Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To describe New Jersey residents\' relative priorities for the allocation of tax revenue generated by recreational cannabis sales. We aim to assess preferences for public health initiatives, including drug treatment, compared to a range of alternatives, including traditional policing, especially within the social and demographic groupings of people generally most impacted by punitive drug enforcement policies.
METHODS: We collected population-representative survey data four months post-implementation of recreational cannabis sales in New Jersey (N = 1,006). We gauge respondents\' top preferences for the allocation of new revenue generated by the legal cannabis market. Using multinomial logistic regression, we assess how various demographic and political factors shape public support for devoting revenue toward public health initiatives.
RESULTS: While priorities are mixed within the sample, we find more general support for funding community-based initiatives in public health, housing, and education than for funding police, courts, and prisons. Among Black residents, the largest proportion chose investments in affordable housing. Regression analysis reveals political orientation as having the most consistent association with expressed preferences, with Republicans favoring investments in traditional law enforcement priorities over other potential funding domains.
CONCLUSIONS: Recreational cannabis legalization is occurring at a rapid pace, yet important context, including how the tax revenue could be invested in communities, remains unclear. Insight into current public opinion on funding priorities suggests a desire for investment in fundamental societal institutions, including education and public health, rather than the punitive enforcement mechanisms that have defined cannabis policy for many decades.
METHODS: We collected population-representative survey data four months post-implementation of recreational cannabis sales in New Jersey (N = 1,006). We gauge respondents\' top preferences for the allocation of new revenue generated by the legal cannabis market. Using multinomial logistic regression, we assess how various demographic and political factors shape public support for devoting revenue toward public health initiatives.
RESULTS: While priorities are mixed within the sample, we find more general support for funding community-based initiatives in public health, housing, and education than for funding police, courts, and prisons. Among Black residents, the largest proportion chose investments in affordable housing. Regression analysis reveals political orientation as having the most consistent association with expressed preferences, with Republicans favoring investments in traditional law enforcement priorities over other potential funding domains.
CONCLUSIONS: Recreational cannabis legalization is occurring at a rapid pace, yet important context, including how the tax revenue could be invested in communities, remains unclear. Insight into current public opinion on funding priorities suggests a desire for investment in fundamental societal institutions, including education and public health, rather than the punitive enforcement mechanisms that have defined cannabis policy for many decades.
摘要：
目的：描述新泽西州居民对休闲大麻销售产生的税收分配的相对优先事项。我们的目标是评估对公共卫生举措的偏好，包括药物治疗,与一系列替代方案相比，包括传统的警务，特别是在受惩罚性药物执法政策影响最大的社会和人口群体中。
方法：我们收集了新泽西州娱乐性大麻销售实施后四个月的人口代表性调查数据（N=1,006）。我们衡量受访者对合法大麻市场产生的新收入分配的最高偏好。使用多项逻辑回归，我们评估了各种人口和政治因素如何影响公众对将收入用于公共卫生计划的支持。
结果：虽然样本中的优先级参差不齐，我们发现更普遍的支持资助基于社区的公共卫生倡议，住房,教育，而不是资助警察，法院,和监狱。在黑人居民中，最大的比例选择了经济适用房的投资。回归分析显示，政治取向与表达的偏好有着最一致的联系，共和党人倾向于投资于传统的执法优先事项，而不是其他潜在的资金领域。
结论：娱乐性大麻合法化正在迅速发展，然而重要的背景，包括税收如何投资于社区，尚不清楚。对当前公众对资金优先事项的见解表明，人们渴望投资于基本的社会机构，包括教育和公共卫生，而不是几十年来定义大麻政策的惩罚性执法机制。
方法：我们收集了新泽西州娱乐性大麻销售实施后四个月的人口代表性调查数据（N=1,006）。我们衡量受访者对合法大麻市场产生的新收入分配的最高偏好。使用多项逻辑回归，我们评估了各种人口和政治因素如何影响公众对将收入用于公共卫生计划的支持。
结果：虽然样本中的优先级参差不齐，我们发现更普遍的支持资助基于社区的公共卫生倡议，住房,教育，而不是资助警察，法院,和监狱。在黑人居民中，最大的比例选择了经济适用房的投资。回归分析显示，政治取向与表达的偏好有着最一致的联系，共和党人倾向于投资于传统的执法优先事项，而不是其他潜在的资金领域。
结论：娱乐性大麻合法化正在迅速发展，然而重要的背景，包括税收如何投资于社区，尚不清楚。对当前公众对资金优先事项的见解表明，人们渴望投资于基本的社会机构，包括教育和公共卫生，而不是几十年来定义大麻政策的惩罚性执法机制。
