Plotting a course through a legislative session usually involves an uncomfortable degree of guesswork. Navigating the last several years of rocky fiscal landscapes has been a challenge, and it’s a mercy that Hawaii has emerged from that into a somewhat rosier economic state.

Or perhaps the islands aren’t quite out of the woods, financially speaking.

The Legislature is at the halfway point in its 2013 session and there seems to be an even greater number of unknowns at this point. How will the sequester affect Hawaii, with federal budget cuts leaving some programs in dire straits and agencies depending even more on state funds? Will the state’s own revenue projections hold up? How will the latest round of labor negotiations figure in all this?

Even though some of the fog might clear away when the Council on Revenues delivers its forecast in the coming days, an abundance of caution will still be needed to make sure the state isn’t caught short — now or in the future. One of the main concerns is deciding how many items Gov. Neil Abercrombie may be able to check off the "New Day" agenda he laid out at the start. Funds supporting everything from unemployment benefits for jobless workers now to medical and pension benefits for future retirees have to be watched with a keen eye.

For example, although business leaders say the state now has enough resources to handle unemployment benefits, the administration isn’t so sure. State Finance Director Kalbert Young expressed concern about a House proposal to postpone a scheduled increase in employer taxes, urging lawmakers to keep the revenue coming in until the unemployment insurance fund is more flush.

Ultimately, though, some measure of relief to employers is needed to offset a hike in the minimum wage which, while long overdue, poses a burden on business that must be mitigated.

The difficulty in balancing interests on this point casts doubt on the wisdom of other initiatives at this point. Just to cite a few examples:

» An expansion in tax credits for the film industry would be a luxury the state’s finances can’t afford, at the same time that lawmakers — wisely — are starting to dial down the breaks that the solar energy businesses have enjoyed.

» Similarly, to those concerned about getting the state budget in order, the proposed investment of $20 million in an entrepreneurial incentive program seems ill-timed.

» Even proposals that should rise to the top of the priority list, such as the pilot program to subsidize private preschool for at-risk children, needs to be approached with care. If the aim is to get more of the state’s keiki on the right start in school, the most important thing is to provide the means for them to attend. A muscular bureaucracy should not be permit- ted to grow up around it.

On at least one other front, the state has a chance to trim government costs without doing a disservice to the community. Marijuana policy has been evolving in this state, and decriminalizing the possession of small amounts seems a rational step to take. In lieu of criminal prosecution, which consumes too much time and money in the criminal justice system, possession of an ounce or less would be treated as a civil violation with a fine of $1,000.

Those who put others at risk — by smoking and driving, for example — already are prosecuted through existing laws barring driving under the influence. While smoking is generally unhealthy, the steep fine serves to control its use. Slapping a conviction on the offender, who is frequently young, leaves a scar on their record that amounts to excessive punishment. The policy is inconsistent in a state that has legalized marijuana when authorized for medical use.

After lawmakers take their intermission and return to the stage for Act II, a lot of distractions will continue to fly about the Capitol. The so-called Steven Tyler bill, for example, would give celebrities a special privacy right that’s unwarranted.

Such proposals add an entertaining twist that every dull lawmaking session needs. But legislators must keep focused on their duty to choose carefully among the initiatives that can strengthen the state without sapping its resources. They should follow that physician’s dictum: Above all, do no harm.