Editor’s note: This commentary is by Matt Simon, who is the New England political director for the Marijuana Policy Project.
[A]ccording to a study conducted by the Rand Corp., roughly 80,000 Vermonters use marijuana on a regular basis. Should it be possible for them to become law-abiding citizens?
This is a simple question, and Vermont’s House Judiciary Committee should be applauded for answering it with a firm “yes.” On March 22, the committee voted 8-3 to approve H.170, a bill that would eliminate penalties for possession of one ounce or less of marijuana, two or fewer mature plants, and four or fewer immature plants, by adults 21 and older.
It has become clear to most Vermonters that the prohibition of cannabis is a failed policy. On the same day as the committee vote, a new poll conducted by Public Policy Polling was published, confirming that H.170 enjoys support from 57 percent of Vermont residents. This is consistent with the results of four previous polls conducted by the Castleton Polling Institute, which found clear majority support for making marijuana legal in Vermont.
Since public support has shifted so strongly in favor of reform, it would be reasonable to ask why some legislators still believe that adults should continue to be punished for using marijuana or growing a small number of marijuana plants. Here are a few of the common myths that continue to be embraced by opponents of H.170:
Myth 1: Law Enforcement Is Opposed
Although some law enforcement leaders have spoken out strongly against H.170, it would be grossly inaccurate to conclude that members of law enforcement are united in opposition. In fact, according to a national Pew Research Center survey of nearly 8,000 police officers that was conducted in 2016, approximately one out of three police officers (32 percent) supports legalizing marijuana for adult use.
In Vermont, Windham County Sheriff Keith Clark has testified in support of ending marijuana prohibition, and three former state attorneys general have endorsed the effort. Additionally, we know that many Vermont law enforcement professionals support H.170 but are understandably reluctant to buck the chain of command by speaking out in favor.
It’s worth noting that, in the past, law enforcement leaders spoke vigorously against incremental reforms in the Vermont Legislature, then soon evolved to a position of supporting those reforms after their fears turned out to be unfounded.
For example, when the decriminalization bill (H.200) was being considered in 2013, Vergennes Police Chief George Merkel lobbied strongly in opposition. “Just the fact that we would decriminalize something like this shocks me,” he told the House Judiciary Committee (“What would marijuana decriminalization mean for Vermont?” Burlington Free Press, April 6, 2013).
Four years after being “shocked,” Chief Merkel now speaks well of the law he once opposed. “Quite frankly I think the decrim law that’s on the books now works fine,” he told the House Judiciary Committee on Feb. 9, 2017.
Myth 2: Teen Use Will Surely Skyrocket
Prohibitionists such as Ginny Burley, who represents SAM-VT, attempted to convince the House Judiciary Committee that teen use has increased dramatically in states where cannabis is legal for adult use. In reality, the data from these states tells a much more reassuring story: according to the most comprehensive surveys of teen use, the rates have actually remained the same or declined.
Vermont’s opioid addiction problem is tragic, but marijuana plainly is not the cause, and it is becoming clear that sensible marijuana policy reforms can be an important part of the solution.
In Colorado, which was the first state to end marijuana prohibition for adults, the Department of Public Health and the Environment biannually conducts the largest survey of Colorado teens, the Colorado Healthy Kids survey. The results of this survey in 2016 indicated that teen use has slightly declined since Coloradans voted to make marijuana legal in 2012. “As the department explained in a June 2016 press release, “The survey shows marijuana use has not increased since legalization, with four of five high school students continuing to say they don’t use marijuana, even occasionally.”
A similar trend has been observed in Washington State, where voters in the 2012 election also ended marijuana prohibition.
Fortunately, the members of the House Judiciary Committee took time to review all the relevant survey data from all of the states that have made marijuana legal for adult use. Overall, these surveys indicate that teen marijuana use has either remained stable or declined following legalization.
In reality, every serious advocate for marijuana policy reform agrees that evidence-based education programs are a good idea regardless of whether or not adults’ possession of marijuana is legal or merely a civil violation. The value of these programs should not be considered in any way dependent on the legal status of marijuana. And, in fact, the committee heard testimony that Vermont has already expanded its marijuana education and prevention efforts since the issue was debated last spring.
Myth 3: Impaired Driving Will Increase
Marijuana is widely available in every state in the nation regardless of its legal status, so it is clear that prohibiting marijuana for adults’ use is a poor strategy for addressing impaired driving. Additionally, research plainly indicates that alcohol, which is legally sold in stores and served at restaurants and events all over Vermont, has a much more profound negative impact on highway safety than marijuana. Rather than continuing to punish adults for choosing cannabis over alcohol, policymakers should support more field-testing training for officers and public education to discourage drug-impaired driving and other dangerous behaviors, such as distracted driving and driving while tired.
Myth 4: We Can’t Do This — We Have an Opiate Problem!
We have all heard the assertion that marijuana is a “gateway drug.” Prohibitionists have used this tired myth as a propaganda tool for decades, but today, even the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) admits there is very little evidence to support it. The DEA reported in 2016 that “Overall, research does not support a direct causal relationship between regular marijuana use and other illicit drug use.”
In reality, allowing adults to grow and share small amounts of cannabis will give them a way to avoid patronizing illicit drug dealers who might introduce them to more dangerous drugs. H.170 would also make cannabis a state-legal option for adult Vermonters as an alternative to opioids for treating chronic pain. This is important, despite recent improvements to the medical marijuana law, because many Vermont doctors and medical practices are not comfortable certifying patients for the state’s medical marijuana program, and many patients are not comfortable registering with the state in order to enjoy the benefits of using cannabis.
Vermont’s opioid addiction problem is tragic, but marijuana plainly is not the cause, and it is becoming clear that sensible marijuana policy reforms can be an important part of the solution.
H.170: A Reasonable, Necessary Reform
Members of the Vermont House all have one thing in common: They all have many constituents who use cannabis responsibly, and who would be law-abiding citizens if not for their use of cannabis. As Robert Sand, Vermont Law School professor and former state’s attorney for Windsor County, explained in his testimony in support of H.170, “We’ve created more harm by how we’ve responded to marijuana, than has ever been created by the plant itself. And that just doesn’t make sense.”
Professor Sand is right. This bill would make it possible for tens of thousands of Vermonters to become law-abiding citizens under state law, and it would be a crime — or, at least, a failure of the democratic process — if it doesn’t pass.
