type
Initiated state statute 		Origin

Citizens


California Proposition 19 was on the ballot as an initiated state statute in California on November 2, 2010. It was defeated.

A "yes" vote supported legalizing recreational marijuana for individuals 21 years of age and older.
A "no" vote opposed legalizing recreational marijuana for individuals 21 years of age and older.


Election results

California Proposition 19

Result Votes Percentage
Yes 4,643,592 46.54%

Defeated No

5,333,230 53.46%
Results are officially certified.


Measure design

The initiative would have allowed individuals over the age of 21 to possess up to one ounce of marijuana for personal consumption. Under the initiative, individuals would have been allowed to use cannabis in a non-public place such as a residence or at an establishment licensed for on-site marijuana consumption. Individuals would have been able to grow marijuana at a private residence in a space of up to 25 square feet for personal use.[1]

Under the initiative, local governments would have been allowed to adopt ordinances regulating marijuana cultivation, processing, distribution, transportation, and retail sales, as well as provide for the taxation of marijuana. Under the measure, marijuana establishments would have been required to pay all federal, state, and local taxes and fees that were imposed on other similar businesses.[1]

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Proposition 19 was as follows:

“Legalizes Marijuana Under California but not Federal Law. Permits Local Governments to Regulate and Tax Commercial Production, Distribution, and Sale of Marijuana. Initiative Statute.”

Ballot summary

The ballot summary for this measure was:

“

Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use.

Permits local governments to regulate and tax commercial production, distribution, and sale of marijuana to people 21 years old or older.

Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using in public, or smoking it while minors are present.

Maintains prohibitions against driving while impaired.

Limits employers’ ability to address marijuana use to situations where job performance is actually

impaired.		”

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.


Support

Control and Tax Cannabis, Yes on 19 led the campaign in support of the measure.

"Yes on 19" campaign logo

Supporters

Supporters of Proposition 19 included the following:[2]

  • Gary E. Johnson, former two term Republican Governor of New Mexico[3]
  • Joycelyn Elders, former United States Surgeon General[4]
  • George Miller, current Democratic House Representative from California's 7th Congressional District[5]
  • Barbara Lee, current Democratic House Representative from California's 9th Congressional District[5]
  • Pete Stark, current Democratic House Representative from California's 13th Congressional District[5]
  • John Dennis, 2010 Republican Congressional candidate for California's 8th Congressional District[6]
  • Dan Hamburg, former Democratic House Representative from California's 1st Congressional District
  • Don Perata, former Democratic President pro tempore of the California State Senate
  • Mark Leno, current Democratic member of the California State Senate
  • Tom Ammiano, current Democratic member of the California State Assembly[7][8]
  • Jorge Castañeda Gutman, former Secretary of Foreign Affairs of Mexico[9]
  • Larry Bedard, former President of the American College of Emergency Physicians[10]
  • Tom Bates, current Mayor of Berkeley, California
  • James P. Gray, former Superior Court judge of Orange County, California and former Libertarian Party senate candidate[11]
  • John A. Russo, current City Attorney of Oakland, California[12]
  • Paul Gallegos, current District Attorney of Humboldt County, California
  • Jeffrey Schwartz, former Senior District Attorney and Prosecutor of Humboldt County, California
  • Terence Hallinan, former District Attorney of San Francisco, California
  • Mike Schmier, former District Attorney of Los Angeles, California and California Administrative Law Judge
  • Norm Stamper, former Seattle, Washington police chief[13]
  • Joseph McNamara, Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution and former Chief of Police of San Jose, California and of Kansas City, Missouri
  • Stephen Downing, former Los Angeles, California police chief
  • David Doodridge, former Los Angeles, California narcotics detective[14]
  • Ed Rosenthal, cannabis activist and columnist[15]
  • Marc Emery, cannabis activist and former cannabis seed seller[16]
  • California NAACP[17]
  • Oakland City Council[18]
  • Berkeley City Council
  • Humboldt County Board of Supervisors[19]
  • California NORML[20]
  • Drug Policy Alliance[21]
  • Marijuana Policy Project[22]
  • American Federation of Teachers[23]
  • National Black Police Association[24]
  • National Latino Officers Association[25]
  • Law Enforcement Against Prohibition[26]
  • ACLU of Northern California
  • ACLU of San Diego
  • United Food and Commercial Workers Union[27]
  • Communications Workers of America, Local 9415[28]
  • International Longshore and Warehouse Union, Northern California District Council[29]
  • Service Employees International Union of California[30]
  • Interfaith Drug Policy Initiative
  • Los Angeles County Democratic Party[31]
  • San Francisco Democratic Party[32]
  • Alameda County Democratic Party
  • Monterey County Democratic Party
  • Santa Barbara County Democratic Party[33]
  • California Young Democrats[34]
  • Republican Liberty Caucus[35]
  • Green Party of California[35]
  • United States Libertarian Party[36]
  • League of United Latin American Citizens[37]
  • Law professors including Jonathan H. Adler (Case Western Reserve University School of Law, Cleveland, Ohio), Ty Alper (University of California, Berkeley, School of Law, Berkeley, CA), Hadar Aviram (University of California, Hastings College of the Law, San Francisco, CA), W. David Ball (Santa Clara Law, Santa Clara, CA) and Randy Barnett (Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC) wrote an open letter to express their support for Proposition 19[38]

Arguments

Official arguments

The following supporting arguments were presented in the official voter guide:[1]

“ PROPOSITION 19: COMMON SENSE CONTROL OF

MARIJUANA

Today, hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are spent enforcing the failed prohibition of marijuana (also known as “cannabis”).

Currently, marijuana is easier for kids to get than alcohol, because dealers don’t require ID.

Prohibition has created a violent criminal market run by international drug cartels.

Police waste millions of taxpayer dollars targeting non-violent marijuana consumers, while thousands of violent crimes go unsolved.

And there is $14 billion in marijuana sales every year in California, but our debt-ridden state gets nothing from it. Marijuana prohibition has failed.

WE NEED A COMMON SENSE APPROACH TO CONTROL AND TAX MARIJUANA LIKE ALCOHOL.

Proposition 19 was carefully written to get marijuana under control. Under Proposition 19, only adults 21 and over can possess up to one ounce of marijuana, to be consumed at home or licensed establishments. Medical marijuana patients’ rights are preserved. If we can control and tax alcohol, we can control and tax marijuana.

PUT STRICT SAFETY CONTROLS ON MARIJUANA

Proposition 19 maintains strict criminal penalties for driving under the influence, increases penalties for providing marijuana to minors, and bans smoking it in public, on school grounds, and around minors. Proposition 19 keeps workplaces safe, by preserving the right of employers to maintain a drug-free workplace.

PUT POLICE PRIORITIES WHERE THEY BELONG

According to the FBI, in 2008 over 61,000 Californians were arrested for misdemeanor marijuana possession, while 60,000 violent crimes went unsolved. By ending arrests of non-violent marijuana consumers, police will save hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars a year, and be able to focus on the real threat: violent crime. Police, Sheriffs, and Judges support Proposition 19.

HELP FIGHT THE DRUG CARTELS

Marijuana prohibition has created vicious drug cartels across our border. In 2008 alone, cartels murdered 6,290 civilians in Mexico—more than all U.S. troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan combined. 60 percent of drug cartel revenue comes from the illegal U.S. marijuana market. By controlling marijuana, Proposition 19 will help cut off funding to the cartels.

GENERATE BILLIONS IN REVENUE TO FUND WHAT MATTERS

California faces historic deficits, which, if state government doesn’t balance the budget, could lead to higher taxes and fees for the public, and more cuts to vital services. Meanwhile, there is $14 billion in marijuana transactions every year in California, but we see none of the revenue that would come from taxing it. Proposition 19 enables state and local governments to tax marijuana, so we can preserve vital services. The State’s tax collector, the Board of Equalization, says taxing marijuana would generate $1.4 billion in annual revenue, which could fund jobs, healthcare, public safety, parks, roads, transportation, and more.

LET’S REFORM CALIFORNIA’S MARIJUANA LAWS

Outlawing marijuana hasn’t stopped 100 million Americans from trying it. But we can control it, make it harder for kids to get, weaken the cartels, focus police resources on violent crime, and generate billions in revenue and savings. We need a common sense approach to control marijuana.

YES on 19.

www.taxcannabis.org[39]

”


Opposition

"No on 19" campaign logo

No on Prop 19 led the campaign in opposition to the measure. The group provided a full list of endorsements, which is available here.

Opponents

Opponents of Proposition 19 included the following:[40]

Arguments

Official arguments

The following supporting arguments were presented in the official voter guide:[1]

“ Even if you support legalization of recreational marijuana, you

should vote “No” on Proposition 19. Why? Because the authors made several huge mistakes in writing this initiative which will have severe, unintended consequences. For example, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) strongly opposes Proposition 19 because it will prevent bus and trucking companies from requiring their drivers to be drug-free. Companies won’t be able to take action against a “stoned” driver until after he or she has a wreck, not before. School districts may currently require school bus drivers to be drug-free, but if Proposition 19 passes, their hands will be tied—until after tragedy strikes. A school bus driver would be forbidden to smoke marijuana on schools grounds or while actually behind the wheel, but could arrive for work with marijuana in his or her system. Public school superintendent John Snavely, Ed.D. warns that Proposition 19 could cost our K–12 schools as much as $9.4 billion in lost federal funding. Another error could potentially cost schools hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grants for our colleges and universities. Our schools have already experienced severe budget cuts due to the state budget crisis. The California Chamber of Commerce found that “if passed, this initiative could result in employers losing public contracts and grants because they could no longer effectively enforce the drug-free workplace requirements outlined by the federal government.” Employers who permit employees to sell cosmetics or school candy bars to co-workers in the office, may now also be required to allow any employee with a “license” to sell marijuana in the office. Under current law, if a worker shows up smelling of alcohol or marijuana, an employer may remove the employee from a dangerous or sensitive job, such as running medical lab tests in a hospital, or operating heavy equipment. But if Proposition 19 passes, the worker with marijuana in his or her system may not be removed from the job until after an accident occurs. The California Police Chiefs Association opposes Proposition 19 because proponents “forgot” to include a standard for what constitutes “driving under the influence.” Under Proposition 19, a driver may legally drive even if a blood test shows they have marijuana in their system. Gubernatorial candidates Republican Meg Whitman and Democrat Jerry Brown have both studied Proposition 19 and are urging all Californians to vote “No,” as are Democratic and Republican candidates for Attorney General, Kamala Harris and Steve Cooley. Don’t be fooled. The proponents are hoping you will think Proposition 19 is about “medical” marijuana. It is not. Proposition 19 makes no changes either way in the medical marijuana laws. Proposition 19 is simply a jumbled legal nightmare that will make our highways, our workplaces and our communities less safe. We strongly urge you to vote “No” on Prop. 19.[39]

”

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for California ballot measures

The following table illustrates the total campaign contributions and expenditures for supporters and opponents:[48]

Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Support $4,134,909.63 $192,417.86 $4,327,327.49 $4,013,204.44 $4,205,622.30
Oppose $307,358.00 $32,174.09 $339,532.09 $318,131.45 $350,305.54
Total $4,442,267.63 $224,591.95 $4,666,859.58 $4,331,335.89 $4,555,927.84

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees supporting the ballot initiative.[48]

Committees in support of Proposition 19
Committee Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Yes on 19. Tax Cannabis 2010. $2,935,931.63 $189,947.89 $3,125,879.52 $2,945,121.41 $3,135,069.30
Drug Policy Action Committee to Tax and Regulate Marijuana - Yes on Prop. 19 $1,098,978.00 $2,469.97 $1,101,447.97 $1,012,257.14 $1,014,727.11
Students for Sensible Drug Policy $100,000.00 $0.00 $100,000.00 $55,825.89 $55,825.89
Total $4,134,909.63 $192,417.86 $4,327,327.49 $4,013,204.44 $4,205,622.30

Donors

The following were the top donors to the support committees.[48]

Donor Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions
S.K. Seymour, LLC $1,307,144.65 $136,953.83 $1,444,098.48
George Soros $1,000,000.00 $0.00 $1,000,000.00
Peter B. Lewis $159,005.00 $0.00 $159,005.00
Paul Buchheit $105,000.00 $0.00 $105,000.00
Philip D. Harvey $100,000.00 $0.00 $100,000.00
Sean Parker $100,000.00 $0.00 $100,000.00

Oppose

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees opposing the ballot initiative.[48]

Committees in opposition to Proposition 19
Committee Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Public Safety First - No on Prop. 19 $304,473.00 $32,174.09 $336,647.09 $315,201.92 $347,376.01
Nip It in the Bud: No on Prop. 19 $2,885.00 $0.00 $2,885.00 $2,929.53 $2,929.53
Total $307,358.00 $32,174.09 $339,532.09 $318,131.45 $350,305.54

Donors

The following were the top donors to the opposition committees.[48]

Donor Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions
Julie Schauer $50,000.00 $0.00 $50,000.00
Calif. Police Chiefs Assoc. $49,999.00 $0.00 $49,999.00
San Manuel Band of Mission Indians $25,000.00 $0.00 $25,000.00
Sebastian Musco $25,000.00 $0.00 $25,000.00
Calif. Narcotic Officers' Assoc. $20,500.00 $0.00 $20,500.00

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Polls

Legend

     Position is ahead and at or over 50%     Position is ahead or tied, but under 50%

Polls

See also: Polls, 2010 ballot measures

Poll results for the initiative are detailed below:

Date of Poll Pollster In favor Opposed Undecided Number polled
April 20, 2010 SurveyUSA 56% 42% 3% 500
May 9-16, 2010 PPIC 49% 48% 3% 2,003
June 22-July 5, 2010 Field 44% 48% 8% 1,005
July 23-25, 2010 PPP 52% 36% 12% 614
July 8-11, 2010 SurveyUSA 50% 40% 11% 614
Aug 31-Sept 1, 2010 SurveyUSA 47% 43% 10% 569
September 14-21, 2010 Field 49% 42% 9% 599
September 19-21, 2010 SurveyUSA 47% 42% 11% 610
September 19-26, 2010 PPIC 52% 41% 7% 2,004
October 2-4, 2010 Reuters/lpsos 43% 53% 3% 448
October 10-17, 2010 PPIC 44% 49% 7% 2,002
October 13-20, 2010 GQR/AV for LAT/USC 39% 51% 10% 922
October 14-26, 2010 Field for the Sacramento Bee 42% 49% 9% 1,501


Media editorials

2010 propositions
Flag of California.png
June 8
Proposition 13
Proposition 14 • Text
Proposition 15 • Text
Proposition 16 • Text
Proposition 17 • Text
November 2
Proposition 19 • Text
Proposition 20 • Text
Proposition 21 • Text
Proposition 22 • Text
Proposition 23 • Text
Proposition 24 • Text
Proposition 25 • Text
Proposition 26 • Text
Proposition 27 • Text
Donations • Vendors
Endorsements
Local measures
See also: Endorsements of California ballot measures, 2010

Support

  • The Financial Times: "Rather than stopping violence, prohibition fuels it. Most drug violence is caused by turf wars, not users committing petty crimes to finance their habit. Traffickers cannot rely on the courts to resolve disputes so they swap lawyers for guns. Mexico’s increasingly bloody drug war – some gangsters are better armed than the state – has cost 28,000 lives since 2006. By raising prices, prohibition allows drug barons to reap high profits. Simply smuggling a kilo of marijuana from Mexico to the US raises its price from $80 to $2,000."[49]
  • The Orange County Register: "Legalizing marijuana use for adults is a significant step away from nanny-state policies and all the crime, corruption and violence that accompany marijuana prohibition, so some caution about such an important move is understandable. But the impact on employment polices, driving laws and the responsibilities of local government are not sufficient to justify rejection of this proposal."[50]
  • The Santa Barbara News-Press: "It is time to legalize marijuana in California."[51]
  • The Santa Cruz Weekly: "The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 will provide the state with significant tax revenue...It's time for this foolish prohibition to be abolished."[52]
  • The Stanford Review: "As both a moral and tangible matter, the harm inflicted on innocent victims by drug gangs is far worse than the harm that drug users willingly inflict on themselves and the abstract harm that marijuana causes to society. The logical next step after this realization is to let legitimate businesses sprout up to supply Californians’ demand for marijuana, instead of continuing our policy of enforcing violent drug gangs’ monopolies on the marijuana market."[53]
  • The Victoriaville Daily Press: "This is not an easy call, but it makes more sense than continuing to expend billions of tax dollars on what is increasingly becoming a futile effort to outlaw marijuana use. It has never worked, and it’s time to try a new tactic. Vote yes on 19."[54]

Opposition

  • Bakersfield Californian: "Proposition19’s backers think a legalized, controlled marijuana industry could eventually be regulated and taxed to the tune of as much as $1.4 billion per year to help fund health care, job creation, infrastructure and other needs. But the initiative doesn’t offer guidance on how this might be coordinated - - in fact the taxation element isn’t even written into the proposition…"[55]
  • The Herald (Monterey County): "We fear that a California-only pot industry operating under inconsistent and even contradictory rules would create serious crime problems of its own. Proposition 19 doesn't set a measurable standard for driving under the influence of marijuana, and it could make it much more difficult for employers to bar employees from using marijuana even if it might undermine their ability to work safely."[56]
  • Lompoc Record: "This measure is too flawed to be taken seriously."[57]
  • Long Beach Press-Telegram: "Proposition 19 is flawed, flies in the face of federal law, is opposed by major law-enforcement officials and politicians and would be abused by underage consumers. Estimates of tax revenue are wildly exaggerated."[58]
  • Los Angeles Times: "Proposition 19 is poorly thought out, badly crafted and replete with loopholes and contradictions."[59]
  • Los Angeles Daily News: "The real question of this initiative is whether California wants to take on the federal government and allow any and every city in the state to make up its own rules about selling, manufacturing and transporting an illegal substance. And the Daily News thinks the answer to the question is an emphatic 'no.' The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 is a poorly crafted initiative that would set the scene for a regulatory nightmare in California."[60]
  • Modesto Bee: "Proposition 19 is poorly drafted and deeply flawed, filled with loopholes and ambiguities that would create a chaotic nightmare for law enforcement, local governments and businesses."[61]
  • Sacramento Bee: "The measure on the Nov. 2 ballot is full of worrisome loopholes and ambiguities that would create a chaotic nightmare for law enforcement, local governments and businesses. It is so poorly drafted, in fact, that it almost makes you wonder: What were they smoking?"[62]
  • San Diego Union-Tribune: "Don’t take the bait. Don’t turn California into the nation’s drug dealer."[63]
  • Pasadena Star-News, San Gabriel Valley Tribune, and Whittier Daily News: "The best way to look at Proposition 19, which would legalize the sale and possession of marijuana for adults, is to paint a picture of the state if the measure were to pass: The guy in the cubicle next to you at work is stoned. There's an increased likelihood the driver of the car in the next lane on the freeway is under the influence of pot. Commercial entities openly selling pot in storefronts near where you shop, or perhaps in your child or grandchild's college dormitory…This is not our vision of a bright California future."[64]
  • Santa Rosa Press Democrat: "Proposition 19 is so poorly worded and filled with loopholes that it’s likely to create more confusion than clarity. And, as with Proposition 215, which legalized medicinal uses of marijuana, it would still leave California law in conflict with federal law, creating more regulatory and policy gridlock at all levels of government."[65]
  • San Bernardino Sun: "Our editorial board agreed unanimously that Proposition 19…is no way to legalize marijuana. It is poorly written, conflicts with too many federal laws and would pose dangers - physical and financial - to the citizens of California."[66]

Path to the ballot

See also: California signature requirements and 2010 ballot measure petition signature costs

Richard Lee and Jeffrey Wayne Jones filed the language for Initiative 09-0024 on July 27, 2009. To qualify for the ballot, 433,971 valid signatures were required. Proponents submitted 694,248 signatures. The Secretary of State announced that the measure had qualified for the ballot on March 24, 2010.[67][68]

See also

2010 Measures

California

News and analysis


External links

Basic information

Support

Opposition


Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 UC Chastings, "California 2010 official voter guide," accessed February 19, 2021
  2. ↑ Tax Cannabis, "Endorsements," accessed July 6, 2010
  3. ↑ "Former Governor Johnson's statement". Retrieved on June 26, 2010. 
  4. ↑ McKinley, Jesse (July 19, 2010). "Blacks May Tilt Balance in Vote to Legalize Marijuana". Retrieved on July 19, 2010. 
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 Grim, Ryan (July 8, 2010). "California Dems Endorse Pot Legalization, Proposition 19". Retrieved on July 8, 2010. 
  6. ↑ West, Jackson (July 20, 2010). "Surprise! Both Red and Blue Want Pot Legal". Retrieved on July 21, 2010. 
  7. ↑ Buchanan, Wyatt (February 24, 2010). "Ammiano wants to make marijuana legal in state". Retrieved on April 24, 2010. 
  8. ↑ "Taking the next step for California", New Times, June 30, 2010
  9. ↑ Camin, Hector (September 5, 2010). "California's Prop 19, on legalizing marijuana, could end Mexico's drug war". Retrieved on September 6, 2010. 
  10. ↑ Bedard, Larry (July 15, 2010). "Opinion: Decriminalize marijuana: It's far less harmful than alcohol". MercuryNews.com. http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_15525522?nclick_check=1. Retrieved on July 18, 2010. 
  11. ↑ Hoeffel, John (March 25, 2010). "Measure to legalize marijuana will be on California's November ballot". Retrieved on April 29, 2010. 
  12. ↑ Russo, John (April 27, 2010). "Open Forum: Legalize Marijuana in California". Retrieved on April 27, 2010. 
  13. ↑ Stamper, Norm (April 20, 2010). "420: Put Down That Joint and Pick Up a Pen". Retrieved on April 20, 2010. 
  14. ↑ Arguments for and against the proposal, Official California voters guide, http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/pdf/english/19-arg-rebuttals.pdf (dead link)
  15. ↑ Downs, David, Daily Roundup (2010-07-17). "Sarah Palin Calls Bud a ‘Minimal Problem’; Vegas Drug Cops Execute Unarmed Father, East Bay Express". http://www.eastbayexpress.com/LegalizationNation/archives/2010/06/17/daily-roundup-sarah-palin-calls-bud-a-minimal-problem-vegas-drug-cops-execute-unarmed-father. 
  16. ↑ Emery, Marc (June 5, 2010). "Why You Should Vote YES on PROPOSITION 19". Cannabis Culture. http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/content/2010/06/05/Why-You-Should-Vote-YES-California-Control-Tax-Cannabis-Initiative. Retrieved on July 26, 2010. 
  17. ↑ Saillant, Catherine (June 28, 2010). "State NAACP backs marijuana legalization initiative". Retrieved on June 28, 2010. 
  18. ↑ Garofoli, Joe (May 19, 2010). "Up with dope! Oakland City Council first in CA to endorse pot legalization measure", The San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved on May 28, 2010. 
  19. ↑ "Humboldt County supervisors decide to endorse Proposition 19", Donna Tam, The Times-Standard, October 20, 2010
  20. ↑ CA NORML Admin (January 28, 2010). "Tax Cannabis 2010 Initiative Headed for November Ballot". California NORML. https://web.archive.org/web/2/https://web.archive.org/web/2/http://www.canorml.org/news/TC2010.html. Retrieved on June 1, 2010. 
  21. ↑ Good, Chris (April 2, 2010). "The Push to Legalize Marijuana: It's Real". The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/04/the-push-to-legalize-marijuana-its-real/38410/. Retrieved on April 16, 2010. 
  22. ↑ Smith, F. Aaron (March 24, 2010). "Marijuana Reform Will Appear on California's November Ballot!". MPP Blog. Marijuana Policy Project. http://blog.mpp.org/tax-and-regulate/2367/03242010/. Retrieved on April 29, 2010. 
  23. ↑ Rush, George (April 11, 2010). "Head of American Federation of Teachers Randi Weingarten supports legalizing pot". Retrieved on April 11, 2010. 
  24. ↑ LEAP (August 19, 2010). "National Black Police Association Endorses Marijuana Legalization". Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. http://copssaylegalize.blogspot.com/2010/08/national-black-police-association.html. Retrieved on August 19, 2010. 
  25. ↑ "Latino Voters League, National Black Police Officers Latest Groups To Endorse California Marijuana Legalization Measure", Paul Armentano, AlterNet, August 24, 2010
  26. ↑ Cole, Jack. "LEAP Endorses "Tax & Regulate Cannabis 2010"". Retrieved on June 4, 2010. 
  27. ↑ Hoeffel, John (July 15, 2010). "Big union supports California measure to legalize marijuana". Retrieved on July 15, 2010. 
  28. ↑ Rosen, Michael (June 28, 2010). "(dead link) Oakland stirs the pot on legalization". Retrieved on July 18, 2010. 
  29. ↑ "Bay area longshore workers want to legalize pot," San Francisco Chronicle, August 18, 2010
  30. ↑ Nagourney, Adam (September 13, 2010). "Marijuana Ballot Measure in California Wins Support of Union, Officials Say", The New York Times. Retrieved on September 15, 2010. 
  31. ↑ "L.A. County Democratic Party - Endorsements," Los Angeles County Democratic Party, September 15, 2010
  32. ↑ "SF Dems Give Key Endorsement to Prop 19," East Bay Express, August 12, 2010
  33. ↑ Molina, Joshua (September 4, 2010). "Santa Barbara Democrats endorse jail tax, oppose marijuana dispensary ban". The Daily Sound. http://www.thedailysound.com/090410SANTA-BARBARA-DEMOCRATS. Retrieved on September 16, 2010. 
  34. ↑ Eskenazi, Joe (July 20, 2010). "Marijuana-Legalizing Proposition 19 Gets Greenlight From California Young Democrats". San Francisco Weekly. http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2010/07/marijuana_young_democrats.php. Retrieved on July 21, 2010. 
  35. ↑ 35.0 35.1 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named TC-Edrsmts
  36. ↑ Hinkle, Mark (July 3, 2010). "California Prop 19: legalized pot coming to the California ballot in November". United States Libertarian Party. http://www.lp.org/blogs/mark-hinkle/california-prop-19-legalized-pot-coming-to-the-california-ballot-in-november. Retrieved on June 20, 2010. 
  37. ↑ Romero, Dennis (October 8, 2010). "'LULAC,' Huge Latino Group, Endorses Proposition 19, California's Marijuana Legalization Initiative", LA Weekly. Retrieved on October 10, 2010. 
  38. ↑ "Law professors say control and tax cannabis"
  39. ↑ 39.0 39.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  40. ↑ No on Proposition 19, "Endorsements," accessed via Wayback Machine on February 19, 2021
  41. ↑ Los Angeles Times, "Feinstein supports campaign to defeat marijuana legalization measure," July 13, 2010
  42. ↑ Sacramento Bee, "Pot legalization ballot statements offer starkly different realities," July 14, 2010
  43. ↑ UPI, "Calif. pot measure called a safety issue," April 7, 2010
  44. ↑ Associated Press, "Medical pot advocates oppose Calif. legalization," September 21, 2010
  45. ↑ Huffington Post, "'I Gots Mine': Dispensary Owners Against Marijuana Legalization," July 14, 2010
  46. ↑ USA Today, "Law officers split on California legal pot fight," September 22, 2010
  47. ↑ Redding Record-Searchlight, "If state OKs pot, Redding might not," July 31, 2010
  48. ↑ 48.0 48.1 48.2 48.3 48.4 Cal-Access, "California Proposition 19 (2010)," accessed September 16, 2024
  49. ↑ "High time to legalise marijuana", Editorial, Financial Times, October 27, 2010
  50. ↑ "Debunking false fears about Proposition 19", October 18, 2010
  51. ↑ "Yes on Prop 19", October 8, 2010
  52. ↑ Endorsements: State-Wide Propositions, The Santa Cruz Weekly Editorial Board
  53. ↑ "Prop 19 about marijuana industry, not use", The Stanford Review Editorial Board, October 11, 2010
  54. ↑ "A reluctant yes on proposition 19" (dead link), Steve Williams, October 15, 2010
  55. ↑ Bakersfield Californian, "No on Proposition 19: Pot initiative's issues too hazy," September 28, 2010
  56. ↑ Monterey Herald, "Legalized marijuana measure Proposition 19 is the right idea, but the wrong law," September 29, 2010
  57. ↑ Lompoc Record, "Proposition 19: Legalizing pot," September 30, 2010
  58. ↑ Long Beach Press-Telegram, "No on Proposition 19," October 9, 2010
  59. ↑ Los Angeles Times, "Snuff out pot measure," September 26, 2010
  60. ↑ Los Angeles Daily News, "Regulatory nightmare: Proposition 19 has too many flaws," September 28, 2010
  61. ↑ Modesto Bee, "Just say no to legalizing pot," September 26, 2010
  62. ↑ Sacramento Bee, "Prop 19 deserves to go up in smoke," October 1, 2010 (dead link)
  63. ↑ San Diego Union Tribune, "The promise is not the reality," October 3, 2010
  64. ↑ Pasadena Star News, "Our View: Legal Pot A Bad Idea," September 27, 2010
  65. ↑ Santa Rosa Press Democrat, "PD Editorial: No on 19," September 28, 2010
  66. ↑ San Bernardino Sun, "Proposition 19 has too many flaws," September 25, 2010
  67. ↑ California Secretary of State, 'March 10, 2010, press release: Secretary of State Debra Bowen Certifies Second Measure for November 2, 2010, General Election," accessed February 13, 2021
  68. ↑ New York Times, "Push to Legalize Marijuana Gains Ground in California," October 27, 2009
v • e
2010 ballot measures
I&R States
Ballotbox.jpg
Non I&R States
Political topics
Other
Post-election
Flag of California
v • e
State of California
Sacramento (capital)
Elections

What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures

Government

Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy

Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=California_Proposition_19,_Marijuana_Legalization_Initiative_(2010)&oldid=10312104"