On Sept. 25, Florida Atlantic University students and faculty gathered in the rotunda of Social Work and Criminal Justice building for the “Breezeway Dialogues,” a platform FAU professors Naelys Luna and Michael Horswell established in 2021 for civil discussion about controversial topics.
This year’s discussion, “High Stakes: Should Weed Be Legal in Florida?,” allowed participants to debate one of the most controversial topics leading up to the 2024 presidential election: the potential legalization of recreational marijuana in Florida for adults 21 and older under Amendment 3.
Florida’s Amendment 3, which will appear on the ballot on Nov. 5, proposes legalizing recreational marijuana for adults 21 and older. A “yes” vote supports legalization, while a “no” vote opposes it. The amendment requires 60% voter approval to pass.
In Florida, marijuana is currently only legal for medical purposes. To purchase it legally, individuals must have a medical card.
The panel of the event was moderated by Assistant Professor Luzmarina Garcia and had three speakers: Jim McKee, an FAU alum and attorney specializing in marijuana regulatory law; Lotta Moberg, a cannabis industry expert and Lenny Chiang-Hanisko, a professor from the Christine E. Lynn College of Nursing.
Economic and societal impact
McKee opened the discussion by outlining the potential outcomes if Amendment 3 passes.
“If it gets 60% of the vote, recreational marijuana will be legal within six months,” he said. “The same dispensaries that currently sell medical marijuana would be able to sell it for recreational use. But if you’re for or against it, make sure you vote—it’s going to be a close one.”
In fact, FAU’s PolCom Lab found in its Sept. 16 poll that 56% of a state representative sample said that they would support Amendment 3 with 18% of voters still undecided.
“If this matters to you, get out and vote,” McKee urged the audience. “This could come down to a few thousand votes.”
Moberg argued that cannabis consumption is now more common than alcohol among young people, like Gen Z and millennials, and that this shift is becoming true for the general U.S. population as well. She argued that prohibition for cannabis isn’t effective, and the real issue lies in what kind of cannabis is available.
“I think that we’re all in agreement here that the prohibition route would never work for cannabis,” she said. ”It’s a matter of what kind of cannabis is available.”
She also argued that there are studies showing that in states where marijuana is legalized, there are improvements like higher credit scores and fewer traffic violations.
She contrasted this with alcohol, which tends to lead to more aggressive behavior and domestic abuse. However, she also acknowledged the risks of cannabis use, especially for younger people.
“Any drug can have bad effects,” she said, noting that using cannabis before age 26—or especially before 17—could be very harmful, “however, studies often show alcohol to be even more detrimental to health.”
The panelists discussed the broader economic and societal implications of legalization. Lenny Chiang-Haniscow started talking about the research that, according to her, suggests that legalizing marijuana could bring significant economic benefits to Florida.
“Based on some of the surveys, the legalization would create at least 200 million of the revenue from across the state,” she explained. She also highlighted that this could lead to job creation and even impact the housing market in a positive way like in other states where it has also been legalized.
Moberg added that people are already consuming cannabis, but legalization would not only bring in these economic benefits to the state’s economy but also improve regulation. “Getting a medical marijuana card in Florida is ‘easy’ as long as you have the money,” she said.
“You meet with a doctor, you say, ‘I have a backache,’ and you’re getting a card right back. It’s just a matter of you having the money,” she explained. “If you pass an amendment like this, you’re more likely to actually know what’s in it and what you’re buying.”
Public health and regulation
From a public health perspective, Dr. Chiang-Hanisko expressed concerns about the cognitive effects of marijuana, particularly on younger users.
“THC, the psychoactive component, can have long-term impacts on brain function, especially when used by younger people. We’re seeing issues with memory, decision-making, and driving ability,” she highlighted. “Education around these effects is essential if recreational use becomes legal.”
During the event, a student shared his personal story, asking the panel whether there were any plans to include warnings on marijuana products, similar to the warnings found on alcohol. He explained that his own experience with marijuana, legal or illegal, had devastating effects on his mental health.
“I used to smoke a lot of marijuana, legal in New York, illegal, whatever kind,” he said. But over time, the drug triggered onset psychosis and eventually led to schizophrenia effects.
“It was really hard to deal with, and it’s something I’m still scared about. It could’ve taken my life away,” he revealed, expressing concern that the potential risks of marijuana use, especially for people predisposed to mental health issues, aren’t always well communicated.
McKee responded to these concerns by emphasizing that if the amendment passes, there would likely be strict regulations regarding packaging and warnings, like the already existing ones with medical marijuana.
“Right now, medical products come with warnings, and we’d expect similar regulations for recreational cannabis,” he said. “It’s crucial that people understand what they’re getting and the potential risks.”
Chiang-Hanisco then continued to address a common concern regarding marijuana being viewed as a gateway drug. She explained that many fear that once individuals start using marijuana, they might be more likely to turn to other, more dangerous substances.
“Based on the research, 30% of people who start using marijuana within three years will become addicted to another medication or start consuming alcohol,” she said, highlighting the significant risk of progression to other substances.
She added that this potential gateway effect remains a major concern for those opposing the legalization of recreational marijuana.
The panel also touched on how legalization could reshape Florida’s image, particularly as an essential tourist spot. Moberg noted that the fear of losing visitors because of a “change of identity” with marijuana legalization could actually create the opposite effect, attracting visitors from states where cannabis is illegal to come to Florida specifically to purchase products.
“Tourists could come here, buy edibles or other products, and take them home,” she said. “That raises questions about how we regulate the sale and distribution of cannabis in a state like Florida, which attracts millions of visitors each year.”
As the event came to an end, it was clear that many participants were left with remaining questions and concerns about the implications of legalizing recreational marijuana. The fate of Amendment 3 will be decided by voters in November.
The University Press will continue to provide updates and coverage leading up to the election.
Sofia De La Espriella is the Editor-in-Chief of the University Press. Email [email protected] or message her on Instagram @sofidelaespriella for information regarding this or other stories.
