Some legislators are pushing for the legalization of recreational marijuana, using an economic argument to make Connecticut potentially the first New England state to allow residents to get high without legal consequences.
Get Instant Access to This Article
Subscribe to Hartford Business Journal and get immediate access to all of our subscriber-only content and much more.
- Critical Hartford and Connecticut business news updated daily.
- Immediate access to all subscriber-only content on our website.
- Bi-weekly print or digital editions of our award-winning publication.
- Special bonus issues like the Hartford Book of Lists.
- Exclusive ticket prize draws for our in-person events.
Click here to purchase a paywall bypass link for this article.
If you put a pot of gold in front of state lawmakers these days they'll do just about anything to get their hands on it.
Whether it's taxing Yale's endowment or penalizing large employers that pay workers below $15 an hour, lawmakers seem willing to float any idea that would raise revenues for a cash-strapped state.
Some legislators are pushing for the legalization of recreational marijuana, using an economic argument to make Connecticut potentially the first New England state to allow residents of a certain age to get high without legal consequences.
We think the argument is wrong-minded. To push for the legalization of an illegal drug simply because it will help the state raise new revenues is not sound economic, social or public health policy. It simply whiffs of desperation.
To be clear, there appears to be little support for legalizing weed this legislative session. A legalization bill proposed in February has gone nowhere. But as the state grapples with growing deficits in the years ahead, marijuana proponents will harp on the notion that legalization could raise substantial sums of money – perhaps as much as $50 million annually, according to one estimate.
Last week, pot proponents held an informational session to explore possibilities of legalization, even bringing in a state lawmaker from Colorado who crafted that state's first-in-the-nation recreational marijuana law. The main argument used was a fiscal one: If Connecticut doesn't act quickly, other New England states will legalize the drug first, preventing the Nutmeg State from maximizing the return on its legalization investment.
Of greater importance than a fiscal argument, however, are the social and health effects legalizing weed would have on the populace, and whether or not we want to promote activities that foster laziness and other potential harmful effects.
Legalizing weed as a way to reform the criminal justice system, for example, is a better argument worth having, but even that notion is flawed. Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, for example, said he opposes legalizing recreational pot even though he has made significant strides to decriminalize small amounts of the drug's use through his second-chance society initiative. While he doesn't necessarily want marijuana use to stain an individual's criminal record — damaging the employability of low-level offenders, particularly minorities — encouraging the drug's use, he recently said publicly, is not a road he wants to travel down.
We aren't trying to be the social police. The political tea leaves may indicate that marijuana legalization will gain steam in the years ahead. So far, four states and the District of Columbia have already OK'd recreational use of the drug. But Connecticut shouldn't legalize marijuana simply because it offers a quick option to fill budget holes created by irresponsible stewardship of our state finances.
We don't need to double down on stupid.
Read more
