The Boston Globe - 11.09.2019

A10 Editorial The Boston Globe WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2019

W

hen the US At-
torney, the local
head of the FBI of-
fice, and the state’s
inspector general
agree that Massachusetts pot shop
laws are an open invitation to polit-
ical corruption, it’s long past time
for the Legislature to take a look at
reforming them.
It would be easy to view the re-
cent federal indictment of Fall Riv-
er Mayor Jasiel F. Correia II, ac-
cused by prosecutors of extorting
four marijuana vendors for some
$575,000 in bribes, as an outlier —
just another example of the greedy,
stupid, and arrogant behavior dis-
played by the 27-year-old mayor al-
ready under indictment for alleg-
edly defrauding investors in his
SnoOwl app scheme.
But the case points to several
troubling — and systemic — issues:
ªThe enormous power local
officials have to advance the
ambitions of would-be pot vendors
in their communities — or not.
ªThe apparent willingness of
some of those potential vendors to
come up with huge sums of money
to secure licenses — whether as an
illegal bribe, as prosecutors say
happened in Fall River, or by
signing on to a host community
agreement that commits them to
fees and give-backs far in excess of
what the law envisioned.
That in turn raises the issue of
how on earth can individuals ap-
plying under social equity provi-
sions of the state law hope to com-
pete with the big money interests
now capturing the market.
US Attorney Andrew Lelling, in
announcing the Correia
indictment, noted that the mayor
had the sole authority to issue the
so-called non-opposition letters
required just to start the process of
acquiring a marijuana license.
“It creates an enormous amount
of temptation,” he said.
At the same news conference,
Joseph Bonavolonta, FBI special
agent in charge of the Boston
office, called it “a perfect storm for
corruption.”
State Inspector General Glenn
A. Cunha said he hoped the indict-
ment “will prompt the Cannabis
Control Commission, the Legisla-
ture and other stakeholders to eval-
uate what additional safeguard or
reforms are necessary.”
For its part, the commission is-
sued a statement saying its stan-
dards “include mandatory disquali-
fications of applicants and licenses
that have any outstanding or unre-
solved criminal proceeding that
may result in a felony conviction.”
Presumably that would mean trou-
ble for the vendor who federal
prosecutors identified as handing
over to a middleman, in addition to
cash, some 12 to 15 pounds of mar-
ijuana intended for resale.
Governor Charlie Baker and
lawmakers have now suddenly
been “woke” to the need for reform

of the law sooner rather than later.

Several proposals to tighten the

reins on those increasingly

problematic host community

agreements were given a hearing

on Beacon Hill at the end of the

July. Advocates long ago flagged

many of those agreements as

legalized “pay-to-play” schemes

under which communities have

been charging far more than the

“impact fee” which is supposed to

be capped at 3 percent.

Marijuana vendors vying for li-

censes have agreed to charitable

“donations,” infrastructure im-

provements, and thousands of dol-

lars for police details — all in addi-

tion to a cut of the proceeds. The

Cannabis Control Commission, in-

sisting it didn’t have the authority

to look under the hood of such

agreements, but merely whether

one had been signed, punted to the

Legislature to clarify its powers.

Now push has come to shove on

that issue, and the Legislature cer-

tainly should clarify that the com-

mission can oversee the agree-

ments. But reforms shouldn’t stop

there.

They should include providing a

measure of transparency and an al-

ternative to what in Fall River

amounted to one-person rule. Of

course, the alternative as practiced

in Boston is fraught with its own

complications. Here the Zoning

Board of Appeal — yes, the same

Zoning Board of Appeal already

under federal scrutiny in the brib-

ery case of John M. Lynch — holds

enormous sway in determining

where or even whether retail mari-

juana shops can locate.

At one point the ZBA had two

(of its seven) members who were

personally involved in marijuana

businesses seeking Boston

locations. Marie St. Fleur has since

resigned to devote full time to that

business, but Bruce Bickerstaff, an

investor in Silver Therapeutics,

remains.

Bickerstaff recuses himself dur-

ing actual votes, and there’s no sug-

gestion of wrongdoing by either

Boston ZBA member, but in other

communities links between local

boards and the pot industry have

raised concerns. For instance, the

Worcester Telegram & Gazette re-

ported on a member of the Grafton

Select Board who resigned the day

before seeking a host community

agreement for a retail pot shop he

was involved in. (And, yes, he got

it.)

Surely it’s time to put some ethi-

cal constraints into practice and at

least halt the planning-board-to-

pot-purveyor revolving door.

Lelling has given every indica-

tion that he intends to pursue po-

litical corruption — weed-related

or otherwise — in the days ahead.

Wise public officials would want to

clean up a system with so many

avenues open to abuse before a

trickle of indictments becomes a

torrent.

Pot shop laws cry out

for reform

Opinion

BOSTONGLOBE.COM/OPINION

M

ichael Bennet is an affable candidate

with an animated message: To fix Wash-

ington and make lasting progress on im-

portant issues, the Democrats must win

in purple states like his.

That leaves the Colorado senator taking aim at Bernie

Sanders’ and Elizabeth Warren’s calls for replacing private

health insurance coverage with a government-adminis-

tered single-payer health care system. Single payer isn’t

the kind of practical liberal message that helped the Dem-

ocrats retake the House in 2018, and it isn’t the way to

win swing voters or swing states in 2020, says Bennet,

who is seeking the presidency after twice winning a US

Senate seat in purple Colorado.

“I don’t think you want to run anywhere on a plan that

makes private insurance illegal for 160 million Americans

and raises taxes by $33 trillion over 10 years,” he said dur-

ing a Monday sit-down. “It is terrible politics.”

In pursuit of that point, Bennet notes that Sanders’ lib-

eral home state of Vermont couldn’t get single payer done.

That a single-payer proposal has gone nowhere in Califor-

nia. And that Colorado voters rejected a single-payer pro-

posal by 79 percent to 21 percent in 2016.

So if Warren becomes the Democratic nominee, does

Bennet think she goes down to defeat? She, after all, is

currently beating Donald Trump, and sometimes handily,

in national head-to-head heats.

“I’m not going to say she loses,” he says, taking a mo-

ment to compliment her overall campaign, “but I think if

our nominee embraces Medicare for All, they may win for

other reasons, but they are going to have to overcome that

among the voters, who don’t support it....Itisaneedless

headwind we are giving ourselves.”

A far better course, Bennet says, would be to add a

public option to Obamacare — a plan he calls “Medicare

X” — and let people choose between that and their private

insurance.

For my money, Bennet has got that right. Voters clearly

prefer a Medicare-like Affordable Care Act public option

to the Sanders/Warren approach. At a time when Donald

Trump is steadily defeating himself, the Democrats

shouldn’t put an easy target like mandatory single payer

on their backs.

That’s not the only issue where Bennet differs with pre-

vailing progressive priorities. As Denver’s former school

superintendent, he says that “free preschool would be a

lot more important and much more progressive than free

college.” He is also proposing big increases in the child tax

credit and the earned income tax credit. “Take those two

things together, raise the minimum wage, and have paid

family leave — that’s a huge shot in the arm for the middle

class and for working people,” he says.

But does Bennet, a relatively late-starting candidate,

have a shot in a crowded race where Joe Biden, Warren,

and Sanders currently own the top tier? He hasn’t, after

all, made the stage for Thursday’s Democratic debate.

“If history is any guide, it’s not locked in,” he argues.

To emphasize that point, he campaigned in New

Hampshire on Friday with Gary Hart, who emerged from

a distant second-place showing in Iowa in 1984 and bat-

tled former vice president Walter Mondale to the last pri-

mary and beyond.

If distressed by Warren’s and Sanders’ sweeping single-

payer schemes, this political pragmatist also rejects

Biden’s notion that if Trump loses, congressional Republi-

cans will become more reasonable. That, Bennet says, ig-

nores the history of the last six years of the Obama admin-

istration, “when we couldn’t get anything through the

Congress because the Tea Party, the Freedom Caucus, and

[Senate Republican leader Mitch] McConnell have immo-

bilized our exercise in self-government.”

Which brings Bennet back to his starting point. To

bring about real change, it’s not enough simply to win the

presidency, he stresses. Democrats need to hold the House

and retake the Senate. That means creating a broad coali-

tion for change, one that extends beyond the deep blue

states.

“There is no shortcut here,” Bennet says. “You’ve gotta

go out and win races in purples states in order to make

change.”

That’s a tough truth from this smart, thoughtful politi-

cal pragmatist — a candidate who has yet to get the atten-

tion he deserves.

Scot Lehigh can be reached at [email protected]. Follow

him on Twitter @GlobeScotLehigh.

SCOT LEHIGH

Michael Bennet’s pragmatic case

for president

Editorial

The following is adapted from

the keynote address that will be de-

livered today at the Flight 93 Na-

tional Memorial in Shanksville, Pa.

W

e gath-

er here on

this 18th

anniversary

of 9/11 at a

complicated

moment in

our nation’s history, a time of hotly

raging debates over the meaning of

“American values.”

I’m an author and a professor,

and I’m not here to be political. I’m

here to make what I consider to be

the apolitical case that — by their

actions, their statements, and ulti-

mately their shared sacrifice — the

40 passengers and crew members of

United Flight 93 should be celebrat-

ed and emulated for representing

the greatest of all American values.

When they boarded the flight in

Newark, they came from an array

of ethnic and racial backgrounds.

They practiced a variety of reli-

gions. They held a range of political

views.

And then, at 9:28 a.m., when

confronted by terrorist hijackers,

these 40 strangers set aside their

individual interests. Through

phone calls, they collected informa-

tion about what happened at the

World Trade Center and, soon af-

ter, the Pentagon. They turned to

one another, sharing what they

knew from those calls and what

they could see in front of them.

And in mere minutes, they

transformed into a cohesive unit

and an unstoppable force. Again

and again, in phone calls from the

plane to the ground, they spoke of

their planned uprising as a joint ef-

fort.

Passenger Tom Burnett told his

wife Deena, “A group of us are get-

ting ready to do something.” Flight

attendant Sandy Bradshaw told her

husband Phil that some passengers

were getting hot water from the

galley. Passenger Todd Beamer told

Airfone supervisor Lisa Jefferson,

“A few of us are getting together.”

Flight attendant CeeCee Lyles told

her husband Lorne, “We’ve got a

plan.” Passenger Jeremy Glick told

his wife Lyz that “some guys are

rallying together.”

And then Jeremy told Lyz some-

thing even more remarkable. He

said they were taking a vote. How

American is that? Facing an exis-

tential threat, they decided to vote

on a response.

From the phone calls and the re-

covered cockpit tapes, we know

how that vote turned out. We know

they banded together. We know

they answered the call — “Let’s

roll!” We know they fought bravely.

We know they battled to the very

end.

At the cost of their own lives, the

RememberingRemembering

40 heroes40 heroes

of 9/11of 9/

Investigative personnel search the crash site of United Airlines Flight 93 looking for debris and evidence

By Mitchell ZuckoffBy Mitchell Zuckoff

abcde

Founded 1872

SENIOR DEPUTY
MANAGING EDITORS
Mark S. Morrow
Jason M. TuoheyDigital Platforms and Audi-
ence Engagement

DEPUTY MANAGING EDITORS
Marjorie PritchardEditorial Page
David DahlPrint and Operations
Felice BelmanLocal News and Features
Veronica ChaoLiving/Arts

BUSINESS MANAGEMENT

Dhiraj NayarChief Financial Officer

Dan KrockmalnicGeneral Counsel

Kayvan SalmanpourChief Commercial Officer

Anthony BonfiglioVice President, Engineering

Claudia HendersonChief Human Resources Officer

Jane BowmanVice President, Marketing & Strategic

Partnerships

Dale CarpenterSenior Vice President, Print Operations

Charles H. TaylorFounder & Publisher 1873-

William O. TaylorPublisher 1921-

Wm. Davis TaylorPublisher 1955-

William O. TaylorPublisher 1978-

Benjamin B. TaylorPublisher 1997-

Richard H. GilmanPublisher 1999-

P. Steven AinsleyPublisher 2006-

Christopher M. MayerPublisher 2009-

Laurence L. WinshipEditor 1955-

Thomas WinshipEditor 1965-

JOHN W. HENRY

Publisher

VINAY MEHRA

President

LINDA PIZZUTI HENRY

Managing Director

BRIAN McGRORY

Editor

JENNIFER PETER

Managing Editor