Sponsored by

VGoodiez 420EDC
  • Welcome to VaporAsylum! Please take a moment to read our RULES and introduce yourself here.
  • Need help navigating the forum? Find out how to use our features here.
  • Did you know we have lots of smilies for you to use?

Law The Cannabis Chronicles - Misc Cannabis News

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT!!!

I've never heard it put better. :biggrin: This doesn't just pertain to being busted in an illegal dispensary. It pertains to any form of being detained in any way by the police.


That’s great!!
 
Much ado about nothing imo.......

Federal Agencies Weigh In On Legal Status Of Hemp, CBD

Washington, DC: Representatives from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) testified last week with regard to federal efforts to regulate domestic hemp production and the sale of certain hemp-derived CBD products.

In December, Congress enacted legislation removing industrial hemp (defined as cannabis containing less than 0.3 percent THC) and products containing cannabinoids derived from hemp from the federal Controlled Substances Act.

In Congressional testimony last week, Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue said that the Department is working to create federal hemp regulations by 2020. Under the provisions of the 2018 Farm Bill, US states that wish to license commercial hemp cultivation must submit their plan to the USDA. However, the agency is not reviewing any state-specific plans until it has finalized its own federal regulations.

In separate testimony, outgoing FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb told Congress that the agency is considering various pathways to regulate hemp-derived CBD products, but cautioned that the process could take "two, three, [or] four years." The Commissioner has previously stated, "t's unlawful under the FD&C Act (US Food Drugs and Cosmetics Act) to introduce food containing added CBD or THC into interstate commerce, or to market CBD or THC products as, or in, dietary supplements, regardless of whether the substances are hemp-derived." That announcement led to regulatory agencies in several states pulling certain CBD-infused products from the retail market.

The FDA director told Congress that the agency will soon announce the formation of a "high-level working group" to begin addressing the issue, with public meetings beginning in April.
 
but cautioned that the process could take "two, three, [or] four years."

Indeed....anything that would take maybe a month to do commercially, it will of course take the Government "two, three, [or] four years." sigh
 
We have both Harvest as a dispensary and we have Freestate Wellness growing Verano brand flower and there a Zen Leaf dispensary in the grow facility building.

Very different brands to me....Verano is a bit of a high qual, boutique brand with price premium but some really nice flower.

Harvest seems to be competing on price and while some of their flower has been enjoyable, some of it was just flat in effect no matter the THC content. I would not consider Harvest to be top drawer in my area.

Guess we will have to wait and see just what licenses convey with this acquisition and what MD laws say about license transfer (which requires local ownership and state approval, I believe)



Two U.S. Marijuana Retailers Hook Up, Possibly Creating Largest Chain


The American cannabis chain Harvest Health & Recreation announced an acquisition today that could make it the industry’s largest retail license holder—with the right to open 123 retail dispensaries across 16 states and territories. Its Canada-listed stock jumped 18% on the morning’s news, to 10.15 Canadian dollars (US $7.57) on the Canadian Securities Exchange.

As cannabis restrictions fall in one state after another, a half dozen companies are racing to become the Starbucks of legal weed. Like Harvest, they must list their stocks in Canada, or with the OTC Markets Group , because the NYSE and Nasdaq won’t accept them as long as cannabis remains federally illegal.

The Phoenix-based Harvest (OTC ticker: HRVSF) will buy the privately held operator Verano, which is headquartered in Chicago, for stock that the companies valued at $850 million. Verano brings with it licenses for 37 retail locations and seven cultivation facilities. The acquisition announcement said that Verano is cash-flow positive.

“It’s a real big deal,” Harvest chief executive Steve White told Barron’s, “particularly if you’re concerned about profitability.”

The merger will increase add retail outlets in states where Harvest or Verano already have cultivation facilities, thereby enhancing the group’s margins.“We were profitable in Arizona. Then we became profitable in Nevada. Then we became profitable in Maryland and Pennsylvania,” said White. “So far, there hasn’t been a state where we haven’t been able to turn profitable quickly.

Verano also has a proprietary technology for extracting cannabis ingredients at pharmaceutical grade levels, said the companies.

“The combination with Verano fits perfectly with our vision of creating the world’s most valuable cannabis company,” said Jason Vedadi, Harvest’s executive chairman, in the release. Verano executives said they’d considered some of the largest players in the industry, before choosing Harvest as their acquirer.

The companies plan to discuss the deal in a conference call this afternoon.
 
Not sure if I posted this in the right place so please feel free to move it if necessary.

https://reason.com/blog/2019/03/15/trump-white-house-claims-executive-privi/amp

" The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) has claimed executive privilege over federal factsheets that reportedly describe the alleged dangers of marijuana legalization. The agency has thus made the documents secret from the public.

In response to a Freedom of Information Act appeal from Reason, the ONDCP asserted that 33 pages of memos sent to its Marijuana Policy Coordination Committee were shielded from release by the presidential communications privilege, under which records prepared or reviewed by the president's close advisers are confidential.

Coincidentally, the denial comes just in time for Sunshine Week, an annual event where news organizations and open-government groups celebrate transparency and commiserate over the lack of it.


The process of trying to get these memos illustrates how hard it has become to get records from the federal government in a prompt or useful manner.

Last summer BuzzFeed reported that the ONDCP had a secretive committee on marijuana policy, and that it had ordered more than a dozen federal agencies to submit 2-page factsheets on the dangers of marijuana legalization. The office

solely sought negative information on the drug. The memos instructed 14 agencies and the Drug Enforcement Administration to submit "data demonstrating the most significant negative trends" on the drug and identify issues with state legalization ballot measures, in part to prepare a report for President Donald Trump, who has previously supported states' rights on marijuana.

The committee complained in one memo that the narrative around marijuana is unfairly biased in favor of the drug and said it wanted to turn the tide on increasing marijuana use.

The public would surely be interested to know what Trump-era federal agencies think about marijuana legalization, right? Or at least I'm interested. So last September I sent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to 11 federal agencies, including the ONDCP, for those memos.

It's been roughly seven months since then. Of the 11 agencies I contacted, eight have yet to send me a final response. Two of those never acknowledged my request at all.

Of the three agencies that did respond, the Drug Enforcement Administration said it couldn't find any records responsive to my request, which means it either failed to send a memo per the White House's instructions or its search was not very thorough.

The U.S. Department of Education refused to release a single page under the "deliberative process" exemption, which shields pre-decisional communications between bureaucrats from disclosure. I'm currently waiting for a response to my FOIA appeal of that decision.

The ONDCP released 33 pages to me, but every one was redacted in full. I filed another FOIA appeal, and today I received a response to it. The ONDCP stated that the memos in question were subject to executive privilege, a broad power that allows the White House to keep information secret for the ostensible purpose of ensuring that aides can give the president candid advice.

"All of the standards for invoking the presidential communications privilege are present in this case," the office claimed. "ONDCP's records review shows written evidence that the records at issue were solicited and received by a senior White House advisor and that the information was gathered for the purpose of formulating advice to and briefing the President. Accordingly, the line-by-line redactions typically required when invoking the deliberative process privilege are not required when the presidential communications privilege applies. Therefore, the records were properly withheld in full, and your appeal is denied."

Happy Sunshine Week! "
 
Last edited:
The inventor of Jelly Belly has launched cannabis-infused jelly beans

5c8f9b95daa5077dcd070f06-750-563.jpg

David Klein, the inventor of the Jelly Belly.
AP Photo/Jae C. Hong

  • Jelly Belly's inventor, David Klein, is getting into the cannabis business.
  • Klein recently launched a business called Spectrum Confections that makes jelly beans infused with cannabidiol, or CBD, the non-psychoactive component of marijuana.
  • While Jelly Belly is not connected to the venture, cannabis-infused candies are on the cusp of transforming the confectionary business.

The inventor of Jelly Belly has a trendy new jelly-bean creation.

David Klein, who invented Jelly Belly in 1976, recently launched a business called Spectrum Confections that makes jelly beans infused with cannabidiol, or CBD, the non-psychoactive component of marijuana.

The candy comes in 38 flavors, including roasted marshmallow, pina colada, and strawberry cheesecake, and each bean contains 10 milligrams of CBD.

"The jelly bean is perfect for the proper dosage" of CBD, Klein told Cannabis Aficionado.

The CBD-infused jelly beans are available in bulk on the Spectrum Confections website, though the candies were sold out as of Monday.

Klein has been involved in the candy business since the 1970s, selling the Jelly Belly trademark in 1980 to the jelly-bean maker Herman Goelitz Candy Co., which changed its name to the Jelly Belly Candy Co.

While Jelly Belly is not involved with Spectrum Confections, the candy industry is bracing for the impact of cannabis-infused foods and beverages.

CBD is seen as an especially ripe area for growth. A team of analysts at the investment bank Cowen recently estimated that the US market for CBD could skyrocket to $16 billion by 2025 from roughly $1 billion to $2 billion now.

 
Federal Cannabis Industry Banking Reform Bill gets a hearing next week


In the first in what are anticipated to be multiple Congressional hearings to address the federal prohibition and criminalization of marijuana, the House Financial Services Committee has scheduled to convene a markup on The Safe Banking Act, HR 1595.

Thousands of state-licensed and regulated businesses lack access to the banking industry and are unable to accept credit cards, deposit revenues, or write checks to meet payroll or pay taxes because federal law discourages financial institutions from engaging in such partnerships. This ongoing federal prohibition forces this newly emerging billion-dollar industry operates largely on a cash-only basis — an environment that makes businesses more susceptible to theft and more difficult to audit. It also places the safety and welfare of these business’ customers at risk, as they must carry significant amounts of cash on their persons in order to make legal purchases at retail facilities.

NORML Political Director Justin Strekal said:

“This situation is untenable. No industry can operate safely, transparently, or effectively without access to banks or other financial institutions. In order to best support the states that have had the good judgment to license and regulate businesses to produce, manufacture, or distribute cannabis, it is critical that Congress address the lack of basic banking services and amend federal law accordingly.

“The banking issue is just one aspect of the failed policy of federal marijuana criminalization. In order to truly bring the marijuana industry out of the shadows, actions need to be taken by Congress to amend this, and many others, outdated and discriminatory practices.

“This will certainly not be the last hearing of this Congress to discuss marijuana prohibition and we expect a full hearing on prohibition to be scheduled in the months to come.”

Congressman Ed Perlmutter said, “For six years, Congress has failed to act on the issue of cannabis banking, putting thousands of employees, businesses and communities at risk. However, the issue is finally receiving the attention it deserves with the first-ever congressional hearing and now a scheduled committee vote. With 97.7% of the U.S. population living in a state where voters have legalized some form of adult recreational, medical or limited-medical use of marijuana, congressional inaction is no longer an option. And with broad, bipartisan support in the House, I look forward to the SAFE Banking Act continuing to move forward in the Financial Services Committee and on the floor of the House.”

According to the most recent FBI Uniform Crime Report, police made 659,700 arrests for marijuana-related violations in 2017. That total is more than 21 percent higher than the total number of persons arrests for the commission of violent crimes (518,617) in 2017. Of those arrested for marijuana crimes, just under 91 percent (599,000) were arrested for marijuana possession offenses, a slight increase over last year’s annual totals. Total marijuana arrests in 2017 increased for the second straight year, after having fallen for nearly a decade.

Thirty-three states, Washington, D.C. and the U.S. territories of Guam and Puerto Rico have enacted legislation specific to the physician-authorized use of cannabis. Moreover, an estimated 73 million Americans now reside in the ten states where anyone over the age of 21 may possess cannabis legally. An additional fifteen states have passed laws specific to the possession of cannabidiol (CBD) oil for therapeutic purposes.

Sixty-eight percent of registered voters “support the legalization of marijuana,” according to 2018 national polling data compiled by the Center for American Progress. The percentage is the highest level of support for legalization ever reported in a nationwide, scientific poll.

Majorities of Democrats (77 percent), Independents (62 percent), and Republicans (57 percent) back legalization. The results of a 2017 nationwide Gallup poll similarly found majority support among all three groups.

To date, these statewide regulatory programs are operating largely as voters and politicians intended. The enactment of these policies have not negatively impacted workplace safety, crime rates, traffic safety, or youth use patterns. They have stimulated economic development and created hundreds of millions of dollars in new tax revenue.

Specifically, a 2019 report estimates that over 211,000 Americans are now working full-time in the cannabis industry. Tax revenues from states like Colorado, Oregon, and Washington now exceed initial projections. Further, numerous studies have identified an association between cannabis access and lower rates of opioid use, abuse, hospitalizations, and mortality.
 
"Despite the fact that many conservatives continue to rail against marijuana, support for legalizing weed continues to grow across the nation."

Now wait a second...I need to throw the BS flag on this gratuitous editorial comment......first, you can't have 61% of the nation favoring MJ Legalization without the support of many who identify themselves as conservative. You can't make the numbers add up any other way. Although people who identify as Republicans support MJ legalization at a lower rate than those who identify as Democrats, per the 2018 national polling data compiled by the Center for American Progress cited in the post just above this one, a majority (57%) of Republicans also support legalization.

Also, NJ is an example of just the opposite where black church pastors and leaders oppose legalization as they conflate it with the crime and severe issues their communities suffer from other, destructive, drugs. And these people are pretty much ALL Democrats.

I just don't think we...as a nation...need to look so damn hard for questionable divisions amongst us when there are so many obvious divisions tearing us apart that we should be trying to heal.

Here is the quote from above:

"Sixty-eight percent of registered voters “support the legalization of marijuana,” according to 2018 national polling data compiled by the Center for American Progress. The percentage is the highest level of support for legalization ever reported in a nationwide, scientific poll.

Majorities of Democrats (77 percent), Independents (62 percent), and Republicans (57 percent) back legalization. The results of a 2017 nationwide Gallup poll similarly found majority support among all three groups."


National poll finds 61 percent of Americans in favor of legalizing marijuana

Despite the fact that many conservatives continue to rail against marijuana, support for legalizing weed continues to grow across the nation.

According to a new survey, there are now more Americans who support legalization than ever before. And importantly, that support is growing across all demographics and political affiliations.

This massive wave of support comes as more and more states continue legalizing medical marijuana, recreational marijuana, or both. Similarly, the rapidly growing support for legalization could become an important factor in the upcoming 2020 presidential race.

New Survey, New High in Public Support
The new data comes from the most recent General Social Survey (GSS). As reported by Business Insider, the GSS has been keeping tabs on popular opinions regarding marijuana since 1973.

This year, the GSS showed its highest-ever levels of support for legalization. More specifically, the GSS found that a full 61 percent of Americans think marijuana should be legalized.

This stat marks a huge jump over past years. Most notably, it shows a dramatic uptick since 1987 and 1990, the years with the lowest levels of support. Those years, only 16 percent of the U.S. adult population supported legalization.

In many ways, the overall support for legalization is one of the most important findings from the new survey. But there are other key data embedded in this larger statistic.

For example, the GSS also broke down support for legalization along a number of demographic and political lines. And these numbers also reveal some powerful trends.

Perhaps most importantly, the GSS revealed growing support among Republicans. Traditionally, conservatives have been the most strongly opposed to legalization.

And while that is still true, there is also a notable uptick in support among Republicans. Back in 2012, only one-third of Republicans said they supported legalizing weed. But today, that number has jumped to 42 percent.

Similarly, there are potentially important shifts happening among various age cohorts. Most notably, among people 65 and older.

In the past, this group has registered relatively low support for legalization. But now, the GSS shows that 42 percent of folks in this demographic now support legalization.

Other key findings from the survey include:

  • 18-34 year olds show the strongest support, with more than 70 percent of folks in this age bracket voicing support for legalization.
  • Among Democratic voters, 69 percent said they support legalizing cannabis. For independents, that number is 66 percent.
  • According to a geographical breakdown of survey results, the Midwest showed the strongest support for legalization. In that region, a full 68 percent of survey respondents said they support making weed legal.
  • Support for legalization is lowest in the South. There, slightly more than half of survey respondents voiced support—still a significant percentage.
Political Implications
The rapidly growing support for legalization could have important political implications. For starters, it seems likely that this popular support is driving the growing number of states now implementing new, more liberal cannabis laws.

Additionally, this groundswell of support seems to be driving increasingly energetic efforts to make legal changes at the federal level.

Similarly, many experts believe this groundswell of support could become a big factor in next year’s presidential race. As per Business Insider, “growing public support has all 2020 presidential candidates backing different efforts to legalize marijuana—whether they are Democrats or Republicans.”
 
Last edited:


For the first time, the majority of Republicans favor marijuana legalization


As if the U.S. marijuana movement needed a sign beyond the constant yammering about pot stocks and pet-friendly CBD to show that weed is really just becoming another cleanly shaven product of popular culture, a new poll released this week finds that the majority of Republicans is now pledging unwavering support for the herb. That’s right – the same party that has continued to sandbag the progress of legalization for the past several decades is now prepared to give the cannabis industry a shoe shine, a $50 haircut and a good old fashion lesson in capitalism.

A survey from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and the General Social Survey finds, of course, that most folks (61 percent) in the United States are ready for legal weed. No big surprise there. For the past several years all of the national polls on this subject have turned out similar results.

But the main takeaway is the elephant-eared support on the matter of marijuana legalization now resides at 54 percent, which is up nearly ten points since 2016.

Republicans have a long way to go, however, before they are rolling with the cool kids on Capitol Hill. Democrats are still showing the most support for pot reform, with 76 percent now in favor of legalizing the leaf in a manner similar to alcohol and tobacco.

Cannabis advocates say they are confident that the moment when marijuana finally goes legal nationwide is on the horizon.

“Our time has come,” Justin Strekal, political director for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), told the AP. “Never in modern history has there existed greater public support for ending the nation’s nearly century-long experiment with marijuana prohibition.”

Well, we’d say it is about time that more than four decades of extensive outreach pays off. It was getting to the point where NORML was going to have to slap the slogan don’t hold your breath on their business cards.

But positive change takes time.

There are now more than 30 states that have legalized for medicinal use, while 10 states and counting have passed laws making it fully legal to possess and buy marijuana in a way similar to alcohol. The latter is the route the nation seems to be gunning for as of late. The most recent pushes in Congress have all included paths to eliminate the cannabis plant from the confines of the Controlled Substances Act and thereby allowing the individual states to legalize how they see fit.

Still, there are plenty of snags.

Sure, the majority of Republicans are showing support for pot reform, but it’s not the right Republicans. The U.S. Senate, where GOP domination is in full effect, does not share in this enthusiasm for legal weed, we assure you. But eventually, they will join in, that is a given. It’s just a matter of getting Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on board. Come to think of it, maybe the next poll (pole) should be one that can be used to knock some sense into him. Because once McConnell supports legal weed, the end of federal marijuana prohibition is as good as a done deal.
 
Only the fucking government could possibly justify taking YEARS to do this task. I once worked on the acquisition team as part of the FAA's NexGen system wide upgrades. Took them FOUR YEARS to just write and issue a contract for a subsystem. FOUR YEARS....and my civil service counterpart would often say to me, when frustrated that we were having yet another meeting to revisit a decision that had been made and reviewed a dozen times already, "Baron23, you need to remember, this is the government".

Hated ever second of it.


CBD regulations could take years, warns outgoing FDA Chief

While the cannabis industry was hoping the U.S. Food and Drug Administration would make some quick tweaks to its policy that would allow edible CBD products to be sold across the country, outgoing commissioner Scott Gottlieb said earlier this week that, consistent with the other bureaucraptastic methods that make up the federal government, it could take years before these regulations are hashed out. The only tried and true way to solve the problem promptly, he said, is for Congress to intervene. Then there would be no question on the matter of CBD’s legality.

Gottlieb understands there is a lot of pressure right now from every angle to make some sense out of the debacle surrounding hemp-derived CBD products, but the problem is “CBD didn’t previously exist in the food supply, and it exists as a drug under the statute,” he explained this week at a Brookings Institution event. However, the law gives the FDA the ability to put the substance through the rulemaking process to change that, but that’s a process that can take some time.

This is because CBD is different than any other chemical the FDA has ever been forced to contend with. Yes, it is a hemp-derived substance, but it is also something that is associated with the cannabis plant itself. Toss in the fact that the FDA approved a CBD-based epilepsy medicine last year called Epidiolex and the problem becomes even more complicated. “We’ve never done this before,” Gottlieb said.

So, how long might the rulemaking process take? Try three years.

Until then, Gottlieb says the agency is working on assembling a team that will try to uncover some potential legislative pathways that could be taken to nip this predicament in the bud, so to speak. Essentially, these findings would then be submitted to the boys and girls on Capitol Hill where they could pass a bill that gives the FDA some direction on how CBD can become a food additive.

“I think the most efficient way to get to a pathway would be through legislation, probably that would just be legislation that would specifically address CBD,” he said.

But as long as the issue remains the sole responsibility of the FDA, it’s going to be a while before it gets sorted out.

There are also other critical roadblocks preventing CBD from being recognized as a legitimate substance. Specifically, even though the 2018 Farm Bill eliminated the hemp plant from the Controlled Substances Act, the DEA still hasn’t removed it. It’s still a banned substance on the books, and Gottlieb has recognized this discrepancy. In fact, the agency is still “considering licenses for importing and exporting hemp,” according to some reports. So until the nation’s leading drug enforces get right with the law, there is going to be trouble.

Ideally, Congress should step up and provide some clarity on this matter, but whether it will remains to be seen.
 
CVS to Sell Cannabis-Based Products, but Only in These Key States


Drugstore CVS recently announced its plans to begin offering hemp-based CBD products at 800 stores across eight states.
  • The news sent shares of Ceraleaf, the company that makes the product, soaring some 17 percent on March 21.
  • The market for CBD oil is projected to reach $1 billion by 2020.
The largest pharmacy chain in the country has begun selling cannabidiol (CBD) products in eight states, marking a potentially major development in the growth of the CBD industry. On March 20, drugstore chain CVS — which has over 9,900 locations worldwide — announced its plans to begin offering tinctures, oils, ointments and supplements with CBD in 800 stores across California, Colorado, Nevada and five other states.


CVS Helps Send Shares of Ceraleaf Soaring
The move by CVS to begin offering CBD products comes on the heels of the legalization of hemp last year. While hemp contains little to no tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the cannabinoid that gives marijuana its psychoactive properties, it does have CBD, which is present in both the hemp and cannabis plants. And while it remains illegal to sell food products laced with CBD, supplements and other over-the-counter treatments using the compound are legal to sell in certain states. And, with the availability of CBD in now-legal hemp, national retailers can consider selling these products in the jurisdictions where it’s legal without violating federal law. That’s important as even those companies selling cannabis products legally in states like California or Colorado are unable to do things like process credit cards or use banks.

Supplements using CBD have become a popular new remedy for anxiety and some other ailments despite a relative lack of scientific evidence supporting claims it can relieve symptoms for those conditions. The market for CBD oils is projected by certain industry groups to reach $1 billion by 2020.

One of the big winners in the deal is Ceraleaf, the legal cannabis company that is partnering with CVS to sell its products. The news was announced during the company’s earnings call on March 20, and company shares were up 17 percent in trading on March 21 on the Toronto Stock Exchange after already gaining 41 percent on the year.


Is It Time to Invest in Cannabis Stocks?
While part of the only reason CVS could consider selling CBD products is that it can now access those that don’t utilize cannabis, it remains likely that many will read this move as part of a growing cultural acceptance for cannabis consumption in the United States. At least 10 states have legalized sale for recreational use — including California, the nation’s most populous state — and at least 22 states have decriminalized possession of small amounts.

That puts the state of the legal cannabis industry in a unique regulatory environment that makes the proper valuation of the companies currently in business exceedingly difficult. Plenty of investors might be imagining an opportunity not unlike the one that helped Joe Kennedy establish the family’s dynasty when he purchased the rights to distribute prominent European liquor brands like Dewars in the United States at a discount shortly before the repeal of Prohibition — a deal that made him the equivalent of about $100 million in today’s money. Should the current climate of relaxation of marijuana laws continue — and eventually result in changes to federal law — it could mean that at least some cannabis stocks could ultimately produce huge returns.

However, there’s a reason why the entire industry is so fraught with risk. Marijuana remains a schedule I drug, putting enormous restrictions on any company that sells it regardless of state laws where it operates. What’s more, not every marijuana stock is made the same. Most are still too small to trade on the Nasdaq or New York Stock Exchange, meaning that a large portion of the industry is penny stocks that trade on OTC markets. That makes for a lot more risk, including the potential for bad actors: the Securities and Exchange Commission opted to release an investor warning against penny stock frauds involving cannabis stocks back in 2014.

So, for the time being, cannabis stocks should be viewed as a very high-risk, high-reward proposition. Some might present incredible opportunity for huge growth due to the current, unique historical period of transition in terms of their product’s legality. But legalization is not necessarily a foregone conclusion, and even if it does come to pass, anticipating which specific companies will cash in — and which are destined to wash out or represent outright fraud — is not easy.
 
California, Colorado, Nevada and five other states.

did I miss it or is this reporter completely incompetent. What five other fucking states?
 

A vote to exempt legal marijuana States from Federal intervention will occur within weeks


The marijuana movement in North America has come an incredibly long way in a relatively short amount of time.

Looking back to 1995, not a single U.S. state had given the green light to medical marijuana, medical cannabis was still illegal to our north and south, and a mere 25% of surveyed adults by Gallup favored legalizing recreational weed. The idea of legalizing adult-use marijuana in the U.S. would have probably been met with laughter, rather than serious debate.

Today, 33 U.S. states have legalized medical cannabis, 10 of which also allow adult-use of the drug. Further, Canada is one of only two countries worldwide to have legalized recreational weed, while Mexico gave the OK to medical pot in June 2017. According to Gallup's October 2018 poll, an all-time record two out of three Americans wants to see marijuana legalized nationally.

Marijuana's Schedule I classification is a buzzkill
Yet in spite of this momentum, the federal government has stood firm on its classification of cannabis as a Schedule I drug. As a Schedule I substance, cannabis is placed side by side with LSD and heroin as being entirely illicit, is not recognized as having any medical benefits, and is considered to be highly prone to abuse.

Of course, this Schedule I classification has impacts that extend far beyond the drug's simply being illegal. For example, businesses that sell federally illicit controlled substances aren't allowed to take normal corporate income tax deductions per Section 280E of the U.S. tax code, save for cost of goods sold, which is often only a small percentage of sales. For profitable pot-based companies, this can lead to an effective tax rate of as high as 90%. With little leftover capital, it can be difficult for even the most successful weed-based companies to reorder product, expand, or hire new employees.

Furthermore, U.S. businesses involved in the cannabis industry often have limited or no access to basic financial services. Even with some states adding lengthy protections for financial institutions, banks simply don't want anything to do with the weed industry, leaving marijuana companies reliant on cash, which is both a growth restrictor and a security risk.

Recent surveys would appear to suggest that the American public wants change, and House Democrats might just give them what they want.

House Democrats aim to pass major cannabis reforms
As reported by cannabis-focused online publication Marijuana Moment on Wednesday, March 27, the Democrat-controlled House Rules Committee, and the broader House, are expected to take up discussion and bring up legislation for vote within the next several weeks that would protect legal states from federal intervention.

House Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), chair of the Rules Committee, had this to say in a recent interview on Boston Herald Radio (discussion on cannabis reform begins at the 15:32 mark):

I can tell you in the House we will move on this issue [cannabis banking reform] in the next few weeks. It will come to the Rules Committee, which I'm the chair of, and we will guide it to the House floor for a vote. I think it will pass with an overwhelming vote -- Democrats and a lot of Republicans as well.

The previous chair of the Rules Committee [Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas)] blocked everything cannabis related, and we're in a new day. We need to make sure that our federal laws don't obstruct what states are doing, especially with regard to banking issues where everything is being done in cash. ... We need to make sure that the federal laws respect what the states are doing.

[A]nd I think that there's bipartisan support in the Senate on this as well, and whether it's the Warren-Gardner bill or another configuration I would expect something would happen this year. I think if we have a strong bipartisan vote [in the House] that'll increase the pressure on the Senate to do something.

Although McGovern's comments primarily revolve around getting cannabis businesses access to basic banking services, the broader implication of his stance and discussion with Boston Herald Radio suggest that House Democrats aim to draw a line in the sand whereby the federal government no longer imposes any controlled substance restrictions on states that have legalized marijuana.

Easier said than done
As much as this might seem like a turning point for cannabis in the United States, even something as simple as banking reforms that protect state-level banking laws concerning the cannabis industry could be tough to pass. The hurdles with marijuana reform break down into three categories.

First, there's the problem that Republicans have a markedly more negative view of cannabis than Democrats and independents. Although Gallup's 2018 survey did show that a slight majority of self-identified Republicans now favor legalization, the Republican-controlled Senate has been pretty clear that cannabis reform isn't a priority. Previous attempts to attach banking reform legislation as a rider to a bill coming up for vote have been blocked by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). Thus, even with a bipartisan House vote, Senate Republicans may balk at the measure.

Second, folks have to realize that marijuana, while popular among enthusiasts, isn't a polarizing enough issue among voters to merit change as of yet. An April 2018 poll from the independent Quinnipiac University asked respondents whether they would still vote for a political candidate who they had a lot in common with, but differed on their view of cannabis. All told, 82% said yes, with just one in eight respondents saying no. This suggests that politicians aren't in any real danger of losing their elected seats over taking a minority stance on cannabis.

Third and finally, it's a money issue. If federal prohibition ends, Section 280E of the U.S. tax code would no longer apply. This would be fantastic news for cannabis companies operating in the United States, but it would actually reduce federal revenue by about $5 billion over the next 10 years. Essentially, not being able to charge a high effective tax rate, and thereby allowing normal corporate income tax deductions, would mean less taxable revenue collected by Washington.

There's no doubt that the U.S. could easily become the most lucrative marijuana market in the world if the federal government stepped out of the way. I'm just not optimistic that we'll see that happen anytime soon.
 
Here's a shocker for you... :tongue:

Federally Produced Marijuana Is Closer To Hemp Than Commercial Cannabis, Study Shows

Research-grade marijuana that’s supplied by the only federally authorized cultivation site in the United States is genetically closer to hemp than cannabis varieties sold at dispensaries in legal states, according to a new study.

The revelation raises questions about how applicable the results of research using the government marijuana really are to understanding the effects of products that consuming are actually using.

Previous studies have demonstrated that marijuana that’s grown at the University of Mississippi, with funding from the National Institutes On Drug Abuse (NIDA), has lower levels of THC and CBD compared to commercial cannabis products. But researchers at the University of Northern Colorado wanted to learn specifically about their genetic variance.

The study, which was made available as a preprint on bioRxiv, looked at 49 different cannabis samples, including hemp and NIDA-supplied marijuana, as well as various indica, sativa and hybrid strains sold in the commercial market. When the samples were genetically analyzed, the researchers were surprised to find just how different NIDA’s marijuana is from the cannabis most people are consuming.

As has already been established, marijuana and hemp proved to be genetically distinct. But interestingly, research-grade cannabis from NIDA shared a closer “genetic affinity with hemp samples in most analyses” than with commercially available marijuana, the study authors wrote.

Screen-Shot-2019-04-02-at-11.41.04-AM-1024x956.png

Via bioRxio.

“Our genetic investigation adds to this previous research, indicating that the genetic makeup of NIDA Cannabis is also distinctive from commercially available medical and recreational Cannabis,” they wrote. “To our knowledge, this is the first genetic study to include research-grade marijuana from NIDA, and its placement with hemp samples was unexpected.”

The findings raise concerns about the results of federally approved marijuana research that has relied on the NIDA supply. If the research concerned individual components of cannabis such as THC and CBD, the samples might be useful, but study participants who consume the NIDA varieties may be experiencing different effects than patients and consumers that get their marijuana from dispensaries.

“As the interest for medical Cannabis increases, it is important that research examining the threats and benefits of Cannabis use accurately reflect the experiences of the general public,” the researchers wrote.

Advocates, scientists and lawmakers have already been urging the Justice Department to expand the number of federally authorized marijuana manufacturing facilities, arguing that the limited supply and diversity of cannabis varieties available from the government’s current sole source is hindering research, but the approval process has been slow-moving.

Whether it will speed up under new Attorney General William Barr is yet to be determined, but he has voiced support for such expansion and said in January that he would “review the matter and take appropriate steps.
 
Here's a shocker for you... :tongue:

Federally Produced Marijuana Is Closer To Hemp Than Commercial Cannabis, Study Shows

Research-grade marijuana that’s supplied by the only federally authorized cultivation site in the United States is genetically closer to hemp than cannabis varieties sold at dispensaries in legal states, according to a new study.

The revelation raises questions about how applicable the results of research using the government marijuana really are to understanding the effects of products that consuming are actually using.

Previous studies have demonstrated that marijuana that’s grown at the University of Mississippi, with funding from the National Institutes On Drug Abuse (NIDA), has lower levels of THC and CBD compared to commercial cannabis products. But researchers at the University of Northern Colorado wanted to learn specifically about their genetic variance.

The study, which was made available as a preprint on bioRxiv, looked at 49 different cannabis samples, including hemp and NIDA-supplied marijuana, as well as various indica, sativa and hybrid strains sold in the commercial market. When the samples were genetically analyzed, the researchers were surprised to find just how different NIDA’s marijuana is from the cannabis most people are consuming.

As has already been established, marijuana and hemp proved to be genetically distinct. But interestingly, research-grade cannabis from NIDA shared a closer “genetic affinity with hemp samples in most analyses” than with commercially available marijuana, the study authors wrote.

Screen-Shot-2019-04-02-at-11.41.04-AM-1024x956.png

Via bioRxio.

“Our genetic investigation adds to this previous research, indicating that the genetic makeup of NIDA Cannabis is also distinctive from commercially available medical and recreational Cannabis,” they wrote. “To our knowledge, this is the first genetic study to include research-grade marijuana from NIDA, and its placement with hemp samples was unexpected.”

The findings raise concerns about the results of federally approved marijuana research that has relied on the NIDA supply. If the research concerned individual components of cannabis such as THC and CBD, the samples might be useful, but study participants who consume the NIDA varieties may be experiencing different effects than patients and consumers that get their marijuana from dispensaries.

“As the interest for medical Cannabis increases, it is important that research examining the threats and benefits of Cannabis use accurately reflect the experiences of the general public,” the researchers wrote.

Advocates, scientists and lawmakers have already been urging the Justice Department to expand the number of federally authorized marijuana manufacturing facilities, arguing that the limited supply and diversity of cannabis varieties available from the government’s current sole source is hindering research, but the approval process has been slow-moving.

Whether it will speed up under new Attorney General William Barr is yet to be determined, but he has voiced support for such expansion and said in January that he would “review the matter and take appropriate steps.
Every report from every researcher who have seen comment on Fed grown research weed has called it complete and unmitigated shit...just crap and useless to boot.
 
States move to legalize CBD to end confusion over U.S. rules


CBD oil-infused gummy bears, lattes and other food, drinks and dietary supplements are selling quickly even though the U.S. government says they’re illegal and local authorities have forced some retailers to pull products. The confusion has the nation’s two largest states and others moving to legalize the cannabis compound that many see as beneficial to their health.

Lawmakers in Texas and California are often in opposition, but they’re both pushing bipartisan legislation to sidestep federal law and allow sales of the compound found in hemp and marijuana. Republicans and Democrats in Congress also are urging the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to change its stance.

The FDA announced Tuesday that it will hold a public hearing in May to gather more information.

Resolving the confusion can’t come quick enough for Jonathan Eppers, who makes Vybes, a popular CBD oil-infused beverage. California health inspectors raided his Los Angeles warehouse in January and impounded $100,000 worth of the drink.

Eppers said about 50 California retailers have since dropped his product and he’s moved production to Texas. He estimates lost sales, legal costs and relocation expenses have cost him at least $500,000.

“What is going on is unbelievable and asinine,” Eppers said. “They put us in this state of limbo that’s costing us.”

Eppers and CBD fans are mystified by the legal insecurity. After all, they say, retailers in California and nine other states that have broadly legalized marijuana sell edibles and other products that get people high, though pot is illegal under federal law. U.S. officials generally have taken a hands-off approach in states where pot is legal.

The FDA has oversight of CBD because it is the active ingredient in an approved prescription drug to treat two rare seizure disorders. The agency says CBD can’t be added to food or sold as a dietary supplement because officials haven’t determined if it’s safe or effective for other conditions.

FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb told Congress last week that enforcement is being limited to sellers who make false health claims. He says the agency recently sent warning letters to three companies touting CBD as a treatment for cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, fibromyalgia and drug addiction.

“But there are products on the market right now that, given our enforcement priorities and our limited resources, we haven’t taken action against,” he said.

Short for cannabidiol, CBD is a non-intoxicating molecule found in hemp and marijuana. Both are cannabis plants, but only marijuana has enough of the compound THC to get users high.

Story Continues Below



CBD oil is extracted when the plant is processed. While hemp derivatives are essentially THC-free, CBD oil from marijuana may have very little or enough to produce a high.

Sellers and users say CBD helps with pain, anxiety and inflammation, though limited scientific research supports those claims. It’s turning up in products ranging from lotions, cosmetics and soap to diet pills, juices, cocktails, candy and drinks.

State and local officials are taking nearly all the enforcement actions against CBD. Health officials in California, which has the nation’s largest legal marijuana marketplace, warned retailers last summer that anything edible containing CBD is illegal until lawmakers or regulators say otherwise.

The warning was largely ignored until earlier this year, when state and local health officials began forcing some small businesses to pull products after receiving complaints.

San Francisco health officials recently barred two small operators from selling CBD-infused food and drink, while authorities in rural Grass Valley, 140 miles (308 kilometres) away, did the same to a small, co-operatively owned grocery store.

“It caught us way off guard,” said Gus Dabais, owner of Sidewalk Wellness, one of the stores targeted.

The San Francisco Health Department sent warning letters to 1,900 businesses last year, spokeswoman Veronica Vien said. She said inspectors are not looking for CBD but responding to complaints.

She said that’s how they ended up “red tagging” products at Dabais’ business and Steap Tea Bar, a popular Chinatown stop that sold CBD-infused bubble tea.

Similar scenarios are playing out in Ohio, where authorities in January ordered a Cincinnati grocery store to remove CBD from two outlets. The following month, New York City health inspectors removed CBD products from a number of restaurants. Police in March raided two Fort Worth, Texas, retailers and seized CBD products after the local district attorney declared the compound illegal.

In Texas, one of a handful of states that outlaws all forms of marijuana, lawmakers are pushing a measure that would legalize hemp oil-infused edibles. It sailed through its first committee in the House this week.

In California, a similar CBD measure has moved on to the full Assembly.

“A number of people have been using it for years, and you can find it on retail shelves all over the place, but now people are surprised to find it’s against the law,” said Assemblywoman Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, a Napa-area Democrat who introduced the measure. “What this bill will do is clear up the confusion.”

She said the legislation would stop state and local enforcement of the FDA’s ban and hopes it becomes law by August.

“This would lift a legal cloud from a legitimate California business,” said Jim Gross of the U.S. Hemp Roundtable, an industry association.

A growing number of federal lawmakers, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, are urging the FDA to approve CBD. They backed a measure taking hemp off the U.S. government’s list of banned substances.

“Hemp is a versatile crop with many uses and applications,” McConnell and Wyden wrote to the FDA in February. “We are hopeful that by working with you on the implementation of our legislation, we can help ensure that hemp can be a new cash crop for farmers across the country.”
 
"At the time that her cosponsorship of the earlier bill was announced, the senator was facing a reelection challenge from a progressive contender, California State Sen. Kevin de Leon (D)."

“By refusing to get on this year’s version of the STATES Act, it shows how obvious Senator Feinstein’s flirtation with putting an end to federal marijuana was just an effort protect her seat,” Michael Liszewski, principal of The Enact Group, a lobbying and consulting firm that focuses on cannabis issues, argued. “It’s remarkable that Feinstein will back marijuana reform to save her job but then refuse to do when it comes to protecting her constituents from federal prosecution.”
Her and many others....all that motivates them is self-interest. About Feinstein...she is also the person who opposes almost all gun ownership but.....held a concealed carry permit because....well, its dangerous out there for politicians....and fuck the rest of us.

I'm not sure if its even possible for my contempt for our professional political class can get any greater.


Democratic Senator Pulled Out As Marijuana Bill Cosponsor, Sources Say

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) was expected to be an original cosponsor of newly filed bipartisan legislation to shield legal marijuana states from federal intervention. But when it was unveiled on Thursday, the senator’s name was nowhere to be found—even though she signed on to a nearly identical bill last year.

Two lobbyists who work on cannabis issues on Capitol Hill told Marijuana Moment that Feinstein’s staff added her name to the bill, but that in the days leading up to its introduction the senator removed herself at the last minute—for reasons that aren’t entirely clear.

The lobbyists did not wish to be named in this story so that they could talk freely about the development, and Feinstein’s office did not respond to several requests for comment on the reasoning behind her decision or whether the senator plans to cosponsor the legislation at a later date.

When Feinstein was announced as a cosponsor of a previous version of the legislation last year, it was a big deal. She has a track record of opposing drug policy reform—including California’s 2016 cannabis legalization measure as well as congressional measures to shield state cannabis laws from federal interference—but she’d suddenly reversed that position. And as the ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee, her newfound support could have been critical in advancing the legislation.

Advocates are both disappointed and suspicious, questioning whether politics, rather than an earnest conviction about the need to change the country’s drug laws, motivated her past cosponsorship of the Strengthening the Tenth Amendment Through Entrusting States (STATES) Act.

At the time that her cosponsorship of the earlier bill was announced, the senator was facing a reelection challenge from a progressive contender, California State Sen. Kevin de Leon (D).

“By refusing to get on this year’s version of the STATES Act, it shows how obvious Senator Feinstein’s flirtation with putting an end to federal marijuana was just an effort protect her seat,” Michael Liszewski, principal of The Enact Group, a lobbying and consulting firm that focuses on cannabis issues, argued. “It’s remarkable that Feinstein will back marijuana reform to save her job but then refuse to do when it comes to protecting her constituents from federal prosecution.”

Justin Strekal, political director of NORML, put it this way: “It’s remarkable when you expect nothing and are still disappointed.”

Feinstein’s reversal on the STATES Act stands in contrast to that of Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA), who sent a letter to the chair of the House Judiciary Committee endorsing the legislation this week. Collins has also opposed various marijuana reform measures during his tenure in Congress but is now calling on the House Democratic majority to advance the new cannabis bill.

Aside from Feinstein, all of the other cosponsors of the last version of the STATES Act who are still in the Senate remained on board for the new version—with the exception of Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), who is sponsoring separate, more far-reaching legislation called the Marijuana Justice Act, which contains provisions addressing the harms of past cannabis enforcement. (Feinstein has not signed onto Booker’s bill or any other cannabis legislation filed in the 116th Congress.)

Two additional senators—Sens. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Kevin Cramer (R-ND)—joined as new original cosponsors of this year’s STATES Act.

“It’s disappointing to see Senator Feinstein flip flop on this issue,” Michael Collins, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, told Marijuana Moment. “We thought she had turned the corner, but it appears not to be the case.”

Marijuana Moment reached out to the offices of Sens. Cory Gardner (R-CO) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), chief sponsors of the Senate’s STATES Act, for details about Feinstein declining to be a cosponsor this time around. Representatives were not immediately available to comment.

While the senator hasn’t said she opposes the STATES Act and could still add her name to the list of cosponsors at a later time, being an original cosponsor would have signaled that Feinstein was making cannabis reform a priority for the 116th Congress. And her position as the ranking member on a committee that will play a central role in the legislation’s fate would have made that all the more important.

“While it’s disappointing that Sen. Feinstein is not an original cosponsor of the STATES Act in the 116th Congress, it is our understanding that is not a signal that she opposes the legislation. Just that it’s not a priority,” Neal Levine, CEO of the Cannabis Trade Federation, said. “We are excited about the additions of Sen. Wyden and Sen. Cramer, and expect Sen. Feinstein to ultimately protect the burgeoning legal cannabis industry in California by voting in favor of the STATES Act.”

Even if Feinstein does ultimately lend her support, getting the bill passed in the Senate will be a challenge. The chair of the Judiciary Committee, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said this week that he’s “not very excited about” about the legislation.

“It’s time Senator Feinstein accepts the inevitability of cannabis legalization and cosponsors the STATES Act,” Michael Correa, director of government relations for the National Cannabis Industry Association, told Marijuana Moment. “This balanced approach and common sense solution helps address the federal/state conflict on cannabis laws, while providing protection for a multi-billion dollar industry.”

“She was elected to defend her state,” Correa said. “This bill does that.”
 

Sponsored by

VGoodiez 420EDC
Back
Top