Op-Ed

Rep. to Registrar: Don't close the Falmouth RMV branch

Editor's note: The following is a letter from Rep. Timothy Madden to Rachel Kaprielian the Registrar of the MA RMV regarding the proposed closing of the Falmouth RMV Branch.

June 30, 2009

Rachel Kaprielian, Registrar
Registry of Motor Vehicles
Office of the Registrar
Box 55889
Boston, MA 02205-55889

Re: Falmouth Registry of Motor Vehicles Branch

Dear Registrar Kaprielian,

I am writing with great concern regarding the proposed closure of the Registry of Motor Vehicles branch office in Falmouth.  Since this RMV office was opened, it has proven to be enormously valuable for the residents and visitors to Falmouth and its surrounding communities.

The closing of this branch would be particularly detrimental to the Upper Cape’s elderly population. As you may know, this area has one of the highest populations of residents aged 65 and over in the Commonwealth.  If the Falmouth branch were closed the three closest branches to the Town become the Yarmouth, Plymouth, and New Bedford registries, each nearly an hour away.  With waiting times of up to an hour at these Registry offices, this quickly turns into a half to a full day trip for many of our elderly residents, a huge inconvenience.  Furthermore, with the added influx of seasonal residents and tourists, these times can grow significantly.

I urge you to come to Falmouth as soon as possible to meet with the community and its elected officials. If the current site is being considered for closure because of costs, I would be happy to work with you and the town's leaders in finding an alternate site in Falmouth, cost-effective to the Commonwealth, to avoid losing this extremely important resource for the community and the Upper Cape region. 

Sincerely,

Timothy R. Madden
State Representative
Barnstable, Dukes, and Nantucket District

1 comment »

Celebrate Energy Independence Day with Win for Wind Raffle

On July 4, 1776, America's founding fathers declared independence from the tyranny of a far-off ruler, paving the way for the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in their new homeland.

100 years later, the Statue of Liberty arrived in New York Harbor and quickly came to symbolize freedom as she served as a guiding light to people traveling to America.

Today, in 2009, we have the opportunity to house a modern icon for freedom - freedom from pollution, volatile energy prices, petrodictators, economic stagnation and poor air quality. Cape Wind promises to usher in a new era of energy independence in America, opening doors for sustainable development in our nation's energy industry while simultaneously protecting our environment from the perils of global climate change. Much like the Statue of Liberty, Cape Wind's turbines will welcome people to Nantucket Sound as a beacon toward energy independence.

But to achieve this vision, Clean Power Now needs your support!

Only 600 tickets for the Green Car of the Year

This summer, Clean Power Now is raffling off a 2010 Honda Insight LX hybrid car, the Environmental Transport Association's Environmental Green Car of the Year and a stepping stone to energy independence. Tickets are $100 and sales will be capped at 600 tickets, giving you greater chances at driving away with this fantastic prize!

For full details, please visit CleanPowerNow.org and help us to score a Win for Wind!

Thank you,

Lauren Dickerson,
Michael Pease,
Development Associates

Leave a comment »

Learning to love Cape Cod's history by writing it

I'm an artist, not a writer

By Kathryn Kleekamp

I'm an artist, not a writer, but I've always been under the impression that writing, like painting, is a very solitary process. I imagine this to be particularly true for writers of fiction who must shut themselves off from outside influences to create their imaginary worlds and dialogue.

A typical painting by MS Kleekamp is the Captain Edward Penniman House above. Penniman was one of Cape Cod's most successful whalers. He sailed the world, often taking his family with him. He was able to retire at age 53 and build his grand French Second Empire style house in Eastham on Cape Cod in 1868. Today's visitors to this historic house, now operated by the National Park Service, can still smell and taste the salt air at its stunning location on Fort Hill overlooking Nantucket Sound. See her galleries here.

So when I signed a contract with a major publisher to write my book, Cape Cod and the Islands: Where Beauty and History Meet, I expected to spend many months with my computer as only companion. I also faced an additional challenge. As one who abhorred every history class I ever had to take, could I really spend hour upon hour sifting through wordy documents, genealogical charts, town histories and the like, to create a volume that would come alive for the reader? I had an advantage of using my art to illustrate the book, 50 oil paintings done over five years, but I still needed to find a way to engage the reader's interest . . . and my own!

What I learned from undertaking the challenge of creating the book was an unexpected and delightful surprise. My research and writing world, although solitary, was not lonely. It became filled with fascinating and impressive players. Beyond dates and events, I was drawn back in time into the lives of real people . . . their dreams, struggles, and outcomes of their life decisions. Although I've visited Cape Cod over the last 30 years and have lived here since 1997, I never realized until writing the book, how significant a role this area played in our country's development. Onward from the very first settlers, the farmers, shipmasters and visionaries were individuals whose courage and persistence led to America's progress and success.

After the Mayflower dropped anchor in Provincetown Harbor, in 1620, and several expeditions had been made to explore the local area, 16 of its men boarded the ship's shallop, a small boat that can be rowed or sailed. Desperate to find a suitable place for settlement, they sailed along the northern coast of Cape Cod. In numbingly cold December weather that froze their clothing "like coats of iron," the rudder broke, the mast snapped and the sail fell overboard.

One of those explorers, William Bradford, would later write in his journal, "That which was most sad and lamentable was that in two or three months time half of the men on the shallop died." Were it not for those stalwart explorers, it's easy to imagine the entire boatload of newcomers would have perished in Provincetown.

"That which was most sad and lamentable was that in two or three months time half of the men on the shallop died."
          -William. Bradford, 1620

While those early colonists thought they discovered a new land, it was actually an ancient and sacred site. For thousands of years the Wampanoag Nation inhabited the entire southeastern Massachusetts region and parts of Rhode Island. Today's visitor to the Cape and Islands finds Wampanoag names at every turn: roads, ponds and villages . . . many exotic tongue twisters. I now have a much better appreciation of the contributions and, ultimately sacrifices, the Wampanoag tribes made enabling early settlers to survive. The affability of the natives, their hunting and farming skills, the vast acreage of woodlands they cleared, all proved invaluable to the survival of the newcomers. A letter back to England penned by Mayflower passenger Edward Winslow, related, "We have found the Indians very faithful in their covenant of peace with us, very loving and ready to pleasure us. We, for our parts, walk as peaceably and safely the wood as in the highways in England."

Cape Codders and Islanders went on to establish towns, farm the land and harvest the sea. Men such as Capt. John Sears of Dennis, who thought that he could produce salt from seawater by solar evaporation, were derided as dreamers full of folly. But he succeeded and the salt produced was invaluable for preserving fish carried to distant ports. Other visions became reality and had international significance, such as the Cape Cod Canal and the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. In 1903, high on the cliffs of Wellfleet, Guglielmo Marconi brought to fruition wireless communication. President Theodore Roosevelt sent well wishes 3,000 miles across the Atlantic Ocean to King Edward VII. To this last feat, we owe today's cell phones, satellite TV and iPODS.

More recent history and the fact that the Cape and Islands have become a refuge for those seeking sanctuary and untamed beauty, bring us to the writings of such authors as Henry Beston and Nan Turner Waldron. At different periods, both spent time secluded in a tiny beach cottage in Eastham that Beston built and immortalized in his 1928 literary classic, The Outermost House: A Year of Life on the Great Beach of Cape Cod. Coincidently, my own book project led me to Nan's daughter, Les Waldron, who shared her recollection of being isolated in the natural world:

"Outermost wasn't just a cottage. It had a different purpose . . . a very different reason for being. It was a courageous little safe-harbor far along a spit of sand with no electricity or amenities save hand pump and gas lights. One chose to stay there (without cell phones) knowing there was not imminent rescue or neighbor to call. The house, and its guests, endured, baked by the sun, plagued by insects, beaten by rain, ice, tides and pelting sand. It was the symbol of modest human presence slipped into the raw world of natural wonder . . . humbling to say the least."

Those last five words easily apply to the experience I had writing my book. Taking time to discover the "story" in history, I found a treasure trove of learning and enrichment. Perhaps most important was the emotional connection and appreciation I felt for others who, although distant in time and place, experienced feelings very much like my own. Leo Tolstoy once said the purpose of history is to teach nations and humanity to know themselves. I must agree.

Kathryn Kleekamp, a retired microbiologist, is a painter and writer based in Sandwich. This appeared as an Op Ed in the Providence Journal on June 16, 2009. Read our review of her book here.

1 comment »

Help Clean Power Now fight Cape Cod Commission's appeal, other "frivolous" lawsuits

Cape Cod Commission appeals to state's highest court to overturn Cape Wind's "super permit"

Alliance, Town of Barnstable plan similar appeals

By Barbara Hill

Yesterday we learned that the Cape Cod Commission is appealing to the state's highest court to overturn the Massachusetts Energy Facilities Siting Board's approval of the composite certificate granted to Cape Wind. This "super permit" secured all state and local permits and was a huge victory for renewable energy.

Now, the Cape Cod Commission is using YOUR tax dollars to fight this project that 74% of Cape and Islands residents and 86% of Massachusetts residents support.

Now, the Cape Cod Commission is using YOUR tax dollars to fight this project that 74% of Cape and Islands residents and 86% of Massachusetts residents support.

The Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound and the Town of Barnstable are planning on filing similar appeals. Clean Power Now plans to fight these "frivolous" lawsuits and we will continue to represent the majority of citizens who support Cape Wind. Please make a donation today to help us against these powerful interests and keep the Cape Wind project moving forward. 

These law suits are a waste of valuable tax dollars and delay the creation of new clean energy jobs. This action is indefensible, especially during an economic crisis when our state needs every dollar and every job possible.

Clean Power Now has been representing the voice of the citizens since 2003. Massachusetts can have the first off-shore wind farm in the nation and all the benefits that will follow. But we have to keep working for it, and fighting for it every step of the way. With your support, we can fight this appeal and keep the Cape Wind project moving forward.

Barbara Hill is the Executive Director of Clean Power Now, a non-profit grassroots organization based in Hyannis, Massachusetts with over 12,000 members committed to viable renewable energy projects and policies such as the Cape Wind project.

1 comment »

Crushing Health Care Reform

Alone in the galaxy of developed nations

By Richard Bartlett

We've known for a long time that the reason we alone in the galaxy of developed nations do not have universal health care is those vast sums of money big pharma and for-profit insurance companies spend on lobbying (bribery) and advertising. The 5 largest health insurers and their PAC spent $6.4 million on lobbying in just the first quarter of 2009. Pfizer (the world's largest drugmaker) alone spent more than $6.1 million just from January to March, 2009.

Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the senate's health committee gets the largest bribe of all.

Both houses of congress, both sides of the aisle, are recipients of this obscene gold rush. It is maddening when you think about it.

The source of all that money being spent to prevent us from getting the kind of health care we need is us. We ourselves. Those dollars come from our skyrocketing premiums and our overpriced prescriptions.

Our own money is being used against us! Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the senate's health committee gets the largest bribe of all. No wonder he says single-payer is off the table. But even just a public plan to bring down costs is said to be in jeopardy.

The AMA has come out against even the most elementary reform.

Now the AMA has come out against even the most elementary reform. Don't the good doctors who help us recover when we are stricken by disease or injury want everyone to have the right to good care? They will still prosper, even if we no longer get gouged.

Doctors with any compassion should oppose the AMA negativity. The "do no harm" philosophy that guides physicians surely must encompass financial harm to the victims of the economy. Idealism used to motivate doctors. Can it now be greed? We want to see them demonstrate their sense of responsibility by speaking up in support of President Obama's reforms now, while the issue is being resolved.

Richard C. Bartlett, Cotuit

1 comment »

An Unsuitable Suit

The Town of Barnstable's arrogance of power

By Richard Bartlett.

Isn't it amazing that at a time when the town of Barnstable is so impoverished that it has to fire dozens of town workers and scores of school department employees the town fathers (and mothers) can find the money, a lot of it, to pursue a futile court case against the state and Cape wind?

For the town manager and the town council to misuse taxpayer money is simply wrong. Why does an impecunious town government throw our money to lawyers fighting against a cause that is supported by the citizenry?

If the Alliance wants to spend private money to block our major local weapon for fighting climate change that is their business. But for the town manager and the town council to misuse taxpayer money is simply wrong. They have a fiducial obligation to use our money responsibly.

3 out of 4 Cape citizens want Cape Wind to be built. 7 years of exhaustive study has led to a favorable impact report, and Sec. Salazar has made it clear he will soon issue the long awaited permit.

The state's siting board has unanimously ruled the cables can use state ocean and land areas, trumping county and local obstructionists. It is extremely unlikely any court will hear a case that flouts the law. Or if it goes to trial, what judge would want to risk being overturned? This forlorn lawsuit hasn't a prayer.

So why does an impecunious town government throw our money to lawyers fighting against a cause that is supported by the citizenry?

These politicians owe us an explanation of what motivates such undemocratic behavior. They should tell us how much has been spent on this case so far, and how much more the town's budget will allow to continue this foolhardy lawsuit. And we who vote have an obligation to consider this issue when we next determine who will be managing our money in the future.

Richard C. Bartlett, Cotuit

8 comments »

A Town Meeting deconstructed

Acquiescence in Brewster

By Steve Leibowitz

After 2 days of attending the annual town meeting in Brewster last week, I've come to one conclusion. As far as Brewster goes, town meeting is in danger of becoming an anachronism, a feel good exercise in democracy versus substance. Now I'm saying this in the heat of the moment, but let me illustrate the point.

For the vast majority of articles, Town Meeting rubber stamps whatever the Board of Selectmen vote. We will vote through millions of dollars in budgets, often with few if any questions posed. In contrast, you can spend 30-45 minutes on the minutia of an article that affects a single person.

For the vast majority of articles, Town Meeting rubber stamps whatever the Board of Selectmen vote. We will vote through millions of dollars in budgets, often with few if any questions posed. In contrast, you can spend 30-45 minutes on the minutia of an article that affects a single person.

Two of the articles passed speak clearly to the inertia that exists in town government here. Brewster residents voted to change from electing Water Commissioners, to having them appointed by the Board. In addition, we voted to change the Town Clerk position from an elected one, to an appointed position. The rationale for the former- no one runs. I can't argue with that; part of the decay is that contested elections in Brewster have pretty much become an anomaly.

The argument made for the change in the Town Clerk's position regarded a past experience when one Town Clerk was pretty much a no show for the job, and the town officials felt they had no recourse. In addition, they would like to consider people not living in Brewster for the vacancy anticipated next year.

Essentially, more power and control has reverted to Town Hall, at the expense of the citizenry, who gladly went along with both articles. A vote affirming the point that the less we need to do, the better! There are well over 8,000 registered voters in Brewster. The first night of town meeting we drew about 7% of those people. The second night did not ever start until close to 7:30, after those of us present were asked to start calling people because we were well short of the necessary quorum figure of.... 200. We ended up with about 207. What would that number be if you subtracted the Board of Selectmen, Finance Committee, School Committee, and other town officials?

Two other articles dealt with monies to be spent in the town. One of these was related to the promoted building switches being proposed in Brewster- elementary school over to Stony Brook, Town Hall and others to Eddy, sell Town Hall to the Lighthouse Charter School being the main focus. A request was made for $178,000 for the architectural work to be done on the Stony Brook School addition.

I'm personally for the concept of these switches. I do think the cart is being put before the horse with this money. Two key issues remain outstanding. Despite the exhortations of the head of Lighthouse Charter that they are interested and can do this financially, there's a difference between playing footsies at the dinner table and walking down the aisle. In other words- how about a purchase and sale agreement being reached? Second, the town has no commitment from the state for any consideration to continue payments at a full or even partial rate, for the reimbursement of Eddy as a school. That's another $2.2 million on the table, or an increase in taxes for residents of about $225 over 4 years. Even the Town Administrator said in the debate- there is a chance this money will be wasted.

Yet Brewster Town Meeting gladly voted to spend the money, even in this environment of tight budgets and cuts. The second expenditure asked for $350K for the construction of tennis courts on a parcel adjacent to Stony Brook School. Again, as the Town Administrator admitted in the debate - the timing on this is bad. You think? Part of these monies may come back in the form of grants, and the vote was contingent on some vague criteria pending receipt of grants. No amounts, no specifics.... just that we get some grants. I'd further argue that while in one sense, recreation near the school makes sense, other factors would argue that it should go elsewhere.

I serve on the Affordable Housing Partnership, and in that role, we presented a plan to the Selectmen to build affordable housing units on that parcel. The study concluded the town would receive as much as $300K in revenue, depending on the size of the project accepted. One of the main arguments made was that the access to the parcel would have to come through the same driveway as the school. Mind you the traffic studies indicated that the increase would be one car, every 4 minutes at peak time.

At town meeting, I kept hearing about how many tennis players there are in Brewster. Perhaps they are going to serve and volley their way to the site? I could also see it as a place that will attract kids hanging out and skateboarding in off hours. The die was further cast when residents were told no more work would be done on the existing courts by the fire station- vote for this or no tennis.

So gladly people went along with spending even more frivolous money, despite the repeated stories we are told as to how tough things are economically. Teachers are laid off, but we can build tennis courts. People cannot afford to live in this town, but we don't need affordable housing. When people don't want to do something, you say there are "problems" with it. When you want to, you somehow manage to solve the problems!

All in all, a disheartening experience. I'm glad for the few that do show, and happier for the fewer yet that are engaged in the process. But I have to seriously question the entire process and wonder if the time has come to reconsider what we do and how we do it. In Brewster, you can't make the case that young people are not getting involved, when the average age in the town is 55. The world is more complicated but the one place you can really make a difference is in your town. If we don't begin to get involved and take back that power, you might as well turn the lights out on town meeting.

Steve Leibowitz
Brewster,MA

1 comment »

The real story behind last Sunday's Turnpike debacle

The latest chapter in Turnpike Follies, will not be the last.
The real story behind the Sunday Pike problem is as follows:

By Christy Mihos

The Massachusetts Turnpike Authority is on a mission. It must put forth the canard that its suffering deep financial ruin, so to win the day for a whopping, highest in the Country gas tax of 50 cents per gallon for the Governor.

Those on the Pike Sunday--became ensnared in this fiasco in real time.

Trust? The Pike admitted that they overcharged a million Fast Lane customers and there is no way to get money back to them.

The Pike has developed minimum staffing levels that were instituted to save money. Unfortunately the minimum staffing levels were affixed to all shifts and when a Holiday with maximum road traffic comes upon us, disaster happens. Add to this there is a provision in the Toll Collectors contract that allows a two [2] hour notice for a paid vacation day, and sick day designation - see where this is heading.

So too, the MTA is trying to convert drivers to Fast Lane Transponder customers and eliminate manual tolling. Why not? The Transponder is four times faster, four times more cost efficient [7 cents per transponder transaction to over 30 cents per manual transaction], plus the automated transaction does not get vacation days, sick days, or an average $66,000 base annual pay.

Why only 15% want a Fast Lane pass

PROBLEM - only 15% of Massachusetts trucks and automobiles are equipped with Fast Lane Transponders - that means 85% don't have them and don't want them. These drivers don't trust the Pike with access to their checking accounts nor their credit cards. Why the problem? The Pike admitted that they overcharged 1,000,000 Fast Lane customers and there is no way to get money back to them. So you see the conundrum. No Trust- no solution.

The Turnpike has $570 million in safe, secure government investments and their profit last year was over $100 million.

I should disclose that as a former Member and Officer of the MTA Board, in August 2003, I offered a motion to give out Fast Lane Transponders FREE - the cost benefit to the MTA was incredible - a 100 day payback to the MTA for its investment in giving free transponders - any business would adopt a 100 day Return on Investment in a heartbeat - not by Board though as I could not even get a second to my motion.

That was almost SIX years ago - today they're giving them out for free. But what the Pike leadership does not understand is that you can not create demand. If people don't want what you are selling no matter if its free - they don't want it or they don't trust it or they don't want anything to do with your business or organization.

That's the issue here. And when the Pike screams no money - look at their last audited statement - they have over $570,000,000.00 in safe, secure government investments and their profit last year was over $100,000,000.00. Those numbers are disclosed on their website. There is no trust.

This latest chapter in Turnpike Follies, will not be the last. The gas tax will not be enacted. Today millions of people will demonstrate and protest against a system that rewards mismanagement, corruption, and inefficiency and forgets the working men and women of this country. Patriots Day is upon us. Think about it.

Christy Mihos, lives in Yarmouth.
Read his previous Op Eds: In Case You Missed It! "Tolls would never come down" here and "Christy's Stimulus Plan for Massachusetts" here.
He was an Independent candidate for Governor of Massachusetts in 2006. He served as a member of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority from 1999 to 2004.

6 comments »

Lead, follow, or get out of the way

The people, as usual, are ahead of their leaders - It was ever so

By Richard C. Bartlett

"If we do not take drastic action soon the planet becomes an unrecognizable and in some places, impossible place to live." - 2,500 scientist

Did our Cape antecedents oppose the hundreds of windmills that pumped sea water into drying areas for the then new salt making industry before finding out how much money was being generated by the wind?

Did they scoff at the horseless carriage before discovering they could make money selling gas, pulling out mired vehicles, and becoming a tourist destination? Did they still, like the ancients, believe phlogiston was the magic ingredient of fire, not oxygen?

Spineless politicians echoing their masters

Today's Capers are mostly pro-wind farm, but some, especially office-holders, still advance out-of-date arguments that have been thoroughly disproved. Tourism always, everywhere, has increased near wind farms. No plane or ship has ever been harmed by a turbine. No wind farm has leaked oil, unlike the tankers headed for fossil-fuel fired power plants. Why are those opposition people so obtuse? We are allowed our suspicions.

The minority make us a laughingstock Cape Backward. The majority supporting Cape Wind will make us Cape Forward.

With so much land so close to shore, and at slight elevation, all Cape and Islanders should be supporting every effort to reduce the climate change crisis. "If we do not take drastic action soon the planet becomes an unrecognizable --- and in some places, impossible --- place to live." That's from the Daily Telegraph, reporting on the dire warnings from 2,500 scientists who convened at the International Scientific Congress on Climate Change, March 13, 2009.

They report "Recent observations confirm ... the mean surface temperature, sea level rise, ocean and ice sheet dynamics, ocean acidification, and extreme climatic events." They warn that the change-related threats are accelerating faster than previously predicted.

For us to do our fair share of crisis prevention we need Cape Wind to be operating. Or we can instead junk 175,000 cars as an alternative way to reduce the Cape's emissions by an equal amount.

Want to send your Mercedes to the scrap heap? Or perhaps it would be better to go with the Obama/Salazar call to utilize that 1,000 gigawatts (enough electricity to power the whole USA) from the offshore winds blowing off our Atlantic coast. A free fuel source, and free of emissions.

The minority tries to make us a laughingstock Cape Backward. The majority supporting Cape Wind will make us Cape Forward.

Richard C. Bartlett, Cotuit

20 comments »

Police and the DA should try listening to the voters for a change

Pot prosecution costs $29 million a year in Massachusetts
Haven't the Police anything more important to solve, like violent crime?

By Dan Bernath

When Massachusetts voters passed a ballot initiative decriminalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana last Election Day, their message was clear: Yes, marijuana should still be illegal, but the penalties for small marijuana infractions are much too harsh.

It should have come as no surprise how easily the proposal to make adult possession of an ounce of marijuana a civil violation punishable by a $100 fine rather than a criminal violation passed.

United States has among the toughest marijuana laws on either side of the Atlantic
   - World Health Organization

Voters understood that harsher penalties for small marijuana violations do not result in lower marijuana use rates or lower crime rates in any way. They knew that 11 other states had already established policies decriminalizing marijuana - most in place for decades - with no more marijuana-related problems than neighboring states that arrest such users.

Their sensible assumptions were affirmed by a 2008 World Health Organization report concluding that while the United States has among the toughest marijuana laws on either side of the Atlantic, we have by far the highest marijuana use rates. In fact, our marijuana use rates are double what they are in the Netherlands, where the sale and adult possession of marijuana are legally tolerated.

The only thing arresting smalltime marijuana violators accomplished was wasting tax dollars - about $29 million a year in Massachusetts, by Harvard economist Dr. Jeffrey Miron's calculations. Oh, that and saddling ordinary citizens, young people and minorities in particular, with arrest records that could follow them their entire lives.

So, despite the way it was portrayed in much of the press, Nov. 4's vote wasn't a referendum on whether marijuana should be legal. It wasn't a referendum on whether marijuana use should be tolerated, much less encouraged. And it certainly wasn't a referendum on state law enforcement's competence or fairness in enforcing existing marijuana laws.

That is, until Massachusetts' law enforcement leadership turned it into one. In what was either a stunning public relations miscalculation or a profound misunderstanding of the proposal, Bay State police chiefs and district attorneys decided not only to oppose the measure, but also to exhaust their credibility trying to defeat it.

Their campaign was full of hyperbole and contradiction. Decriminalizing marijuana would encourage marijuana use, especially among children, they said, while ignoring the lower marijuana use rates in neighboring New York, a decriminalized state since the late '70s. Decriminalizing would send the message that marijuana use is ok, they argued, while at the same time insisting that street cops rarely bothered with low-level marijuana users anyway. The process of fining and releasing marijuana violators would be too complicated for cops, they said, although officers apparently had no difficulty arresting, booking, trying, convicting and then fining them.

And so on. Not surprisingly, Massachusetts voters rebuffed law enforcement's dire warnings and passed the measure with 65 percent of the vote, more than President Obama, who carried the state easily, received.

Also not surprisingly, nearly three months after the law was implemented, none of the opponents' predictions of chaos and wanton drug abuse have come to pass.

"Reefer Madness Alert"
D.A. O'Keefe and crew should learn from their recent mistakes and show some faith in their constituents' judgment.

But law enforcement leaders, having just embarrassed themselves at the polls with their "reefer madness" opposition to a modest, uncontroversial adjustment to marijuana penalties, are determined to exacerbate the damage they've done to their credibility. Rather than accept that the voters were right on this one, law enforcement officials are attempting to exploit a provision in the new law that allows localities to pass ordinances enhancing penalties for public marijuana use.

The provision was intended for the unlikely possibility that some communities might find that the prospect of a $100 fine and confiscation of contraband to be an inadequate deterrent to public marijuana use.

Rather than respect the will of the voters and acknowledge that the new law has in no way encouraged public marijuana use, those who originally opposed the initiative are rushing to subvert it through the public use provision. Among these opponents are Cape Cod District Attorney Michael O'Keefe and police chiefs in nine Cape towns.

While the details are sketchy right now, and the effects such proposals will have on the letter and spirit of Massachusetts' decrim law unclear, O'Keefe and crew should learn from their recent mistakes and show some faith in their constituents' judgment.

So far, we've seen more of the same nonsense from them that we saw before the law passed. You'd think to hear these officials talk that there's an epidemic of marijuana users taking to our parks to smoke marijuana, happy to pay the existing $100 fine and lose their stash for the privilege.

Once again, these law enforcement officials are playing games. Once again, it's up to the voters to call them on their childish nonsense.

Dan Bernath is the assistant director of communications for the Marijuana Policy Project,  PO Box 77492, Capitol Hill, Washington, D.C., 20013.

9 comments »