Updated at 4:17 p.m.
Gov. Phil Scott on Wednesday vetoed pending legislation that would legalize marijuana in Vermont. But he promised to work with lawmakers to fashion a new bill that might win his support next month.
“I am not philosophically opposed to ending the prohibition on marijuana,” Scott said at a highly anticipated press conference in his Montpelier office. “However … we must get this right.”
The legislation would have allowed adults over age 21 to possess up to an ounce of marijuana and grow as many as two mature plants per household, starting in July 2018. It also would have created a commission to report back by November with a plan to tax and regulate marijuana sales, as other states have done.
The Republican governor said Wednesday that he would provide legislators with “explicit” recommendations to craft a bill that might meet his approval. He suggested that lawmakers tackle them when they reconvene July 21 for an expected two-day veto session.
The governor’s office later released a list of written recommendations calling for “clear” penalties for the sale of marijuana to minors and the use of the drug in vehicles occupied by children. The list also called for “broader membership” on the commission studying taxation and regulation, as well as more time for it to issue its report.
Senate Judiciary Committee chair Dick Sears (D-Bennington) said he received a verbal outline of the governor’s suggestions from Scott’s legislative liaison, Kendal Smith. “It sounds like there’s some room to work with him,” Sears said.
The senator said he had been expecting the governor to veto the bill based on his comments over the last few weeks. “So I’m pleased he’s willing to work with the legislature,” Sears said.
His counterpart, House Judiciary Committee chair Maxine Grad (D-Moretown), also saw a silver lining in Wednesday’s announcement.
“While I’m disappointed, it could’ve been a veto and nothing else, so I do see that as an opening,” she said.
Sears said that acquiescing to the governor on smoking in cars is unlikely to be problematic but that delaying the commission’s report could be. “I was hoping for something quicker,” he said. “In Massachusetts, they’ll be selling it in July 2018.”
Grad agreed. “I need to think about that,” she said.
The House Judiciary chair said that the logistics of moving a new measure through the legislature in two days next month could be a challenge. It would require the Republican minority to agree to suspend legislative rules to speed the process. “I’m hoping [the governor] will work on all sides of the aisle and help us take that path,” she said.
But House Minority Leader Don Turner (R-Milton) later made clear that he would not play ball. He said in a statement Wednesday afternoon that he saw “no reason to expedite or circumvent the legislative process by suspending rules” to pass a new legalization bill during the veto session.
“There’s a lot of people in our caucus opposed to legalizing marijuana,” Turner said later in an interview. “I don’t see that changing.”
Without the support of a significant number of Turner’s 53-member Republican caucus, the House would lack the votes to suspend the rules. Turner said Scott’s staff did not seek his support to help advance the legislation this year. “They said, ‘We’re not asking for anything, but here’s what we’re doing,'” Turner said.
Opponents and proponents of legalization alike lobbied Scott aggressively in recent weeks as they awaited his decision on the bill.
On Wednesday, the Vermont chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics praised Scott’s veto in a statement. “Legalizing recreational marijuana would have created substantial risks to the health and development of Vermont’s children and adolescents, and normalized the use of the drug in ways that had great potential to increase youth use rates,” the group said.
Supporters of legalization were disappointed in Scott’s veto. Lt. Gov. David Zuckerman, a Progressive/Democrat, called it “very short-sighted.”
“I am sad to see the governor disregard the will of most Vermonters and reduce individual liberties in our state,” he said in a statement.
Other legalization supporters vowed to keep fighting.
“We’re encouraged that there’s a path forward,” said Laura Subin, director of the Vermont Coalition to Regulate Marijuana. “I think it’s workable.”
Eli Harrington, a legalization supporter and co-founder of the advocacy organization Heady Vermont, was less optimistic that a new bill could be crafted to meet Scott’s demands. “I think it’s probably pretty doubtful,” he said.
After Wednesday’s press conference, however, Scott’s staff approached both Subin and Harrington and asked if they’d be willing to have a conversation with administration officials about the next steps.
“I wish we’d had it sooner, but anytime,” Harrington told Scott staffer Ethan Latour.
That outreach stands in contrast to Scott’s previous involvement in marijuana legalization. His staff testified before legislators when asked but generally did not get involved in helping them craft a bill that would have been acceptable to him.
The 58-year-old governor, who said he’s never consumed marijuana himself, reiterated Wednesday that he doesn’t see legalization as a priority.
“There’s nothing that says we have to do this,” he said.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
look, I don’t use, but i believe _____, and as far as Mr. Scott goes, well, as a non-user, I think ______. Now regardless of whether or not I use–which I don’t–I just think it’s common sense that _____, at least from a non-user perspective. I just want to make sure that everyone on this comment section, users and non-users (of which I am one … a non-user) knows that I believe ______. And that I don’t use. Thanks for your honest input, Vermonters.
“The 58-year-old governor, who said hes never consumed marijuana himself, …”
This not only is an example of ignorance determining policy, but also shows the incredible lack of curiosity and experience of our political leaders. You have to be without any will for personal discovery to have never experimented with pot, or just untruthful, whichever it is, it isn’t good.
The recommendations show how clueless Scott is when it comes to Marijuana use. Don’t smoke pot in a car with kids? I mean, duh, that’s great advice and all but does it really need to be a law? Has anyone ever heard of that happening amongst the current 100,000 Vermont marijuana users? Common sense legislation should be aimed at actual problems, not irrational beliefs.
I like some of what he’s doing. I didn’t vote for him and this will keep me for ever voting for him. Btw I don’t use. But unlike a lot of people on here, I know how well prohibition works. And unlike Phil I’m not so easily drawn in by a bunch of BS “stats and facts”. I guess If I did use I’d just go out of state to buy like I do for everything else.
Thank you Governor Scott for keeping your word.
It’s frustrating that our legislators have yet to introduce comprehensive marijuana legislation, especially given that they have their pick of other states to study and model it off of. Tourism is a significant contributor to Vermont’s economy, and people will flock to VT, as they did to Colorado, when we legalize marijuana. Legalization will also create jobs for Vermonters. I don’t understand this concern for high drivers: stoners drive slowly and much less dangerously than drunks or even tired people. Lastly, people tend to do a lot of drugs in Northern, rural areas where there may be little to do, especially in the Winter. I’d rather see someone smoke a bowl and watch movies on their couch than go get drunk or decide to try heroin. I hypothesize that making marijuana legal and available will, to an extent, supplant the use of heroin and alcohol.
Playing the child card as a reason makes you a wimp Mr. Phil. Tell us the REAL reason for your Veto? No law stops someone from driving around in a car with a child, drunk, on drugs or otherwise. Making it illegal for that reason doesn’t stop someone from driving while impaired. Ask the thousands of people driving to work on prescription drugs.
I don’t understand the logic of going about this for so long after states like Colorado have solid stats that stand up to the typical arguments. Must we always think that every state is a foreign land where things like this have not happened before or that somehow “our state” can do it better.
What a waste of time and money.
I sense a new governor on the horizon.
Guess my taxes aren’t going down anytime soon.
Amazing how these people all come out of the woodwork to whine and shout at Gov Scott veto on their pot smoking, but you never see their voice about anything on important issues in here..but unlike David Zuckerman, I’m not a pot smoker..he must be biting nails in half because of the veto..lol
It’s not about revenue it’s just common sense legislation. It’s letting people have the freedom to smoke if they want without fear of imprisonment. Just because you turn 18 you don’t race to the store to get cigarettes. Some people do some don’t. Stop making it an issue. We need to grow up as a nation and stop making things like weed so taboo . Get over it. There will not be an influx of people. Massachusetts is legal and Trudeau is going to decriminalize marijuana in Canada. We need to stop my making it and issue…good by mister Scott….no reelection for you
It isn’t that Scott is “out of touch with his constituents”. It is that he simply does not respect the minds of the majority of his constituents and their elected legislators. In his “libertarian” mind he alone knows best, as his is the supreme intellect…the great leader that knows best what is good for us incompetents. Thanks dad. The invocation of veto is the ultimate in anti-libertarian thinking. Scott does exactly as he pleases, but without the courage to do it honestly. Marmosets elected Trump, and marmosets elected Scott. Is there anything unexpected here? In the words of another great thinker, you Mr. Scott, are “fired’.