Pot on the agenda

The tide is shifting on drug policy, and Vermont is poised to go with the new tide.

A Senate committee last week heard testimony about how to regulate legal use of recreational marijuana by Vermonters. Much thought is going into the prospect of legalization, which has gained support from powerful leaders in state government.

These include Gov. Peter Shumlin, House Speaker Shap Smith and Sen. Dick Sears of Bennington County. Sears is the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and his previous lack of enthusiasm has been a major obstacle in the movement toward legalization.

His decision to allow action to proceed is an important signal of change. It is ironic that legalization of marijuana is advancing in Vermont at the same time that the state is grappling with a major crisis involving heroin and prescription painkillers.

It is an indication that our understanding of drugs has taken us beyond the panicked “just-say-no” approach of the past and the militarization and criminalization associated with the “war on drugs.”

Opposition to legalization rests with the real concern that legalization of recreational marijuana for those 21 and over will make it more readily available for those under 21. No one wants to encourage the abuse of any drug, and the prospect of Vermont teens succumbing to the addling effects of excessive pot smoking must be taken into account.

Experience suggests that legalization would not necessarily worsen the problem of abuse. Already, marijuana is readily available, and Vermonters have a relatively high rate of use, including Vermont teens.

This is not good, but it is a fact. In Colorado marijuana has been legal since 2012, and it appears that use has not expanded. The people who smoked before still smoke, but they do it legally, obtaining their drug from legal and regulated sources. But those not inclined to smoke still do not smoke.

Whether marijuana is legal or not, Vermont has an obligation to educate young people about the abuse of drugs, including marijuana. The lure of the drug will continue, whether legal or not.

There is concern about the effect of legalization on traffic safety. The experience in Colorado suggests that traffic safety has not worsened. The rate of fatalities has continued to decline.

Vermonters may want to consider what they will think if Vermont becomes the only legal source on the East Coast. As the Rand Corp. report noted, Colorado is far from large population centers, while Vermont is close to New York, Boston and Montreal. Colorado law forbids taking Colorado pot across state lines, and Vermont’s law could do the same.

But how easy would it be to enforce, and would Vermont officials be inclined to enforce it? What do we think about Bostonians trooping to Vermont to buy? Maybe it would give a nice boost to the tourist economy.

Marijuana could give a nice boost to the farm economy, too, especially if state regulations encourage so-called craft growers, as suggested to legislators last week.

The spectre of big corporate producers is worrisome. The tobacco industry is probably not the model most Vermonters probably have in mind. Meanwhile, legal production of hemp might open up markets for Vermont farmers.

It is now widely understood that the war on drugs has been a losing campaign. Even Mexico is coming to grips with this reality. A story in The New York Times reported that a legal ruling in Mexico may lead to legalization for consumers in Mexico.

In Mexico the war on drugs has been more than metaphorical. Tens of thousands of people have died in battling the cartels that feed American markets for pot, as well as cocaine and heroin.

Other Latin American nations are deciding the war on drugs has not served them well. Getting criminals out of the business would serve our neighbors to the south as well as depriving criminal gangs in the United States of a marketable product. The cocaine and heroin problems would remain.

Tax revenue should not be a reason to legalize pot, but it would be a useful consequence. In Colorado a portion of the revenue has been channeled to education, which is what Vermont has done with lottery proceeds. It gives a patina of virtue to the prospect of profiting from vice.

Vermont has taken its time in following the example of Colorado and Washington state. That’s a good thing. When it comes time for the Senate Judiciary Committee to consider the merits, rather than the mechanics, of legalization, it will be important for it to look at those states’ experience in depth.

Everyone, 16 years old or 66, needs to educate him or herself about drugs, the reality and the costs associated with the different courses of action available to us.