3 ms·

It'll be interesting to see how this windfall tax revenue is actually spent. Under Amendment 64, the Colorado state constitution requires that the first $40MM

It'll be interesting to see how this windfall tax revenue is actually spent. Under Amendment 64, the Colorado state constitution requires that the first $40MM of revenue each year be allocated towards public schools[0]. To my knowledge, the rest of the tax money has not yet been earmarked, so it's currently up for grabs. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Amendment_64 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Amendment_64.

cdash 13y ago
I think I had read some of it will be going to drug rehabilitation/substance abuse prevention programs.
kristofferR 13y ago
According to CNN: $40 million to public school construction $86 million for drug prevension, treatment $12,4 million on public health $3 million for law enforcement and public safety $2 million for marijuana industry oversight http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT6YYkFK4e0&t=2m0s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT6YYkFK4e0&t=2m0s
- rch 13y ago
  Everything other than the education component seems inherently wasteful to me. Is there a way to see that these funds are reallocated going forward? Edit: public health could be alright, but there's no way to tell at this level of specification. It would be great to see some improvement in mental health services, for instance.
  - haldujai 13y ago
    Seriously? Without even knowing the details you are able to conclude this is wasteful? In what universe is addiction treatment and police wasteful? I get that not all police are good and corruption exists but try living in a place without a functioning police force and then call it a waste.
    - rch 13y ago
      > In what universe is addiction treatment and police wasteful Well, I do actually know some of the details concerning what gets filed under those categories, and I see instances of significant waste. I've also traveled extensively in less predictable parts of the world, and have had experiences in the U.S. that I wish had been mitigated by a capable law enforcement effort. But on the measure, I am still in favor of a more focused and constrained police presence. Also based on observation, I feel that the breadth of activities that may be referred to as 'addiction treatment' is disconcerting. I do support programs that can be shown to actually help people, of course.
  - cdoxsey 13y ago
    Education spending is wasteful too.
patio11 13y ago
Since money is fungible (a dollar is a dollar no matter from which hand it comes from or pocket it goes into), it doesn't matter. They'll simply have a bit of handwringing the next time the budget gets tight, then offset the education spending by the amount it is increased by the pot tax. This happens with remarkable consistency across the US on earmarked taxes, generally sin taxes or lottery receipts. [+] It also happens in a variety of other contexts -- donating $1,000,000 to your university as cash or with the proviso "must be used ONLY for undergraduate scholarships" has the same effect either way. [+] Edit to add: I wildly underestimated how many taxes were actually earmarked. See: http://mercatus.org/publication/effects-dedicating-tax-revenues http://mercatus.org/publication/effects-dedicating-tax-reven...
- chimeracoder 13y ago
  > Since money is fungible (a dollar is a dollar no matter from which hand it comes from or pocket it goes into), it doesn't matter. It does matter, not because those recipients will necessarily receive more money as a result, but because they will become beneficiaries of Amendment 64 and the (legal) marijuana trade. In the case of the schools, this was intentional - in ten years, if someone wants to repeal Amendment 64, they either (1) have to come up with $40MM elsewhere in the budget, or (2) have to face criticism that they are "cutting the public school budget"[0]. The intent of the tax (alongside the stipulation that it be spent on education) was not to raise money for schools; it was to make opposition to the measure less palatable. [0] Don't underestimate the power of PTAs - in fact, it's the PTAs in rich areas that originally lobbied in the late 1970s to repeal just one part of the Rockefeller drug laws in New York (possession of marijuana under 27 grams). Their children were being convicted of minor possession, and due to the mandatory minimum sentences, judges were powerless to do anything but sentence them to prison. Of course, these same rich parents did not view (e.g.) the crack cocaine vs. power cocaine sentencing disparity as a problem, so those laws remained in effect.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]

cdash 13y ago

I think I had read some of it will be going to drug rehabilitation/substance abuse prevention programs.

kristofferR 13y ago

According to CNN: $40 million to public school construction $86 million for drug prevension, treatment $12,4 million on public health $3 million for law enforcement and public safety $2 million for marijuana industry oversight http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT6YYkFK4e0&t=2m0s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT6YYkFK4e0&t=2m0s

rch 13y ago
Everything other than the education component seems inherently wasteful to me. Is there a way to see that these funds are reallocated going forward? Edit: public health could be alright, but there's no way to tell at this level of specification. It would be great to see some improvement in mental health services, for instance.
- haldujai 13y ago
  Seriously? Without even knowing the details you are able to conclude this is wasteful? In what universe is addiction treatment and police wasteful? I get that not all police are good and corruption exists but try living in a place without a functioning police force and then call it a waste.
  - rch 13y ago
    > In what universe is addiction treatment and police wasteful Well, I do actually know some of the details concerning what gets filed under those categories, and I see instances of significant waste. I've also traveled extensively in less predictable parts of the world, and have had experiences in the U.S. that I wish had been mitigated by a capable law enforcement effort. But on the measure, I am still in favor of a more focused and constrained police presence. Also based on observation, I feel that the breadth of activities that may be referred to as 'addiction treatment' is disconcerting. I do support programs that can be shown to actually help people, of course.
- cdoxsey 13y ago
  Education spending is wasteful too.

patio11 13y ago

Since money is fungible (a dollar is a dollar no matter from which hand it comes from or pocket it goes into), it doesn't matter. They'll simply have a bit of handwringing the next time the budget gets tight, then offset the education spending by the amount it is increased by the pot tax. This happens with remarkable consistency across the US on earmarked taxes, generally sin taxes or lottery receipts. [+] It also happens in a variety of other contexts -- donating $1,000,000 to your university as cash or with the proviso "must be used ONLY for undergraduate scholarships" has the same effect either way. [+] Edit to add: I wildly underestimated how many taxes were actually earmarked. See: http://mercatus.org/publication/effects-dedicating-tax-revenues http://mercatus.org/publication/effects-dedicating-tax-reven...

chimeracoder 13y ago
> Since money is fungible (a dollar is a dollar no matter from which hand it comes from or pocket it goes into), it doesn't matter. It does matter, not because those recipients will necessarily receive more money as a result, but because they will become beneficiaries of Amendment 64 and the (legal) marijuana trade. In the case of the schools, this was intentional - in ten years, if someone wants to repeal Amendment 64, they either (1) have to come up with $40MM elsewhere in the budget, or (2) have to face criticism that they are "cutting the public school budget"[0]. The intent of the tax (alongside the stipulation that it be spent on education) was not to raise money for schools; it was to make opposition to the measure less palatable. [0] Don't underestimate the power of PTAs - in fact, it's the PTAs in rich areas that originally lobbied in the late 1970s to repeal just one part of the Rockefeller drug laws in New York (possession of marijuana under 27 grams). Their children were being convicted of minor possession, and due to the mandatory minimum sentences, judges were powerless to do anything but sentence them to prison. Of course, these same rich parents did not view (e.g.) the crack cocaine vs. power cocaine sentencing disparity as a problem, so those laws remained in effect.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]