The Massachusetts Legislature provided a fresh example of the abuse of lame-duck sessions Dec. 28, when both House and Senate hastily passed a bill delaying for six months provisions of the ballot question legalizing recreational marijuana.
Lame-duck legislative sessions have a bad reputation for good reason. They come after an election but before a new legislature is sworn in, which minimizes accountability. They often happen when voters aren’t paying attention and few legislators are in attendance, like between Christmas and New Year’s. A bill can be gaveled through in seconds, with no chance for debate or public input.
The Massachusetts Legislature provided a fresh example of the abuse of lame-duck sessions Dec. 28, when both House and Senate hastily passed a bill delaying for six months provisions of the ballot question legalizing recreational marijuana approved by voters in November. The bill – which Gov. Charlie Baker signed Dec. 30 – was passed without debate, with no roll-call vote and with little advance notice.
According to State House News Service, just two senators were present when Senate President Stan Rosenberg gaveled the bill through on a voice vote, in a session that took all of three minutes. Who says the Legislature can’t act quickly?
The authors of this maneuver, Rosenberg and House Speaker Robert DeLeo, issued statements acknowledging their "responsibility to implement the will of the voters," but their actions showed arrogance and a disrespect for the democratic process that has long been part of the Beacon Hill culture.
A six-month delay might be justified if it was necessary to give the process set forth by the ballot question time to work as intended. Question 4 sets an aggressive timetable for the Cannabis Control Commission, a regulatory body to be named by the state treasurer. The CCC must set and enforce regulations for licensing marijuana facilities, establish procedures for tracking production and sales and make rules for products and packaging. Treasurer Deb Goldberg has been complaining about the initiative’s timetable for months, but has shown little urgency about fulfilling her responsibilities. Still, if she gave a detailed explanation for why her office needed more time to get implementation right, we’d listen.
But Rosenberg and DeLeo aren’t primarily interested in getting Goldberg or the CCC more time to do their job. Nor are they talking about tweaking the law to smooth its implementation. In their joint statement, they promise to name a "Committee on Marijuana" to "to research, review, and draft marijuana related legislation."
That sounds like another way of saying, "Question 4 is dead. We’ll let you know later how we plan to replace it."
But the Legislature has had years to rewrite the state marijuana law. As Question 4 was headed for the ballot, DeLeo refused to let the House consider any alternative bill. Now the leaders want to start all over. Rosenberg says he has a long list of changes he wants to make, from raising the tax rate to raising the legal age for cannabis consumption to 25.
That’s not keeping faith with the 1,745,945 voters who approved Question 4 by a healthy margin. Those voters made a law, not a suggestion.
Rosenberg and DeLeo promise to have a new marijuana law in place by July of 2017. There’s talk of a transparent legislative process that involves all stakeholders in rewriting the law. That would be out of character for the Massachusetts Legislature, and they are already off to a bad start. The leaders’ lame-duck mischief has cost Beacon Hill credibility with those who supported Question 4.
News Moderator: Katelyn Baker
Full Article: Editorial – Lame-Duck Mischief On Cannabis Law
Author: Staff
Contact: 978-739-1300
Photo Credit: Michael Schennum
Website: Wicked Local Topsfield
