Response by Bob Orleck to article in vtdigger.com “INSIDE THE GOLDEN BUBBLE: POLICE AND THE POLITICS OF POT”
The Governor of Vermont says that he is happy that the Vermont Commissioner of Public Safety supports the bill to legalize marijuana. But does he really? In this article Commissioner Flynn speaks of his role in the process and his rationale for supporting the legislation. It would be instructive to look at what he says and apply it to the goals he is relying on that was set by the Governor in his State of the State message.
The article pointed out and it is granted that the Commissioner of Public Safety is between a rock and a hard place but he is not the first person that holds a position of public trust that this has happened to. Sure, he was appointed by Governor Shumlin and probably holds the job at the Governor’s pleasure, but he should not be looking for some nuanced way to avoid publicly taking the principled stand he should especially when considering the concerns he has expressed.
I spent time transcribing some of what he said in the audio interview embedded in the on-line article and the message came through that he has three major concerns. That of the message that will be sent to children and that it is right, that we reduce impaired drivers on Vermont’s roads and that we reduce the black market in marijuana. He is relying on the hope that the legislation will meet and accomplish the five goals set out by the Governor in his State of the State message.
To figure out if the Commissioner’s hopes are realistic we have to look at Governor Shumlin’s five goals and analyze them. The numbered items represent each of the Governor’s stated goals and are in quotation marks and the my comments follow after that.
1. “A legal market must keep marijuana and other drugs out of the hands of underage kids. The current system doesn’t. Our new system must.” The Commissioner recognizes that marijuana is here. So the issue he says would be whether it is better to regulate it or leave it unregulated and if we go in the direction of access then we have to be concerned about the message being sent to our children and be sure it is right. People have to make choices in their lives and even though something is illegal they can choose to seek after it. That is different, however, than having it out there legally. Adults are the intended consumers from the stores that the state will establish. Adults are the intended consumers from stores that sell liquor. If we didn’t think there would be a market we would not establish stores so we know that adults will take it home and that legal marijuana will become accessible to underage children. Creating such a market can have no other effect on availability to children than to increase it. Argue that as you will, the next point is surely hard to counter. The message, and it is the message the Commissioner is concerned about, surely is one that will encourage younger people to use the product if they can get it from an accommodating adult or taken from the parent’s liquor/marijuana cabinet. If we did not believe that example brings a message to our children why do we try to set them for our children? One would have to be into reality denial to believe that there is not a bad message here. Yes, the message being sent is a bad one, Commissioner. I believe it is in the report of the Vermont Department of Health that says that education programs have no effect on reducing use so that element that is so important to you is not going to make a difference. The health element has been clearly expressed by physicians from six different medical organizations and their words have fallen on deaf ears.
2. “The tax imposed must be low enough to wipe out the black market and get rid of the illegal drug dealers.” I would like the Governor to explain how a tax can be low enough to eliminate the black market and get rid of drug dealers. Commissioner, that is impossible! The state looks as if it is going to impose a 25% tax on marijuana. Couple that tax with the cost of establishing and operating highly regulated stores only adds up to the marijuana they are selling being an expensive product. The illegal dealer’s black market marijuana will not carry the 25% and the dealer does not have the high store overhead. So while drug tourists will frequent these fancy state authorized drug dens, the buying habits of those with suppliers now is not likely to change. The proponents of this plan of course are relying on “huge” revenue from the sale to drug tourists and can’t reasonably think that doing it with a 25% surcharge and high marketing costs will eliminate the black market and drive out the dealers. Commissioner, do you really believe this goal will be reached by making sure the tax is low enough as he said to “wipe out the black market and get rid of the illegal drug dealers”?
3. “Revenue from legalization must be used to expand addiction prevention programs.” Let’s see. Enable stores to sell a drug you can tax to pay for programs to prevent the drug’s use. (pause) Not sure who is buying this but I doubt if you are Commissioner.
4. “We must strengthen law enforcement’s capacity to improve our response to impaired drivers under the influence of marijuana who are already on Vermont’s roads.” The Commissioner says it is important to him that one of the points in the Governor’s five points works to reduce the number of impaired drivers on the road. However, Commissioner Flynn, if you legalize it they will come and when they come, they will come by car and they will use marijuana and will drive impaired not only while here but when they go back home to Montreal, Boston and New York. So we will have drug impaired locals and drug impaired tourists. Doesn’t sound like a way to reduce the number of drugged drivers on Vermont’s roads does it? One only needs to look at Colorado statistics that show that drug-impaired fatalities have increased since the legalization there. Commissioner, this goal is not going to be realized and I think you know it. Director of the Vermont State Police, Col. Birmingham know it and so do many other law enforcement people and I think you do also. People will die and lives will be ruined.
5. “Take a hard lesson learned from other states and ban the sale of edibles until other states figure out how to do it right.” While not enabling edibles, the legislation gives a charge to the Commission to study edibles and come back with recommendations. There is big money in edibles and that door is being left open to allow this in the future. The operative word in the Governor’s goal is “until”. It is obvious where this is going.
Below is the transcript I did of the first part of the Commissioner’s audible interview in the article. I include this so you can have his words to apply to the comments I have made above. My opinion is that the Commissioner’s course of action should be clear to him. He should tell it like it is and refuse to be a part of it or he should resign and show the world that this is all about greed, money and power and not what is right for the citizens of Vermont. Commissioner, that includes your grandchildren and mine.
You said that “As we move forward if there’s a bill that will accomplish all five of the governor’s goals then it is a goal that as the Commissioner of Public Safety I can live with and we should be moving forward with.” The bill will not accomplish those five goals and no bill could!
Transcript of the Commissioner of Public Safety, Keith Flynn
“As we move toward this issue, I think that the governor’s five points that he put out are very important and if we can accomplish those five points and a couple of them really stand out for me. We need to make sure the message that we are getting to our children is right. That’s why I think it’s important that we have a big education piece in this and a big health piece. I think that is very important.
I am concerned as is the governor about the five points. One of the five points that he mentioned is the need to make sure that we do whatever we can to reduce the number of impaired drivers on our highways and I think that is extremely important. Being able to reduce the black market I think will be also one of the corner stones of this.
As we move forward if there’s a bill that will accomplish all five of the governor’s goals then it is a goal that as the commissioner of public service I can live with and we should be moving forward with. If marijuana is here, and it’s not a matter whether marijuana is here now, marijuana is here now. The question we need to ask ourselves first of all is are we better off having it in a regulated atmosphere or in a un-regulated atmosphere and I believe there is a value to having it in a regulated atmosphere.
We know a number of things. First of all we know that prohibition has never worked. You name the substance and it hasn’t worked. So the approach that we are taking with complete prohibition has not been working. But I think when we start down that road we are confronted with the other questions. What are the messages we are sending to our children and what about the safety of people on the highway.
Those are big things for me. And I think the approach that is being taken and I don’t know what the end result will be. But if we are able to accomplish all the five goals that the governor has set forward I think that is a common sense approach to doing this and a responsible approach.”