Connecticut Medical Marijuana Legalization Gets Closer, But Politicians Still Have Some Stupid, Cruel, and Anti-Market Objections

No-doubt-accidentally in honor of 4-20, legal medical marijuana in Connecticut (which decriminalized small amounts of pot in 2011) had some promising progress today when the state's financial committee voted 36-15 to legalize medical marijuana, under a measure now on its way to the state House of Representatives. However, several Republican lawmakers managed to voice some objections along the way.

The law would very tightly control medical marijuana, but to Connecticut state Sen. Toni Boucher (R-Wilton), that's not enough. She gets that marijuana helps some dying people, sure. But what about the children?

She offered several amendments to soften the bill, including one that would have limited the use of medical marijuana to those with terminal illnesses.

“This…is exactly the wrong message to our children,” Boucher said. “While trying to help a small few…the costs to our families and children are so severe.”

And, inquired, Rep. Prasad Srinivasan what about the financial cost of legalizing medical marijuana?

Srinivasan, a Republican from Glastonbury who is also a medical doctor said he’s well aware of the potential benefits of marijuana for ill patients.

“Being a physician and taking care of [the] terminally ill, I am well aware of that there are indications for medical marijuana,” he said

But the cost to the state would be prohibitive, Srinivasan said. He questioned figures provided by the nonpartisan Office of Fiscal Analysis. OFA found that any costs associated with the bill, such as the hiring of additional drug control agents, would be offset by revenue gains through registration fees.

The assumption that legalizing the substance would mandate the hiring of more drug control agents and that Connecticut couldn't, ya know, just get along with the amount of agents they had (or, dare to dream, fewer of them) pretty much sums it up. The financial cost estimated by the committee is very minor, but if Connecticut was interested in a real, free market in marijuana, they wouldn't have to consider the cost of any drug control agents, even just two. If you see the benefits of medical marijuana, as Srinivasan claims to, but you consider the the potentially "prohibitive" cost to the state" a deal breaker, you're doing something wrong as a doctor and a politician. 

Reason on drug policy

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Bingo||

    WHO THE FUCK CARES ABOUT THE FUCKING CHILDREN JESUS FUCKING CHRIST

  • Lucy Steigerwald||

    You have my vote.

  • Pound. Head. On. Desk.||

    Darn! Now Bongo's one vote up on me!

  • Pound. Head. On. Desk.||

    And I can't type...

  • AlmightyJB||

    The Disneyfication of America. The lazy parents answer to everything.

  • Pound. Head. On. Desk.||

    I'm lazy. I'm a parent. My solution has been the reverse: Treat the kids like adults, to the greatest extent behavior allowed. They all took well to it. They were the envy of their friends. And it gave them lots to lose if when they screwed up.

  • Bingo||

    I'm just amazed that in the process of doing everything "for the children" that we've essentially infantilized an entire population and no one is allowed to make decisions as an informed adult anymore.

    Is that irony? I don't even know.

  • Bucky||

    but, what about the whales?

  • ||

    An excellent source of nutrition.

  • ||

    And oil.

  • Pound. Head. On. Desk.||

    but, what about the whales?
    An excellent source of nutrition.

    The Inuit are proof!
    Actually, there's good reason to believe fat is good for weight loss and preventing a host of the "diseases of civilization." The specialist my doctor sent me to suggested I should eat three tablespoons of coconut oil every day for the saturated fat. Only problem is now my face is as oily as a teenager's!

  • Terr||

    Well, the oil goes in your mouth; not on your face.

  • Pound. Head. On. Desk.||

    Only problem is now my face is as oily as a teenager's!
    Well, the oil goes in your mouth; not on your face.

    But it feels so good going on!

  • cherokeejack||

    children will care about untreated pain and unsympathetic politicians. Then they will start wondering who is in charge and will they be mistreated as well.

  • PantsFan||

    This is where (pre-registration) I would post as Helen Lovejoy:
    "Won't somebody please think of the children!?!"

  • ||

    You are doing the dreadful stereotype of the Lazy Canuckistanian too much justice.

  • ||

    What a worthless cunt Toni Boucher is.

  • ||

    If you see the benefits of medical marijuana, as Srinivasan claims to, but you consider the the potentially "prohibitive" cost to the state" a deal breaker, you're doing something wrong as a doctor and a politician.

    Unfortunately, all too often these occupations overlap. Unnecessarily. I blame lawyers, mostly.

  • Evil Otto||

    I suppose the lawyers are forcing them to ask whether I wear seat belts or use condoms and have guns in the house when all I'm doing is dropping off a stool sample. One of these times I'm going to mash a spent 22 casing into my poop.

  • ||

    Actually Tulpa, you aren't far off the mark. It's both lawyers proper and lawyers by proxy of insurance companies. Hence the redundancy of paperwork, not only for accuracy of H&P/HX, but for malpractice avoidance. And of course, nanny concerns are paramount. I've often posted on these boards that the power of the most shitweasely of medical professionals is the MPH and is being ever more expanded, hence the seat belt use, helmet use, and guns in the house. Condom use is legit H&P/HX information, however, when dropping off a stool sample (not all sexual contact is just vaginal, Tulpy Poo. How long have you posted on these boards, you silly Jif Jester?)

    As a joke, go right ahead and mash the casing into your stool sample. Be warned, the path lab may render a DX that you (and much more likely your insurance provider) may not like.

  • ||

    You're being rational Woman. Be ware!!! That can lead to voting!

  • mustard||

    Why would the GOP care? They know the livertrannians will line up to vote for them like sheep to the sheering because they don't want to pay their fair share to the community.

  • Bingo||

    So it turns out that Mary Stack is still obsessed with HnR, who would have guessed...

  • ||

    Hey did I ever tell you guys that my university's Dean of Community Standards emailed me saying that someone had sent a complaint to him about my comments on this site?

    He warned me to "be aware of a possible cyber-stalker."

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  • Bingo||

    It's still really fucking strange to me that someone the same age as my mother spent (spends?) hours griefing a website of a marginalized political minority with no perceivable tangible benefits.

  • ||

    What's strange to me is how bangable her daughter is. Obviously Daddy had good genes to make up for Mommy's Down's.

  • Bingo||

    Bangable only if she doesn't have whatever genetic-disorder that makes you stalk message boards and incubate various personality disorders.

    Jesus, just by the comparison to her mom alone she's more attractive.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    The only cyber-stalker is that liberal who snitched on you, heller.

    mustard sounds like a suspect...

  • Bingo||

    Aware dean is aware. She was mimicking you for something like a month before registration. You might want to invite the guy out for beers to see if he's a regular (only if not Tulpa).

  • ||

    Tulpy Poo is in PA, and a Mathematics Professor. I think heller is safe from the fuddy duddy.

  • AlmightyJB||

    That's messed up

  • ||

    "someone had sent a complaint to him about my comments on this site"

    Holy shit.

    I keep thinking of changing my handle to my name, as I really dont see any reason for me to remain anonymous. Just when I think I am going to do it, someone tells a story like this. Ugh.
    Someone complained to your university that you hold opinions they dont like? FUCK THEM.

  • Spartacus||

    I'm still stuck on the "Dean of Community Standards" bit. What the hell is that? Is that seriously a full-time job or is it some title the univ established so they could qualify for some sort of grant?

  • General Butt Naked||

    They have something like that at my school. Basically, if you live next to a house full of college kids and they're partying all the time and or destroying your property you can call and the uni will have a meeting with them. Or when kids get charged with a crime outside of school they'd have to have a hearing.

  • Bardas Phocas||

    The "for the children" shit is why I'm starting a campaign to repeal the 19th amendment. We didn't have this shit before giving women the vote. Politicians know the wimens care nothing but the safety of their little snowflakes and are willing to get out ahead of them, as shown with alcohol prohibition.

    War on Drugs - tough on crime - keep the Black man down; all policies to placate the women and protect their spawn. It's not that men don't appreciate the value of children. Their little hands and short stature have uses in our factories and mines. But the women will give up all theirs' and our liberties for incremental security for their rugrats.

    Repeal the 19th Amendment - For Freedom!

  • Hyperion||

    Where do I sign up?

    The problem with the wimin folk is that most of them are highly unstable due to being driven more by emotion than anything else.

    You might embark upon a campaign to convert one of them to the Libertarian way of thinking and one day thinking you have finally succeeded, you will just be frustrated when they suddenly and unexpectedly transform into a neocon or even a wildly irrational progressive because of some lame melodrama being broadcast on the evening news.

  • Formerly Almanian||

    Dude! I'm sooooooooo wasted!!

  • AlmightyJB||

    What Jefferson was saying was, Hey! You know, we left this England place 'cause it was bogus; so if we don't get some cool rules ourselves - pronto - we'll just be bogus too! Get it?

  • ||

    I feel ya brah!!! (air guitar)

  • Spartacus||

    OK, I have an actual, serious question. nearly a third of states now have some form of medical marijuana, so nobody should have to guess anymore about what the effects would be. Is there any actual data that would indicate any negative effects at all from legalized weed? "More people are using it than we had in mind" is not really a negative effect, but I can't find anything else being cited as an actual problem.

  • Hyperion||

    There would be the data of the harmful effects when the fed goon squads swoop in on the legal dispensaries, shoot any dogs or kitties on sight, haul off everyone to prison, and thereby deny the patients depending on said dispensary for their medication.

  • AlmightyJB||

    I saw a couple episodes of this show that was on about these medical mj dispensaries in Colorado. Might have been in Silver Springs? Anyways the old guard were trying to vote them out of business. The ex-mayor went on the radio and just seemed to be making up stastics as he went along. My take was that what got all their panties in a bunch was the fact that there town streets were lined with weed shops. Wondering if maybe the shops were a little more non-discript or out of sight if it would have been as big a deal. I could be wrong about that. They're certainly plenty of aholes who love telling other people how to live their life.

  • Jennifer||

    Five years ago, when Connecticut was talking about legalizing medical MJ, I wrote a story about a local paraplegic who smoked it to suppress his muscle spasms. Then I called Boucher, told her about said paraplegic, and asked how long she thought he should stay in prison for violating the MJ laws. The odious coward refused to answer; indeed, she got offended and called it a "ridiculous question." And apparently won various re-election bids since then.

    Ancient Hit and Run link:
    http://reason.com/blog/2007/04.....ull-politi

  • ||

    Excellent work, Jennifer. Kudos. I also read your UK The Fraudian piece. Do still you give deserved grief to Ms. Boucher?

    Still odd to see unthreaded comments, and I started posting here on that format.

    Still needs moar "sucking Satan's sulfurous balls." :-)

  • Jennifer||

    Nah, I lost my job in the wake of the whole Tribune bankruptcy thing. Now I'm just a freelance Taker of Umbrage, rather than a full-timer.

  • chris3145||

    what is severe about letting adults use cannabis maybe we should ban steak because babies can't chew it

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement