Should the top law enforcement officer in the Commonwealth not be a little more concerned about not increasing crime and addiction? Is the AG really the democratic star that she would like to be or is she a calculating politico more interested in playing with the Beacon Hill crowd than speaking out against an industry to that brings the crimes she is allegedly trying to protect the citizens from?
On the one hand, the legislation is needed in areas that have been historically neglected. One has to wonder what the Judicial Committee has been doing since 1968? I digress.
On the other hand, one has to wonder about orchestration of the legislation. Announced after the Legislative session has recessed for the summer; mid-summer when no one is paying attention; perfectly timed to please Terry Murray and those legislators who don’t want to loose too much sleep because they will vote “yes” in the fall for slots/casinos to please their union, special interest, casino investors and Leaderships cronies.
On the one hand, let’s do a Deval Patrick (Harvard) and get ahead of the inevitable Native American casino in Middleboro…wait, SCOTUS says NO casino in Middleboro.
On the other hand, let’s do a Martha Coakley (Williams) and get ahead of the increased crime elected leaders want to invite to the Commonwealth!
No sense.
to create a bill to try to mitigate the inevitable problems when those problems don’t need to exist in the first place. What does this bill do to avoid/stop/mitigate those who will commit crimes because of their addictions? And what do we do for families where one spouse hides the addiction and suddenly the family’s lost its entire savings, maybe its house… it may not be ‘against the law,’ but it isn’t exactly fostering a strong society and could certainly lead more people into committing crimes. I would expect Coakley to stand up for what’s right in keeping Massachusetts a safe place, not going along to get along, especially given her stature within the state.
the “Pound of Cure Act of 2009.”