In an op/ed for yesterday's Seattle Times, Seattle city attorney Pete Holmes argued that Washington State should "lead the way" toward complete legalization of marijuana. Arguing that pot prohibition has been a "failure [and a] a misuse of both taxpayer dollars and the government's authority over the people," Holmes writes,

We have long since agreed as a society that substances should not be prohibited by the government simply because they can be harmful if misused or consumed in excess. Alcohol, food and cars can all be extremely dangerous under certain circumstances, and cigarettes are almost always harmful in the long term. All these things kill many people every year.

But we don't try to ban any of them — because we can't, and we don't need to. Instead, we regulate their manufacture and use, we tax them, and we encourage those who choose to use them to do so in as safe a manner as possible.

OK, so food is kind of a weird example---except for packaged food, Washington State exempts food from sales tax---but his point is basically this: Pot is certainly no more dangerous than booze or junk food. So why single it out?

I applaud the state Legislature for recently holding a hearing on House Bill 1550, which would legalize marijuana. This is an important start to the conversation about ending prohibition, which I believe is likely to lead to a successful citizens' initiative if the Legislature doesn't step up and do the right thing first.

Ending marijuana prohibition and focusing on rational regulation and taxation is a pro-public safety, pro-public health, pro-limited government policy. I urge the state Legislature to move down this road.