Gov. Phil Scott has until the end of the day next Wednesday to decide whether to sign into law a bill that would legalize possession of marijuana.
Senate Secretary John Bloomer delivered the bill, S.22, to the governor’s office Thursday morning. By law, the governor has five days to respond. Saturday counts but Sunday doesn’t.
The first-term Republican governor indicated Wednesday that he doesn’t know whether he will sign the bill, veto it or allow it to become law without his signature.
He said that while he is not philosophically opposed to legalizing possession of marijuana, he has concerns about highway safety and youth access to the drug. “I have to do what I think is right for the state throughout from a public safety standpoint,” he said.
The bill would legalize possession of up to an ounce of marijuana and home-growing of up to two mature plants per household starting in July 2018. It would not legalize the sale or commercial growing of marijuana.
Those for and against legalization have been lobbying Scott hard. A group of medical professionals and others held a Statehouse news conference Thursday urging him to veto the bill.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
The real reason that there is opposition to marijuana legalization is the loss of funds that the illegal status guarantees those in the present illegal trade. Somebody is going to lose a lot of money if it is made legal: those who presently grow it and smuggle it into Vermont, those law enforcement folks who interdict, the legal defense system that defends people arrested, the forfeiture profits, the prison for profit people who demand a quota of prisoners from the state, and big pharma that sell pills for everything the marijuana is better for treating, and the alcohol and tobacco folks. These are the obstacles for legalization… not concern for the kids or about highway safety. It is “how will the loss of revenue for the status quo be made up”. You can’t make an omelet without breaking few eggs.
I want to know more about “A group of medical professionals and others held a Statehouse news conference Thursday urging him to veto the bill.” Holy sh*t what is the opposition saying? I need to know!!! I want to be able to know what sort of nonsense needs to be proved to be nonsense. I’m happy to take on the burden of proof but for petesake give me a link to this public news conference please!!!!
Stoner logic: smoking cigarettes very bad, smoking weed very good.
Cannabis prohibition assures that children of any age will have easy access to cannabis because criminals don’t discriminate. Cannabis prohibition assures that the hundred billion dollars spent yearly in the United States for recreational Cannabis will go straight into the pockets of organized crime and criminals. It is absolutely clear that cannabis is far safer than alcoholic beverages or tobacco which together are killers responsible for over 500,000 deaths per year according to the Center for Disease Control.
Legalizing would be more helpful than harmful. People would stop getting locked up over having or possessing a small amount of marijuana. But I also believe that if it’s legalized we need to come up with a way to regulate and tax it. Allow dispensaries. Etc. I understand the wanting to make sure that it’s done properly and dealt with properly.
Or, Flutie – you could let responsible marijuana users grow their own…
Let’s reduce the number of youth using drugs, improve roadway safety and address the devastating effects of widespread opioid abuse.
Sign S.22.
Regulated alcohol provides responsible alcohol drinkers as well as addicts with an important public health benefit: nobody goes blind or dies from bathtub gin.
Both responsible users and those who have addiction problems deserve pure unaldulterated drugs. The only way to achieve this is to regulate the marketplace and sell drugs at their fair market value. Otherwise, criminals will take over the marketplace and the blood they shed will be on the hands of prohibitionists.
Penelope is right. Talk to most law enforcement officers individually, as well as medical professionals, and the majority will tell you alcohol abuse is more serious than marijuana is, or would be. Yet we promote alcohol consumption tirelessly, at almost every public venue, restaurant, or event. Even glorify it in advertisements, TV shows, and film.
When people imbibe, they become obnoxious, over-confident, start fights, are often uncontrollable, they drive fast and out of control, and act recklessly. When people get high, they become mellow, sometimes a little paranoid, and often recognize they are impaired and unable to drive. And when they do drive, which they shouldn’t do, of course, they drive very slow. The effects on the brain and metabolism of the body between alcohol and marijuana are totally different.
Allowing alcohol consumption…actually even promoting it…while prohibiting marijuana has never mede any sense. And the Legislature is finally recognizing it.
Our state would be demonstrably safer if marijuana was legal and alcohol and tobacco were outlawed.
Funny how those claiming to be concerned about safety are working so hard to protect the lucrative sales and sales tax on alcohol and tobacco. I guess people dying from alcoholism, alcohol-related car crashes, and lung cancer isn’t as unsafe as having the sky fall upon us when weed is legal everywhere but in Vermont.