Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., recently introduced House concurrent resolution 341, a piece of legislation to celebrate the 75 years of effective alcohol regulation in the wake of the repeal of prohibition. The bill quickly garnered bipartisan support in the House (it now has 94 co-sponsors) because most Americans love alcohol, and House concurrent resolutions have no legal weight. The bill presents an opportunity for the House to give itself a pat on the back.

I am not particularly fond of the House patting itself on the back, but I have no objections to the celebration of the end of prohibition, and I am sure most other college students do not have any objections either. My problem with the legislation is the irony inherent in it. It states, “Whereas passage of the 18th Amendment, which prohibited `the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors’ in the United States, resulted in a dramatic increase in illegal activity, including unsafe black market alcohol production, organized crime, and noncompliance with alcohol laws.”

That’s all very well, but why don’t lawmakers apply the same logic when evaluating their policy on marijuana? Study after study has continually shown marijuana to be no worse than alcohol. It is an ineffective law; the rate of marijuana use is actually higher in America than it is in Holland. In 2007, the violation of marijuana laws in America resulted in over 872,000 arrests, and these arrests did not occur proportionally across racial lines. We currently have the highest incarceration rate of any country in the world. Our jails are overpopulated. The legalization of marijuana would help to mitigate this overcrowding problem. Legalization would also effectively separate the soft drug market and the hard drug market. By separating the two markets, hard drugs become less accessible and casual marijuana users will be far less likely, as well as far less able, to try hard drugs.

We live in a country where drug use is fine so long as you are paying homage to Merck. Any Binghamton University student can go to Health Services, complain of “stress” or “insomnia,” and, without any reluctance from the doctor, receive a prescription for dangerous pills. On the other hand, if a student were to get caught possessing marijuana they could get a criminal record, putting their future into jeopardy.

Recently, 129 college presidents have rallied around the Amethyst Initiative, which intends to lower the drinking age, but there is no equivalent movement occurring for the legalization or decriminalization of marijuana. Why?