Opinion - The fundamentals need to be addressed first

The economy is the center of attention. Jobless rates continue to climb. Foreclosures are expected to rise. Governments are frantically trying to balance budgets.

It is a new environment, not so much because of the difficulties experienced over the last few years, but because there is little of a quick recovery.

Quick fixes will not do enough. Some fundamental hard work and objective thinking is needed. The temptation, however, seems to be to get involved in peripheral issues instead of the most basic ones.

Take, for instance, Washington’s look at legalizing marijuana. The idea was just recently killed in the legislature, but it was seriously considered.

The advantages given for legalizing pot were to decriminalize a commonly used drug and to generate new tax revenues. The prescribed use of “medical” marijuana is already legal.

Marijuana has been the focus of law enforcement for more than 50 years. For that long, it has been an emotional, contentious issue.

After so many years of debate, it was not a serious reconsideration of the fundamental issues that put legalizing marijuana in the forefront. It was a budget crunch.

Perhaps this is how things get done, but the real argument is not how much money legalizing pot will generate for the state but whether or not it should be legalized in the first place. The arguments for or against should have nothing to do with government revenues.

The important considerations are those of health and safety. These are the heart of the argument and should remain so despite budget consideration.

To bring this issue up to solve revenue problems is just playing at government. More fundamental, structural reviews are needed. What the basic role of government is and what the basic responsibilities of government are should be the focus at this point.

The answers may not come from the public sector. The campaign to legalize marijuana is one thing. Making it part and parcel of an economic recovery plan for government is entirely different and shows the lack of a serious approach to problems facing the state.

There are more important issues facing government. There are more basic questions that need to addressed.

Then, once the most fundamental issues are resolved, peripheral concerns can be confronted in light of their own value.