Governors reluctant to follow Colorado's 'pot' lead
WASHINGTON — All the buzz at the National Governors Association meeting over legalizing pot, some say, is just smoke.
Nearly three months after Colorado began selling recreational marijuana, the nation's governors are taking a cautious approach to loosening their drug laws despite growing support for legalization.
Republican and Democratic state chief executives meeting in Washington this weekend expressed broad concern for children and public safety should recreational marijuana use spread. At the same time, Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper is warning other governors against rushing to follow his lead.
He said he's spoken to “half a dozen” governors with questions about his state's experience, including some who “felt this was a wave” headed to their states.
“When governors have asked me, and several have, I say that we don't have the facts. We don't know what the unintended consequences are going to be,” Hickenlooper said. “I urge caution.”
The Democrat continued: “I say, if it was me, I'd wait a couple of years.”
States are watching closely as Colorado and Washington establish themselves as national pioneers after becoming the first states to approve recreational marijuana use in 2012.
Colorado became the first to allow legal retail sales of recreational marijuana on Jan. 1 and Washington is expected to open its marketplace soon.
Hickenlooper confirmed that early tax revenue collections on Colorado pot sales have exceeded projections but cautioned that tax revenue “is absolutely the wrong reason to even think about legalizing recreational marijuana.”
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.