Back in 2012 New Hampshire Governor-Elect Maggie Hassan said she was open to the idea of passing medical marijuana legislation. My first thought was, why? What did Democrats have to gain by putting their foot on the path toward what is typically considered a liberty issue? My answer was money and power.
If New Hampshire Democrats are really interested, does legal pot in any form put us on a path to more government or less? Any Democrat-approved plan will include licensing, lots of regulations, fees or taxes, and some manner of bureaucracy to manage it all. But don’t think for one minute that the existing load of lick-spittle paper pushers will be adequate. Some number of new state (union) employees, complete with new salaries and pensions, will be a staple with zero offsetting reductions in the fixed costs associated with the law enforcement side.
Related: Do Modern Democrats Vote for Anything That Will Make Government Smaller?
Democrats don’t typically support policies that will lessen the power and influence of the state. And it was clear to me that support would focus first on taxing it and then spending that revenue to grow the government. And why would we support that?
We Wouldn’t Support That or Shouldn’t
A great example of when “we” didn’t rose in 2016 with HB1694. House Bill 1694 would legalize marijuana for those 21 years old and older and would impose not only a $15-per-ounce tax on the leaves but also a $530-per-ounce tax on the much more potent flowers, which also can be used to cultivate plants.
Elizabeth Ferreira, on the NHLA Facebook page, observed that, [HB 1694] was a legalization bill with some very good points, but it would have grown government more under the guise of liberty. Another liberty member referred to it as “the Cronyjuana Tax Bill,”….(and while) The NHLA works very hard and usually gets things right, I’m afraid I couldn’t agree with their recommendation this time. I would have voted for *complete* decrim. The taxation and bureaucracy aspect of the bill was, and should be, in my opinion, unacceptable if you’re trying to keep the government smaller rather than larger.
Vermont Leads the “Wrong” Way
The Land of Bernie Sanders, that sliver of so-called sovereignty to our left labeled “Vermont,” is not shy about showing us what the Left has planned.
The Governors Subcommittee on Taxation and Regulation will present its 90-page report to Gov. Phil Scott’s Marijuana Advisory Commission next month. Under the plan, Vermont would adopt a 26 to 27 percent tax rate on cannabis sales. The rate includes a 20 percent cannabis retail excise tax, 6 percent state sales tax, and a 1 percent local option tax.
Officials say prices for legal cannabis should be competitive with prices in the illicit market. According to the report, other states that legalized recreational cannabis saw increases in state revenue, despite falling prices.
Marijuana will be taxed heavily. Regulated heavily. It will come with a substantial levy. The tax will purposefully keep the price near the cost in the illict market. If the legal price is higher, people will still pay it because regulated pot comes with the promise of a clean product. “Where they know it’s a clean product, where they know it doesn’t have herbicides and pesticides on it.” And yes, there will be much revenue.
And We’ll Have Fun Until the State Takes It Away
Grab your Hemp Birkenstocks Phelonia. We’re heading to Ben & Jerry’s for a pint of MaryJane Brownie Swirl. It’s made with State Approved, Fair Trade, antibiotic-free, no-pesticide ingredients packaged in biodegradable won’t warm the environment packaging.
The proceeds of every sale will go to grow the Vermont State government and a handful of groups dedicated to hating white men.
I joke, but this has never been a liberty issue for the left (because nothing is). But advocates have always needed the left to move forward. Knowing, I hope, that Democrats are willing to support almost anything to achieve the goal of more funding for more government.
This is not the first time I’ve referred to this as a Faustian bargain.
Enforcement of that oversight will, in my back-of-the-envelope estimation, dwarf the current estimated costs of enforcement used to justify “decriminalization” which, in reality, will never truly be the case. We’ll get legalization, not decriminalization. There could be some brief window during which you may be able to grow your own “legally,” but they won’t let that be: the path to licensing and a bureaucracy to handle that is as clear to me as a brightly lit runway.
Look to our left.
Lt. Gov. David Zuckerman, a Progressive/Democrat, supports a tax-and-regulate market.
“If we have an aboveground market, where you have choices, just as we do with beer, most people are going to go where those choices exist, where they know it’s a clean product, where they know it doesn’t have herbicides and pesticides on it,” he told WCAX-TV.
The only liberty left will be choosing not to take part. If that’s good enough, then on with it. Otherwise, prepare yourself for legal marijuana with all the strings attached.
Related: NH’s Marijuana Policy Project further proves their anti-2nd Amendment stance
