Ready, Fire, Aim: the Prop 2 Fake “Compromise”
On Wednesday, Utah House Speaker Greg Hughes confirmed, as the Utah Bee previously reported, that the Utah Legislature is not bound by the fake “compromise” that he and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) grandly announced 2 weeks ago. Likewise, other members of the Utah Legislature confirmed that they in no way are bound by the fake “compromise.”
Elaborately rolled out to voters just 4 days before ballots were mailed, the fake “compromise” that 4 men put together in secret was intended to signal to faithful members of the Mormon Church that everything was solved, and they should vote against Prop 2. Recent polling suggests that the electioneering ploy is working.
Presenting the “compromise” to a legislative committee on Wednesday, Speaker Hughes said that the “compromise” is not “a porcelain doll” or “a Cinderella slipper that you can’t touch.” He clarified that legislators can amend it as they see fit. (That would be the same legislators who have consistently opposed medical cannabis and have given no indication that they, in significant numbers, have changed their minds.). In other words, the ink ain’t close to dry on the fake “compromise.”
Everything in the “compromise” is fair game. Nothing in the fake “compromise” is agreed to by anyone other than Speaker Hughes, the Mormon Church, and a peripheral libertarian group Libertas. To illustrate that point, immediately after Speaker Hughes explained the bill, Utah Legislators immediately started sharpening their knives, identifying parts of the “compromise” they intend to slash. As Bethany Rodgers of the Salt Lake Tribune reported, "Rep. Brad Daw, the committee chairman, said legislators will have more opportunities to DISSECT the bill during the November special session on medical marijuana (emphasis added).”
At this point, as Utahns vote on Prop 2, four things should be clear: (1) the “compromise” is a fraud on voters and an insult to democracy, (2) the Utah Legislature is not bound by the fake “compromise,” (3) the “compromise” will not result in patients actually getting medical cannabis, and (4) Prop 2 must pass for patients to get relief.
The uninitiated will ask why a “compromise” was rolled out to great fanfare even before legislators had read it or gathered to discuss it. Tragically, the answer is that this is simply dirty politics. Filthy dirty, as the Utah Bee has reported.
For the last 5 years, the Mormon Church prevented the Utah Legislature from passing a meaningful medical cannabis law. In response, Christine Stenquist—a formerly bed-ridden patient with a brain tumor—started a citizens’ initiative and gathered 200,000 signatures to put the issue on the ballot as Prop 2. To give you an idea how far fetched the idea of a “compromise” is, Speaker Hughes has not met with Stenquist for the past 2 ½ years, despite her almost daily presence at the Capitol during legislative sessions.
If Utah citizens were to override the Legislature and pass Prop 2 over the Church’s objection, the Mormon Church believed it would be diminished. When all polling data consistently showed that the Initiative was going to pass, the Church instructed Speaker Hughes to dangle a shiny object before the voters as a “compromise” solution. The point was not the content of the “compromise.” Rather, the point was the timing and the elaborate rollout. Get the train rolling, stat! “All hail another Utah Compromise. Fear not, good citizens. The issue is solved. Vote against medical cannabis, and—abracadabra, presto chango—patients will get medical cannabis.”
Of course, the issue is not close to being solved, as this week’s committee presentation showed. Had the product of the secretive meetings been softly announced as a beginning of a long-overdue legislative process to finally consider medical cannabis, that would have been appropriate. But, such honesty would not have adversely affected the vote on Prop 2, and that was the intent of the exercise, to falsely signal to voters that a better option had been agreed upon, though Speaker Hughes and the Mormon Church fully knew that the Legislature had in no way, shape, or form agreed to the fake “compromise.”
But, give credit where credit is due. The “compromise” does seem to be working as it was intended: convincing voters that they can vote against medical cannabis to get medical cannabis. Polling data from the Hinckley Institute of Politics/Salt Lake Tribune shows that the fake “compromise” erased 15% percentage points from Prop 2’s chances of passing, as support among active Mormons dropped from 54% in June to just 28% in October.
One of the libertarian negotiators, Connor Boyack, has scrambled to patch over the blunder his group made to trumpet something bigger and better than Prop 2. On Facebook, Boyack attempted to discount the Hinckley/Tribune poll—and the Hinckley Director’s interpretation that the “compromise” had cut the support—by saying it “was a long poll with a bunch of questions.” However, the Hinckley/Tribune team asked the same number of questions in June, when support for Prop 2 polled at 68%.
Boyack also said on Facebook that the Hinckley/Tribune poll is an “anomaly,” because all other polling showed extremely strong support. Yes, but all that other, consistent polling was conducted before the “compromise” was announced. Boyack specifically noted the recent Rasmussen/HarrisX/Deseret News poll that showed 64% percent support.
But, again, the calls for that poll were primarily made before the “compromise” was announced and entirely before active Mormons went to church on Sunday. The thing that changed was announcement of the “compromise.” Support for Prop 2 can be measured on a b.c./a.d. scale, “before compromise” and “after deception.”
For Prop 2 to pass, Utah voters must be informed, over the hallelujah chorus of the “compromise,” that the fake “compromise” would never actually get medical cannabis to patients. Two poison pills would prevent that: (1) calling dispensaries “pharmacies” and (2) the extensive involvement of the State in dispensing medical cannabis. The Utah Bee has discussed the “pharmacy” issue previously. The second issue—the significant role of the State—is nothing short of bizarre, especially since self-proclaimed libertarians had been brought into the four men’s secretive discussions as the human shields for the “compromise.” Government is not a problem; it is uniquely the answer.
Yet, no medical cannabis state is actively involved in actually dispensing medical cannabis to patients. Not one. None. Zero. State laws authorize dispensing, but States themselves don’t dispense. Yet, the Utah “compromise” contemplates a robust role for the State of Utah itself to actively break federal law. One letter from the reefer madness posse at the Department of Justice or DEA shuts down that nonsense.
To counter that reality, Speaker Hughes and Boyack point to a provision of the “compromise” that would decriminalize medical marijuana in 2021, if patients weren’t actually getting medical cannabis by then. Uh huh. If patients aren’t getting medical cannabis by 2021, that date would be pushed back, then pushed back again, and pushed back indefinitely. No way does Utah decriminalize cannabis. “Gummies, and lollies, and bears. Oh my!”
The “compromise” is meaningless words on paper. It binds no one. It delivers nothing. It does, though, mislead voters. Don’t be misled. For patients to get medical cannabis, Utah voters need to vote for medical cannabis. “Yes” on Prop 2.
The Utah Bee seeks to share both sides of a debate. If anyone who opposes Proposition 2 wants to submit a piece with their views, we will gladly accept it.