In Alaska, Colorado, Oregon, and Washington state, voters approved ballot initiatives for legalization.
But when advocates put measures on the ballot, they try to keep the language of the initiatives simple to avoid scaring off voters and giving too much leeway to lawmakers who might disagree with what voters choose to do.
"I still have not heard a good reason why we need any edibles," Sabet says.
"I think it's really difficult to make an argument that you need lemon-flavored gummy bears that have THC in them." But some in the industry have pushed back against regulations attached to the goods.
By Kleiman's count, only liberal Vermont is seriously looking at the possibility of legalizing pot through its state legislature.
Even if state legislatures passed their own legalization legislation, another problem is that federal law limits how much state agencies can involve themselves in the day-to-day management of marijuana shops.
They're making money from the heavy users." Mark Kleiman, a drug policy expert at New York University's Marron Institute who supports a much more regulated form of legalization, has consistently pointed to the commercialization of marijuana as one of his primary concerns with the current model of legalization.
Marijuana companies' "best customers are the problem users," Kleiman said in a previous interview.
"We're seeing the expected level of marketing irresponsibility from the vendors, but they don't have much to sell at the moment," Kleiman says.
"When they've got something to sell, we'll see how aggressive they get." Sabet acknowledges that if cautious drug policy experts like Kleiman were singlehandedly in charge of setting up a regulatory model for legal marijuana, the concept would be less concerning.