This November, California voters could make California the first state in the union to decriminalize the recreational use of marijuana, a landmark in the drug’s history in this country. Currently, fourteen states have legalized the use of marijuana for medical purposes. In October of last year, the Obama administration declared that the federal government would discontinue the practice of prosecuting marijuana offenders, as long as they complied with state laws.

For many advocates of marijuana decriminalization, Obama’s departure from the Bush-era prosecution of the drug, coupled with the growing number of states allowing its use for medical reasons, is evidence of the nation’s desire to end the ancient prohibition. Opponents of this measure—known as the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010—are stepping up to stress the detriments that this act will have on overall public health and safety.

We, the Editorial Board, want to make it clear that we believe that marijuana, like any drug, poses potential dangers to society. Regrettably, a clear analysis of the dangers and benefits of marijuana decriminalization has been clouded for decades, mainly because personal preferences have rendered those involved in this debate unable to provide unbiased research on the subject. Proponents of the decriminalization of marijuana have capitalized on California’s current financial situation and sold the drug as a part of the solution to the state’s budget woes. Regardless of the legitimacy of this claim, California voters cannot make this decision for the shortsighted goal of alleviating the deficit, but must consider the long-term societal changes that this act will cause.

The facts about marijuana are difficult to determine from the numerous conflicting studies, but a few facts are clear—the number of sentences for the possession of marijuana has increased dramatically over the last 20 years, yet the use of the drug has remained relatively steady, according to most available surveys. Fears that decriminalization will increase use of marijuana seem as unfounded as hopes that increased prosecution would decrease the drug’s use. Opponents of marijuana today use scare tactics similar to those used by Harry Anslinger and the creators of exploitation films such as “Reefer Madness” in the 1930s, relying on anecdotal evidence and unsubstantiated claims of the negative effects of the drug. This is a danger to the democratic process.

It is for this reason that advocates of marijuana decriminalization have avoided engaging in conversation on the social costs of the drug, and instead focus their efforts towards illuminating the medical and fiscal benefits of legalization. In the process, the American public has been shortchanged of what is the most important question to be answered in November: Does the legalization of marijuana pose significant dangers to our communities? We implore those on both sides of the fence to return to this question and provide honest evidence so that we, as citizens, can make an informed decision.

Recent opinion polls show that this proposition has a good chance of passing. If, in November, the people of California decide to decriminalize marijuana, the ancient practices of sensationalism and misinformation must cease. It is the responsibility of advocates and opponents alike to put their prejudices aside and work together in ensuring the safety and health of California residents. And come November, both sides will have to respect the outcome of the election.