With marijuana legalization and a new budget, a little public scrutiny
The legislature returned last week for a short special session that was a festival of confusion and revelations. It was accompanied by rare public flashes of vengeance in shaping public policy.
The efforts to create a regulated industry to grow marijuana and sell it to adults was chaotic during the hours it was not shrouded in secrecy. The struggle over who will reap the greatest financial benefits was wrapped in arguments about the legacy of the enforcement during the half century of an erratic war on drugs.
Legislators were too hard on Connecticut. It has been many years since anyone went to jail for the possession of a small amount of marijuana alone. The state has long provided programs that allow defendants to avoid a conviction for the use of illegal drugs and even the possession of what were once deemed significant amounts.
A complicated process of creating regulations and bestowing licenses on marijuana growers and sellers will require transparency and scrutiny. One area to keep an eye on will be the sudden interest of marijuana businesses in making generous campaign contributions. That never changes.
Much of the public will have no interest in the details that legislators and Gov. Ned Lamont’s aides tussled over in the dark this year. What they know is that marijuana will soon be legal. That news will awaken the entrepreneurial instincts in people who do not have the resources to win one of those state licenses. They will grow their own.
Businesses that spend a lot of money to win a slice of a government monopoly resent self-starters who skip the licensing competition. This should not become a new focus of law enforcement — no matter how much the state’s new class of marijuana growers and sellers howl.
Like any other emerging industry, the marijuana business has endured waves of upheavals, failures, successes and mergers. The new law’s emphasis on the past enforcement of drug laws will be subject to the laws of supply and demand just like any other business — even with the advantages of state licenses. There will be fortunes made and some lost. Good intentions often take a beating in brutal business calculations. Brace yourselves.
While the governor and a handful of legislative leaders fought over the 900-page marijuana bill, an 800-page budget bill, called an implementer, appeared hours before voting on it was to start. Its primary purpose was to provide authorizations and direction for the budget the legislature passed the week before.
The original limited purpose of the implementer has expanded over the years into a nefarious instrument. It has become the home of proposals the legislature would decline to pass on their own. The budget implementer is essential to the smooth operation of the state so it can become the home of otherwise objectionable legislation.
The bill, because this is Connecticut, is created in secret and is never the subject of a public hearing. The governor, Senate president and speaker of the House put the bill together and agree on its contents. Traditionally, any one of them can veto a section in their furtive negotiations.
The budget bill — the one that was passed with much self-congratulating — included proper funding for a watchdog agency that keeps an eye on certain state contracts. Its purpose is to assure independent assessments that will prevent the sort of corruption that marked the Rowland administration. The budget implementer — only a week later — removed that funding.
Governors often resent independent agencies that require them and their people to submit to the scrutiny of others. Lamont seems more bitterly opposed than most to the long held philosophy that sunlight is the best disinfectant in the conduct of the people’s business.
It can’t be the money. The cut in funding that Lamont wanted and got was around $450,000 a year in additional funds, not much in a
$46 billion two-year budget. This administration puts a premium on not having its authority questioned or even seen.
We have witnessed
Lamont’s aversion to public scrutiny since early in his administration. It grew more serious as he has wielded emergency powers during the pandemic. With the latest oversight assault, we know it factors in the most minor budget decisions. What adds to our alarm is that the leaders of the legislature have become his active accomplices.