Of the estimated market, according to the Oregon State Police, yes.
Of course, drug dealers are also dealing with multiple drugs, so again, unless we're talking about all drugs—which I don't think we are and I don't think we should be—and making all drugs cheap enough to get drug dealers out of the drug business, this becomes difficult.
If you don't mind, there is one point on the variation that I think hasn't been made and is very interesting, especially for elected officials accountable to voters. I don't have the numbers for Oregon, and Ms. Weeks can illuminate us on Washington, but what we've seen in Colorado is that the majority of the localities have actually voted against having a marijuana store in their community.
On the one hand we voted for amendment 64 or whatever, legalization, because we don't want people to go to jail. We want something new, and let's treat it like alcohol. On the other hand , if we ask, “Okay, well, by the way, if we put it in your backyard, is that okay? If we put it where you kid goes to school, is that all right with you,” most of the time people respond, “No, no, no. Actually, let's do it over there, not here.”
Again, I'm not as learned on the bill as I should be in terms of local control, but that is a very interesting issue. This does not seem to be a big issue for most people unless it really starts to affect them. Then you get the calls from your constituents saying, “You know, I sort of thought this was good, and maybe we could regulate, but they're not going to open it here, are they? What can we do to stop that?”
It's a very interesting thing that even in a pretty liberal state like Oregon—you've seen in the last election the majority of jurisdictions voting there—even jurisdictions that wanted legalization when they voted for it, voted against having a pot shop in their own community. I think that's going to be a very interesting discussion to have, too.