So far the only thing making this year a lively campaign season in Vermont is the Democratic primary race between incumbent Bill Sorrell and challenger T.J. Donovan for Attorney General. It seems every week we're seeing a new endorsementor position paper from both camps, and the campaign so far has been relatively substantive.
Still, while making his pitch for change, it seems odd that T.J. hasn't made a big deal of his latest policy position, which Jane Lindholm broke on Vermont Edition last week.
As you probably know, Donovan has made prescription drug abuse the centerpiece of his campaign, arguing that the impact of prescription drug abuse on public safety is a mandate to take both criminal and public health approaches to the problem, and to make it a higher priority than garden-variety nonviolent crime.
What was the hidden announcement Thursday? In response to a question late in the interview, Donovan confirmed that he supports decriminaliztion of marijuana. You should really listen to the entire interview, but I'll just give away the surprise and let you know that about 24 minutes into the show, Jane Lindholm specifically asks him “Do you support the decriminalization of marijuana?” and Donovan say, “I do, and here's why . . .”
This seems like a big thing for Donovan, with nothing but positives for the campaign. First, it's going to be a low-turnout election, attracting mostly the core Democratic electorate, which is undoubtedly more liberal than the population at large. Second, with support from the State Troopers Association and the Sheriffs' association, Donovan isn't in danger of being painted as soft on crime. Third, challenging an incumbent means he needs to be aggressive and make big initiatives to gain visibility and distinguish himself from Sorrell. The decriminalization statement is just the kind of thing that should help the campaign.
There's still nothing up on Donovan's web page, and although my e-mail in box is full of his communiques I haven't gotten a decrim e-mail yet, but watch the news to see this story develop.
I think it's Sorrell's turn.
I listened to roughly the first 15 minutes of the interview after the fact, on VPR’s website. I was mostly interested in Donovan’s position on tasers, in the wake of Macadam Mason’s death, which had announced that same morning. (See below.) Once I heard that exchange I stopped listening. Because, frankly, Donovan didn’t impress me much. He seemed hesitant and overly cautious. Many of hyis answers were standard politico-speak. And when he did say something out of the ordinary, he said it in a rambly sort of way.
On tasers, the first thing he said was that he wasn’t aware of the Mason case. At all. Made me wonder how he’d spent his morning, since it had been the big story in the state (particularly for law enforcement) and the VSP had just wrapped up its news conference. Was Donovan so deep in “interview prep” that no one on his team followed the news?
So his answer on tasers was standard stuff — he endorses the use of tasers, but there need to be solid, consistent guidelines. But the fact that he was unaware of the story, or professed to be unaware, was unimpressive. In fact, I’d say inexcusable — not for Donovan himself, as much as for his campaign team. Wasn’t anyone checking the news?
I never understand why people don’t run for office in Vt on this issue. I’m a (local) beer drinker, but it sure seems both sound policy and sound politics to me
I liked almost all of what Donovan had to say. Except that he hadn’t heard of the top news story in Vermont, Macadam Mason.
And the biggest problem I have with Donovan is his belief that police should go fishing in the drug database to turn addicts into criminals. I want clarification from him on that. I believe that if cops want to look at that database they need a warrant. If Donovan agrees with that position, well OK then. But if he thinks that cops should be able to look at any time for no reason other than criminalizing addiction, well I strongly disagree!
T.J. Donovan also collected the endorsement of the Vermont State Labor Council, AFL-CIO.
This comment response to Jack’s post started as a comment, but then I kept writing until it turned into a post. See: Labor’s endorsement of T.J. Donovan.