The Vermont legislature’s crossover deadline for bills to emerge from committee came and went Friday with no sign of the House’s long-awaited marijuana legalization bill.
The missed deadline doesn’t mean the bill is dead, though it does indicate a lack of vigorous support in the House.
House and Senate leaders agreed Friday to give the bill a one-week extension to emerge from the House Judiciary Committee while House leaders continue to count floor votes.
“As long as it’s voted out by next Friday, we’ll take it,” Senate Judiciary Committee chair Dick Sears (D-Bennington) said.
The bill would legalize possession of up to an ounce of pot, but would not allow for Colorado-style marijuana
stores or lounges. The legislation would result in a law similar to Washington, D.C.’s.
The House Judiciary Committee completed work on the bill weeks ago and had been scheduled to vote it out Wednesday, but abruptly removed that vote from its schedule.
That’s apparently because House leaders couldn’t count on it passing the full House and were reluctant to advance a bill that would fail. As they took stock of where members stood, a fair number declined to commit, sources said.
Earlier in the week, House Judiciary Committee vice chair Chip Conquest (D-Newbury) said of votes among House members, “I know they’re counting them and I know it’s close.”
“We’re making sure we understand where people are on it,” House Speaker Mitzi Johnson (D-South Hero) said Friday.
One reason the House might be having trouble solidifying support is that Johnson herself is not fully behind the bill. “I’m lukewarm,” she said Friday. Asked how she would vote on the bill, she said, “I would lean toward yes.”
Friday morning, her district-mate, Rep. Ben Joseph (D-North Hero) was among those speaking at a press conference against legalization. The former state court judge argued that legalization would lead to increased use, which would lead to more highway deaths.
Sears said that if the House marijuana legalization bill reaches the Senate, he will consider it, but that he continues to favor a full legalization law under which marijuana would be taxed and regulated like alcohol. Last year, the Senate passed a tax-and-regulate bill but the House defeated it.
Asked if he would try to amend the House bill to call for full legalization this year, Sears said, “I’m not ready to say. I’m not interested in putting the House in an extremely difficult position.”
Any marijuana legalization effort that passes the legislature could be opposed by Gov. Phil Scott. The Republican governor has said he wants a roadside marijuana test to be available before legalizing the drug, but such a test does not exist.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Crossover for thee, but not for me. Double standard.
Lacks strong support among who? Polls regularly show that a large majority of Vermonters want legalization. Some context would be nice. It would also be nice if we had any reporting on who is funding the anti-legalization campaign. In other states it has been big-pharma, big-alcohol, and law enforcement.
it’s really ridiculous that this has not passed yet. I am more in favor of a bill that has retail / taxing on the agenda – as I would love to see some new money in gov’t to combat the great dope zombie epidemic.
I ask my peers this one question though:
Who does it hurt the most keeping this substance illegal? Me, and many others who are professionals, and respected community leaders who have to deal with the stigma of using marijuana. I use marijuana for three reasons:
*Relieves chronic pain suffered from bullying, helps me walk without a cane. I refuse to take opiates for pain.
*Helped me through physical withdrawl symptoms of alcoholism – I am almost 3 years off the sauce because of it.
*It’s a damn good way to relax and meditate on the day.
There are many of us like myself who are not part of the “420 culture”. Frankly, I do not listen to bob marley, I do not take “burn turns” nor do I use marijuana when I have social and business obligations. I am a responsible marijuana user for all the right reasons and yet – I can take opiates for pain and become a junkie and get a job – or I can stay straight and strong and smoke pot and get declined for IT positions because I smoke something that got me off booze and relieves pain. It’s a stupid trade off, cause obviously the government knows that opiates are CLEARLY superior to marijuana, and they have all these great drugs to get me off opiates that have deadly withdrawl symptoms compared to the opiates themselves. IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE, I CANNOT BELIEVE I HAVE BEEN BLIND FOR SOOOOO LONG.
it’s really ridiculous that this has not passed yet. I am more in favor of a bill that has retail / taxing on the agenda – as I would love to see some new money in gov’t to combat the great dope zombie epidemic.
I ask my peers this one question though:
Who does it hurt the most keeping this substance illegal? Me, and many others who are professionals, and respected community leaders who have to deal with the stigma of using marijuana. I use marijuana for three reasons:
*Relieves chronic pain suffered from bullying, helps me walk without a cane. I refuse to take opiates for pain.
*Helped me through physical withdrawl symptoms of alcoholism – I am almost 3 years off the sauce because of it.
*It’s a damn good way to relax and meditate on the day.
There are many of us like myself who are not part of the “420 culture”. Frankly, I do not listen to bob marley, I do not take “burn turns” nor do I use marijuana when I have social and business obligations. I am a responsible marijuana user for all the right reasons and yet – I can take opiates for pain and become a junkie and get a job – or I can stay straight and strong and smoke pot and get declined for IT positions because I smoke something that got me off booze and relieves pain. It’s a stupid trade off, cause obviously the government knows that opiates are CLEARLY superior to marijuana, and they have all these great drugs to get me off opiates that have deadly withdrawl symptoms compared to the opiates themselves. IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE, I CANNOT BELIEVE I HAVE BEEN BLIND FOR SOOOOO LONG.
thank you for this article, terri, but please go deeper, list all public servants supporting and opposing this measure, or leave details and links for the public on where to source the information.
mitzi feels lukewarm about h.170, but an overwhelming majority of vermonters do not. please call or email mitzi johnson to show your support and help her feel confident in moving forward with this legislation. vermonters are completely behind you, mitzi.
http://legislature.vermont.gov/people/sing…