Special thanks to the anonymous who noted on the last posting, "This is kind of random." Well yeah, that is pretty much what blogging is, sort of random.
Pardonez-moi for the digression into random matter. On to matters less "random."
Twelve Democratic and one Progressive members of the Legislature have written to Gov. Jim Douglas and Attorney General Bill Sorrell seeking a reversal on the governor's call for marijuana busts from state law enforcement agencies in Windsor County to be handled by the AG's office. This all came as a result of State's Attorney Bobby Sand's decision to allow a Windsor County lawyer busted with 2.5 pounds of pot to go through court diversion. (Signers of letters are: Sens. Campbell and McCormack, Reps. Cheney, Emmons, Martin, Mitchell, Pellett, Sweaney, Clarkson, Haas, Masland, Ojibway, Shand).
The legislators are arguing that Douglas is interfering with local government. "The voters of Windsor County have the right to have our local elections respected," the letter to Douglas says.
They explicitly say, "We are not addressing suggested reforms to Vermont's drug laws." But that is the backdrop of this issue. Is marijuana a drug that Vermont considers a serious infraction or not?
In the letter to Sorrell, legislators get at that issue:
"Finally, we are dismayed by the governor's apparent lack of a sense of
proportion. Vermont has recently experienced its worst week of
violent crime in our history. Our larger towns are beset by gang
activity, the effects of which are spreading to our rural communities. Our
correctional facilities are overcrowded and understaffed. It is preposterous
that the governor would choose to focus, not on these problems, but on the
routine decision to send a nonviolent first-time offender to Court Diversion. We
urge you to distance yourself from so irresponsible and distorted a
position."
Yesterday, the Supreme Court justices came before the Legislature's Joint Fiscal Committee to talk about their strained financial situation, largely due to underfunding of employee pay across state government. Chief Justice Paul Reiber told legislators that the state is underfunding the court system it has chosen to have. The discussion evolved into one about the notion of taking a look at the finances of the overall justice system - cops, courts, prosecutors, defenders, prisons, probation - and how the interact.
In that realm, is it worth considering downgrading certain crimes because the state simply can't afford to prosecute them? Or are Democrats setting themselves up for another smackdown on this one? How easy will it be for Republicans to suggest Democrats are getting soft on crime?
- Terri Hallenbeck
