It’s well-known that Gov. Peter Shumlin is gung-ho about having Vermont pass a law this year to legalize marijuana. But Massachusetts? Shumlin is not so keen on that state’s legalization efforts.
Shumlin wrote an op-ed on the subject on March 18. He referred to a measure on which Massachusetts residents are scheduled to vote in November as a “bad pot bill.”
Never mind that it’s actually a referendum, not a bill.
Shumlin argued, “If Massachusetts moves forward with their legalization bill while Vermont delays, the entire southern part of our state could end up with all the negatives of a bad pot bill and none of the positives of doing the right thing.”
The Vermont governor noted that if Massachusetts approves legalization, it will allow edible marijuana products, smoking lounges, home delivery and possession of up to 10 ounces. A bill that the Vermont Senate has passed and is pending in the House would allow possession of up to an ounce, no edibles, no lounges, no delivery.
Massachusetts newspapers picked up Shumlin’s sentiments in articles that ran this past weekend. From a Massachusetts lens, it looked as though Vermont’s pro-legalization governor — he’s taken in thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from pro-marijuana groups — was suggesting Bay Staters ought to vote against legalization.
Not so, Shumlin spokesman Scott Coriell said Monday.
“The governor is going to let Massachusetts voters decide that question,” Coriell said. “It would be pretty hard to do worse than the current failed war-on-drugs policy of marijuana prohibition.”
In Massachusetts, however, the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol found itself fending off Shumlin’s criticisms. Jim Borghesani, the group’s communications director, told the State House News Service, “He seems to focus on edibles as a negative, and unfortunately, I think he’s falling into the same exaggerations when it comes to edibles that a lot of other people have.”
Shumlin may be making things harder for Massachusetts legalization advocates, but his comments appear to be directed more at his home turf. He’s trying to use Massachusetts’ November vote as leverage to get a Vermont law on the books.
If Vermont passes a bill this year, it would be the first state to legalize marijuana through legislative action rather than by a public vote, which allows the state to more specifically tailor the law, Shumlin noted.
“The bill passed by the Vermont Senate would represent the most careful, deliberate attempt to regulate marijuana in America,” Shumlin wrote. “We can be the first state to do it right.”
And then if Massachusetts voters approve legalization, there’d be nothing to keep Vermonters from heading to Massachusetts for edibles and lounges. But that is an op-ed for another day.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
‘We can be the first state that does it right’. Not by enacting the will of the people, but by passing a bill that is the most restrictive and beneficial to our state government.
Does anyone in Vermont REALLY care what Shumlin wants?
What’s the matter Shummy?? Afraid that you might not get all your profits.. that you want to be the big shot Governor? You’re not the Governor of Massachusetts.. Why don’t you take care of Vermont and mind your own business..
Just let us grow our own and stop trying to make profit off a weed. Shummy’s buddies have a lot of time and money invested in this money machine…the state may regulate but the money talks.
Peter Shumlin, the world’s biggest narcissist, suffers from the spectacular delusion that anybody cares what he thinks.
Maybe Shumlin should ban all official state travel to Mass., too?
And then a bunch of other states can ban their official state travel to Vermont because Vermont is anti-religion, anti-GMO, pro-marijuana, etc.
And then we can have a 50-state interstate free-for-all travel ban where every state bans official state travel to every other state, because each state doesn’t like the other state’s policies. We’ll all refuse to allow our state employees to go to any other state.