Baron23
Well-Known Member
Well that and I sort of believe that is impossible to make a white powder pharmaceutical look like whole botanical flower? How could this possibly be done. Pure BS, IMO.
|
Sponsored by |
|---|
|
|
-
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
- Thread starter CarolKing
- Start date
Well that and I sort of believe that is impossible to make a white powder pharmaceutical look like whole botanical flower? How could this possibly be done. Pure BS, IMO.
Baron23
Well-Known Member
Three U.S. presidential candidates have used cannabis — what plans do all frontrunners have for pot?
Three U.S. presidential candidates have used cannabis — what plans do all frontrunners have for pot?
Fri, 10/25/2019 - 16:45
Posted in:
“We not only need to legalize but we also need to pursue experiments," Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg said recently
U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg says he’s used marijuana and thinks Americans should be able to do so legally.
The Associated Press reports the confession came out when the 37-year-old mayor of South Bend, Indiana and military veteran spoke to reporters outside a legal pot shop in Las Vegas.
“I have. A handful of times a long time ago,” he said, adding that people stigmatize the industry because of antiquated beliefs.
“When you go into a place like this, it almost reminds you of an Apple store how tidy and carefully it’s laid out, knowledgeable employees and a legitimate business that still struggles because federal policy hasn’t caught up,” he said.
Buttigieg is the third presidential candidate to admit using cannabis — here’s what all of the frontrunners have to say about marijuana.
What has Pete Buttigieg said about cannabis?
Pete Buttigieg has federal level plans to legalize cannabis, eliminate jail time for drug possession and reduce sentences for other drug offense, which will be applied retroactively.
Harvard University campus police also caught him smoking the butt end of a joint, but let him off with a warning. He said it inspired him to expunge past convictions, pointing to how Black Americans are disproportionately arrested for marijuana possession.
“We not only need to legalize but we also need to pursue experiments, knowing the racial disparity and lives that have been ruined by sentences over marijuana possession,” Buttigieg told FOX News.
What has Donald Trump said about cannabis?
U.S. President Donald Trump currently allows states to set their own marijuana policies.
“We’re going to see what’s going on. It’s a very big subject and right now we are allowing states to make that decision,” Trump said when asked about cannabis in a press conference on Aug. 30.
Trump and the senate also passed a bill to prevent the Department of Justice from getting involved in state-legal cannabis programs.
What has Elizabeth Warren said about cannabis?
Elizabeth Warren is pro-cannabis legalization.
The Democratic candidate’s campaign site reads, “We need criminal justice reform and we need it now. That means ending racial disparities in our justice system … It means comprehensive sentencing reform and rewriting our laws to decriminalize marijuana.”
Though, like Trump, her position on pot has also been inconsistent. Warren was opposed to legalizing recreational cannabis in 2011, during her first Senate campaign.
What has Joe Biden said about cannabis?
Democratic candidate Joe Biden supports decriminalizing cannabis, saying, “nobody should be in jail for smoking marijuana,” during a June campaign stop in New Hampshire.
Campaign spokesman Andrew Bates told CNN Biden also aims to automatically expunging prior criminal records for marijuana possession “so those affected don’t have to figure out how to petition for it or pay for a lawyer.”
“He would allow states to continue to make their own choices regarding legalization and would seek to make it easier to conduct research on marijuana’s positive and negative health impacts by rescheduling it as a Schedule II drug (which would let the Food and Drug Administration oversee cannabis),” Bates said.
What has Bernie Sanders said about cannabis?
Bernie Sanders has fought for cannabis legalization for decades — he also admitted to trying a join before.
“I smoked marijuana twice and all I did was cough my guts out, so it didn’t work for me,” he said during a rally in Las Vegas.
Despite the sore lungs, the democratic candidate advocated for cannabis legalization in his last run to be U.S. president and also filed a first-of-its-kind bill to senate request the end of federal cannabis prohibition.
“Right now, marijuana is listed by the federal government as a Schedule I drug—meaning that it is considered to be as dangerous as heroin. That is absurd,” Sanders said at George Mason University during a 2015 rally.
Sanders did more of the same in 1995, co-sponsoring a bill to legalize medical marijuana at a federal level and co-sponsored three iterations of a bill that ensure hemp did not share the same definition as cannabis.
He also recently co-sponsored the Marijuana Justice Act.
What has Kamala Harris said about cannabis?
Democratic Candidate Kamala Harris has advocated for cannabis legalization — and has also openly admitted to smoking a joint in college.
“It was a long time ago,” she said during a radio interview with The Breakfast Club.
“It gives a lot of people joy, and we need more joy in the world.”
Harris has called for legalizing recreational cannabis and expunging non-violent cannabis offenders, co-sponsoring the Marijuana Justice Act and the SAFE Banking Act, which aims to protect bank working with cannabis businesses from any punishment by the federal government.
“Decriminalizing marijuana at the federal level isn’t just the smart thing to do, it’s also the right thing to do. We can’t keep repeating the same mistakes of the past. Too many lives have been ruined by these regressive policies,” she wrote in a tweet.
While she is now a staunch advocate for legalization, the former San Francisco district attorney and California attorney general opposed the idea in her past.
She had a reputation for being tough on crime in both roles, calling legalization a “flawed public policy” and when asked about her opponent’s pro-legalization stance during her California re-election run in 2014, she laughed and nodded, saying “He’s entitled to his opinion.”
Three U.S. presidential candidates have used cannabis — what plans do all frontrunners have for pot?
Fri, 10/25/2019 - 16:45
Posted in:
“We not only need to legalize but we also need to pursue experiments," Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg said recently
U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg says he’s used marijuana and thinks Americans should be able to do so legally.
The Associated Press reports the confession came out when the 37-year-old mayor of South Bend, Indiana and military veteran spoke to reporters outside a legal pot shop in Las Vegas.
“I have. A handful of times a long time ago,” he said, adding that people stigmatize the industry because of antiquated beliefs.
“When you go into a place like this, it almost reminds you of an Apple store how tidy and carefully it’s laid out, knowledgeable employees and a legitimate business that still struggles because federal policy hasn’t caught up,” he said.
Buttigieg is the third presidential candidate to admit using cannabis — here’s what all of the frontrunners have to say about marijuana.
What has Pete Buttigieg said about cannabis?
Pete Buttigieg has federal level plans to legalize cannabis, eliminate jail time for drug possession and reduce sentences for other drug offense, which will be applied retroactively.
Harvard University campus police also caught him smoking the butt end of a joint, but let him off with a warning. He said it inspired him to expunge past convictions, pointing to how Black Americans are disproportionately arrested for marijuana possession.
“We not only need to legalize but we also need to pursue experiments, knowing the racial disparity and lives that have been ruined by sentences over marijuana possession,” Buttigieg told FOX News.
What has Donald Trump said about cannabis?
U.S. President Donald Trump currently allows states to set their own marijuana policies.
“We’re going to see what’s going on. It’s a very big subject and right now we are allowing states to make that decision,” Trump said when asked about cannabis in a press conference on Aug. 30.
While his stance has changed on the topic, telling FOX News in February legal cannabis is “a real problem” despite advocating for the legalization of drugs in 1990, Trump’s opinion has remained relatively stable recently.
Trump and the senate also passed a bill to prevent the Department of Justice from getting involved in state-legal cannabis programs.
What has Elizabeth Warren said about cannabis?
Elizabeth Warren is pro-cannabis legalization.
The Democratic candidate’s campaign site reads, “We need criminal justice reform and we need it now. That means ending racial disparities in our justice system … It means comprehensive sentencing reform and rewriting our laws to decriminalize marijuana.”
Though, like Trump, her position on pot has also been inconsistent. Warren was opposed to legalizing recreational cannabis in 2011, during her first Senate campaign.
She has since signed the bill senate passed to block interference from the Department of Justice, as well as co-sponsoring bills like the Marijuana Justice Act that quell talks of prohibition and the CARERS Act, which protects medical marijuana users.
What has Joe Biden said about cannabis?
Democratic candidate Joe Biden supports decriminalizing cannabis, saying, “nobody should be in jail for smoking marijuana,” during a June campaign stop in New Hampshire.
Campaign spokesman Andrew Bates told CNN Biden also aims to automatically expunging prior criminal records for marijuana possession “so those affected don’t have to figure out how to petition for it or pay for a lawyer.”
“He would allow states to continue to make their own choices regarding legalization and would seek to make it easier to conduct research on marijuana’s positive and negative health impacts by rescheduling it as a Schedule II drug (which would let the Food and Drug Administration oversee cannabis),” Bates said.
He was against legalization in 1974, a view he maintained in 2010, according to the Marijuana Moment, calling cananbis a “gateway drug.” He was in favour of creating the 1989 Office of National Drug Control Policy and drafted the 1994 bill that led to America’s current laws that jail non-violent drug offenders. Biden also said cannabis dealers should get the death penalty.
What has Bernie Sanders said about cannabis?
Bernie Sanders has fought for cannabis legalization for decades — he also admitted to trying a join before.
“I smoked marijuana twice and all I did was cough my guts out, so it didn’t work for me,” he said during a rally in Las Vegas.
Despite the sore lungs, the democratic candidate advocated for cannabis legalization in his last run to be U.S. president and also filed a first-of-its-kind bill to senate request the end of federal cannabis prohibition.
“Right now, marijuana is listed by the federal government as a Schedule I drug—meaning that it is considered to be as dangerous as heroin. That is absurd,” Sanders said at George Mason University during a 2015 rally.
He has signed a number of bills to make cannabis more accessible and stop federal authorities from implementing more restrictions.
Sanders did more of the same in 1995, co-sponsoring a bill to legalize medical marijuana at a federal level and co-sponsored three iterations of a bill that ensure hemp did not share the same definition as cannabis.
He also recently co-sponsored the Marijuana Justice Act.
What has Kamala Harris said about cannabis?
Democratic Candidate Kamala Harris has advocated for cannabis legalization — and has also openly admitted to smoking a joint in college.
“It was a long time ago,” she said during a radio interview with The Breakfast Club.
“It gives a lot of people joy, and we need more joy in the world.”
Harris has called for legalizing recreational cannabis and expunging non-violent cannabis offenders, co-sponsoring the Marijuana Justice Act and the SAFE Banking Act, which aims to protect bank working with cannabis businesses from any punishment by the federal government.
“Decriminalizing marijuana at the federal level isn’t just the smart thing to do, it’s also the right thing to do. We can’t keep repeating the same mistakes of the past. Too many lives have been ruined by these regressive policies,” she wrote in a tweet.
While she is now a staunch advocate for legalization, the former San Francisco district attorney and California attorney general opposed the idea in her past.
She had a reputation for being tough on crime in both roles, calling legalization a “flawed public policy” and when asked about her opponent’s pro-legalization stance during her California re-election run in 2014, she laughed and nodded, saying “He’s entitled to his opinion.”
Baron23
Well-Known Member
"A supermajority of Americans favor legalizing marijuana"
So, why aren't our representatives (we are, in fact, supposed to be a constitutional representative democracy ) actually representing our desires? Would this indeed be nonfeasance or malfeasance? Can we get the money we pay them back since they are not doing the job they are supposed to? Hmmmm?
Support for marijuana legalization reaches all-time high despite vaping illness
A supermajority of Americans favor legalizing marijuana, despite recent negative coverage due to vaping illnesses.
A mysterious vaping illness is linked to nearly 1,500 cases and resulted in 33 deaths, according to the latest numbers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Though the illness caused legal marijuana users to stop buying vaping products, it hasn’t changed Americans’ perspective on marijuana legalization one bit.
Two-thirds of Americans support legalizing cannabis, according to a Gallup poll first reported by Forbes. This is the same percentage the polling firm found last year regarding marijuana legalization, demonstrating that negative coverage around vaping hasn’t significantly influenced the country’s thinking on cannabis. The steady support around legalization encouraged cannabis advocates like Justin Strekal, political director for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML).
“There is no buyer’s remorse on the part of the American people,” Strekal said in a statement. “In recent years, American’s support for legalization has only grown stronger. At the end of the day, every age demographic below 65, representing the overwhelming majority of the taxpaying public, would rather their dollars be spent to regulate cannabis, not incarcerate its consumers.”
Gallup reported no major differences were found among major groups or subgroups in supporting marijuana legalization. Most expected categories like millennials (80%) and Democrats (76%) favor legalization. Only conservatives (48%) and senior citizens (49%) count as outliers where legalizing is not the majority position within the group.
This isn’t expected to change anytime soon, Gallup reported. When Gallup first began polling for marijuana legalization in 1971, only 12% of Americans supported it. Over the past 15 years, we’ve seen a rapid 180-degree turn from Americans who are now a supermajority when it comes to marijuana legalization.
While vaping illnesses remains a chief concern among the American public, mainstream press and cannabis media alike have responded that legalization is the first step in solving the problem. The majority of vaping illness cases stem from THC cartridges bought on the black market, where marijuana concentrates are often cut with toxic chemicals to extend product. Should legalization occur, marijuana products like vape pens would be regulated by health officials and tested to ensure safety for the public.
So, why aren't our representatives (we are, in fact, supposed to be a constitutional representative democracy ) actually representing our desires? Would this indeed be nonfeasance or malfeasance? Can we get the money we pay them back since they are not doing the job they are supposed to? Hmmmm?
Support for marijuana legalization reaches all-time high despite vaping illness
A supermajority of Americans favor legalizing marijuana, despite recent negative coverage due to vaping illnesses.
A mysterious vaping illness is linked to nearly 1,500 cases and resulted in 33 deaths, according to the latest numbers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Though the illness caused legal marijuana users to stop buying vaping products, it hasn’t changed Americans’ perspective on marijuana legalization one bit.
Two-thirds of Americans support legalizing cannabis, according to a Gallup poll first reported by Forbes. This is the same percentage the polling firm found last year regarding marijuana legalization, demonstrating that negative coverage around vaping hasn’t significantly influenced the country’s thinking on cannabis. The steady support around legalization encouraged cannabis advocates like Justin Strekal, political director for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML).
“There is no buyer’s remorse on the part of the American people,” Strekal said in a statement. “In recent years, American’s support for legalization has only grown stronger. At the end of the day, every age demographic below 65, representing the overwhelming majority of the taxpaying public, would rather their dollars be spent to regulate cannabis, not incarcerate its consumers.”
Gallup reported no major differences were found among major groups or subgroups in supporting marijuana legalization. Most expected categories like millennials (80%) and Democrats (76%) favor legalization. Only conservatives (48%) and senior citizens (49%) count as outliers where legalizing is not the majority position within the group.
This isn’t expected to change anytime soon, Gallup reported. When Gallup first began polling for marijuana legalization in 1971, only 12% of Americans supported it. Over the past 15 years, we’ve seen a rapid 180-degree turn from Americans who are now a supermajority when it comes to marijuana legalization.
While vaping illnesses remains a chief concern among the American public, mainstream press and cannabis media alike have responded that legalization is the first step in solving the problem. The majority of vaping illness cases stem from THC cartridges bought on the black market, where marijuana concentrates are often cut with toxic chemicals to extend product. Should legalization occur, marijuana products like vape pens would be regulated by health officials and tested to ensure safety for the public.
ClearBlueLou
Well-Known Member
Just a guess, but I guess our representatives know that the majority of the people is not represented by the majority party in government (the republicans have ruled congress as if they were the national majority, and have shown no interest in “bipartisan” or “nonpartisan” anything. The minority party among the electorate is the majority party in Washington and has been for decades; they do not take orders from their voters but from their donors. Their donors benefit from laws and policies that are harmful to and or unpopular with the people, so we have laws that are unpopular and or harmful, despite the public, and despite the voters. We keep putting people into office based on some fantasy that flies in the face of actual behavior, and they ignore us, disobey us, work against us. Why? Because their donors pay them better than we can...and that’s what their paymasters pay them to do..
Not to make it political, but it’s an important question, the answer just *IS* political.
Not to make it political, but it’s an important question, the answer just *IS* political.
Baron23
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry, I can't address most of that...even though I have some counter-points to make...as I def do not want to drag this into a partisan political discussion.
But I will throw the BS flag on this as IMO, there are many, many, many examples of our representatives (from BOTH parties) imposing what they think over the expressed desires of the electorate and in particular on the issue of cannabis legalization.
If you believe that any organization involved in this is wearing the white hats, then we must live in very different universes.
Medical pot on campus: Colleges say no and face lawsuits
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Colleges are becoming a battleground in the conflict between federal and state marijuana laws as students who use medical pot challenge decades-old campus drug policies.
In states where medical marijuana is legal, students disciplined for using it are taking their schools to court. College officials argue they could lose federal funding for failing to follow federal law that labels cannabis an illegal drug with no accepted medical use.
Sheida Assar said she was expelled from GateWay Community College in Phoenix last month for violating the school’s drug policy after she tested positive for marijuana, which she uses to treat chronic pain from polycystic ovary syndrome.
She was studying diagnostic medical sonography, Assar said, and an instructor had told her she wouldn’t have any problems if she presented her Arizona medical marijuana card. She typically uses marijuana to help her sleep and had never been under the influence in class, she said.
“They yanked me out of class in the middle of the school day,” said Assar, 31, of Chandler, Arizona. “They escorted me to the administration like I was a ... criminal. It’s discrimination, and it also violates my rights under the Arizona medical marijuana law.”
The legal challenges are coming from students studying nursing and other medical specialties who, under school policies, must undergo drug testing.
Assar and other students say they received approval to use medical marijuana from college employees who serve students with health-related needs — only to face discipline from higher-ranking school officials.
Assar said she intends to sue GateWay to recoup the $2,000 she spent on tuition and other educational expenses and seek more money in damages. Her lawyer already has been in contact with the school, she said.
A GateWay spokeswoman, Christine Lambrakis, said that she could not confirm Assar’s status at the school and that the college continues to prohibit marijuana use.
Asked about an Arizona Supreme Court ruling last year that overturned a 2012 state law that made possession or use of marijuana on college campuses a crime, Lambrakis said the school is in the process of reviewing its policies and will not change them in the meantime.
Thirty-three states and Washington, D.C., allow medical marijuana, and 11 states and Washington, D.C., have legalized recreational marijuana, creating clashes with federal law that have been playing out in courts, mostly in employment cases that have had mixed results for medical pot.
There don’t appear to be efforts by recreational marijuana users to challenge college drug policies, observers say. That’s likely because states limit recreational use to people 21 and older, excluding most college students, and because there haven’t been successful legal challenges to campus alcohol policies even though state laws allow people 21 and over to drink, they say.
States with medical marijuana laws allow use by people 18 years or older with a doctor’s recommendation, as well as by minors if their parents approve.
Connecticut nursing student Kathryn Magner sued Sacred Heart University last month after she tested positive for marijuana and was barred from attending required clinical medical rounds, according to her lawsuit. She had begun using marijuana legally in her home state of Massachusetts over the summer to treat conditions that were not disclosed in legal documents.
Connecticut law allows medical marijuana and forbids public and private colleges from discriminating against students who use it. A judge cited the state’s law in ordering that Magner, 22, from Marlborough, Massachusetts, be allowed to return to the medical rounds. The lawsuit was settled under undisclosed terms.
Before the settlement, she stopped using marijuana, passed a drug screening and obtained approval to use medical pot from the Fairfield school’s Office of Student Accessibility to try to salvage her nursing career, her lawsuit said. But nursing school officials wouldn’t budge, her lawsuit said.
“Many schools disability services offices are not universally listened to by the university,” said Michael Thad Allen, an attorney for Magner. “It just shows that these kinds of issues will become more common if employers and schools don’t abide by the law.”
Sacred Heart requires students to “obey the law at all times,” but it treats medical marijuana like other disability-related requests and “seeks to provide reasonable accommodation under the law,” school officials said in a statement.
In Florida, Kaitlin McKeon, of Naples, is suing Nova Southeastern University for expelling her from its nursing program in Fort Myers last year after she tested positive for marijuana. She has a state medical marijuana card to take the drug for several conditions.
McKeon also said school officials told her there would be no problem with her use of medical marijuana under the provisions of state law.
But after she failed the drug test in January 2018, higher-ranking officials moved to expel her, saying she violated the school’s drug policy, her lawsuit says.
“It’s really sad that Nova Southeastern ... took this stance on this issue and is really preventing a really good, caring person from entering the nursing field and living out her dream because she chose a medication that’s legal in Florida but not one that they recognize,” said her lawyer, Michael Minardi.
Nova Southeastern officials said they cannot comment on pending litigation.
The lawsuits have the potential to set legal precedents on the use of medical marijuana at colleges.
In the meantime, advocates say, universities can lighten penalties so students do not face expulsion or suspension for legally using medical marijuana.
“Universities can effectively decriminalize it, de-punish it and make it not something they focus on,” said Jared Moffat, campaigns coordinator for the Marijuana Policy Project, an advocacy group for pro-marijuana laws.
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Colleges are becoming a battleground in the conflict between federal and state marijuana laws as students who use medical pot challenge decades-old campus drug policies.
In states where medical marijuana is legal, students disciplined for using it are taking their schools to court. College officials argue they could lose federal funding for failing to follow federal law that labels cannabis an illegal drug with no accepted medical use.
Sheida Assar said she was expelled from GateWay Community College in Phoenix last month for violating the school’s drug policy after she tested positive for marijuana, which she uses to treat chronic pain from polycystic ovary syndrome.
She was studying diagnostic medical sonography, Assar said, and an instructor had told her she wouldn’t have any problems if she presented her Arizona medical marijuana card. She typically uses marijuana to help her sleep and had never been under the influence in class, she said.
“They yanked me out of class in the middle of the school day,” said Assar, 31, of Chandler, Arizona. “They escorted me to the administration like I was a ... criminal. It’s discrimination, and it also violates my rights under the Arizona medical marijuana law.”
The legal challenges are coming from students studying nursing and other medical specialties who, under school policies, must undergo drug testing.
Assar and other students say they received approval to use medical marijuana from college employees who serve students with health-related needs — only to face discipline from higher-ranking school officials.
Assar said she intends to sue GateWay to recoup the $2,000 she spent on tuition and other educational expenses and seek more money in damages. Her lawyer already has been in contact with the school, she said.
A GateWay spokeswoman, Christine Lambrakis, said that she could not confirm Assar’s status at the school and that the college continues to prohibit marijuana use.
Asked about an Arizona Supreme Court ruling last year that overturned a 2012 state law that made possession or use of marijuana on college campuses a crime, Lambrakis said the school is in the process of reviewing its policies and will not change them in the meantime.
Thirty-three states and Washington, D.C., allow medical marijuana, and 11 states and Washington, D.C., have legalized recreational marijuana, creating clashes with federal law that have been playing out in courts, mostly in employment cases that have had mixed results for medical pot.
There don’t appear to be efforts by recreational marijuana users to challenge college drug policies, observers say. That’s likely because states limit recreational use to people 21 and older, excluding most college students, and because there haven’t been successful legal challenges to campus alcohol policies even though state laws allow people 21 and over to drink, they say.
States with medical marijuana laws allow use by people 18 years or older with a doctor’s recommendation, as well as by minors if their parents approve.
Connecticut nursing student Kathryn Magner sued Sacred Heart University last month after she tested positive for marijuana and was barred from attending required clinical medical rounds, according to her lawsuit. She had begun using marijuana legally in her home state of Massachusetts over the summer to treat conditions that were not disclosed in legal documents.
Connecticut law allows medical marijuana and forbids public and private colleges from discriminating against students who use it. A judge cited the state’s law in ordering that Magner, 22, from Marlborough, Massachusetts, be allowed to return to the medical rounds. The lawsuit was settled under undisclosed terms.
Before the settlement, she stopped using marijuana, passed a drug screening and obtained approval to use medical pot from the Fairfield school’s Office of Student Accessibility to try to salvage her nursing career, her lawsuit said. But nursing school officials wouldn’t budge, her lawsuit said.
“Many schools disability services offices are not universally listened to by the university,” said Michael Thad Allen, an attorney for Magner. “It just shows that these kinds of issues will become more common if employers and schools don’t abide by the law.”
Sacred Heart requires students to “obey the law at all times,” but it treats medical marijuana like other disability-related requests and “seeks to provide reasonable accommodation under the law,” school officials said in a statement.
In Florida, Kaitlin McKeon, of Naples, is suing Nova Southeastern University for expelling her from its nursing program in Fort Myers last year after she tested positive for marijuana. She has a state medical marijuana card to take the drug for several conditions.
McKeon also said school officials told her there would be no problem with her use of medical marijuana under the provisions of state law.
But after she failed the drug test in January 2018, higher-ranking officials moved to expel her, saying she violated the school’s drug policy, her lawsuit says.
“It’s really sad that Nova Southeastern ... took this stance on this issue and is really preventing a really good, caring person from entering the nursing field and living out her dream because she chose a medication that’s legal in Florida but not one that they recognize,” said her lawyer, Michael Minardi.
Nova Southeastern officials said they cannot comment on pending litigation.
The lawsuits have the potential to set legal precedents on the use of medical marijuana at colleges.
In the meantime, advocates say, universities can lighten penalties so students do not face expulsion or suspension for legally using medical marijuana.
“Universities can effectively decriminalize it, de-punish it and make it not something they focus on,” said Jared Moffat, campaigns coordinator for the Marijuana Policy Project, an advocacy group for pro-marijuana laws.
Baron23
Well-Known Member
Let’s break down how Bernie Sanders will legalize marijuana
The senator’s new policy represents the most ambitious and detailed plan of any presidential candidate thus far.
One of the biggest takeaways from Bernie Sanders’ newest policy announcement is also the goofiest. This strategy, which details the steps Sanders would take as president to “ensure permanent legalization of marijuana,” was released at 4:20 p.m. Apparently politicians still think this little bit of weed humor is still cheeky and original in 2019.
We mention that because that small note up top because that weed pun from Sanders’ campaign is potentially the only piece of his policy that wasn’t considered to its fullest extent. The marijuana legalization plan Sanders released this week is among the most ambitious, step-by-step pieces of marijuana policy we’ve seen in some time.
“Too many lives were ruined due to the disastrous criminalization of marijuana,” Sanders tweeted. “Today I am releasing my plan to: Legalize marijuana with executive action, expunge past marijuana convictions, [and] invest in communities most affected by the War on Drugs.”
Sanders first hinted at his plan on the Joe Rogan podcast: In his first 100 days in office, Bernie Sanders would direct the attorney general to declassify marijuana as a controlled substance. This act would effectively legalize cannabis by removing marijuana’s Schedule I drug status, which qualifies as any drug that has no established medical benefit and is considered a highly addictive substance. Both Beto O’Rourke and Elizabeth Warren have promised to deschedule marijuana through executive action, but only Sanders promised to do so within the first 100 days of office.
This plan is also the most detailed of any candidate. Revenue generated by the legal cannabis industry would go back to supporting communities disenfranchised by the War on Drugs, specifically communities of color. Included in that would be a $20 billion grant program positioned inside the Minority Business Development Agency with the intention of supporting “entrepreneurs of color who continue to face discrimination in access to capital.” In addition, Sanders’ plan would create a $10 billion grant program designed at funding businesses located where the effects from the War on Drugs is felt most acutely.
“When it comes to ending prohibition, we cannot go forward without looking back,” Queen Adesuyi, National Affairs Policy Manager for Drug Policy Action, said in a statement. “It is not enough to just legalize marijuana. We must do it the right way, and that means reinvesting in the communities that have been most harmed by the cruel and inhumane policies brought forth through the war on drugs.”
Under Sanders’ direction, there would be a review of all prior marijuana convictions at the state and federal levels. Any current marijuana sentences would be reconsidered by an independent clemency board with the intention of early release. Any old convictions would be expunged.
But nowhere does Sanders separate himself from other presidential candidates than in the world of cannabis business. The senator would urge marijuana businesses not to follow the same path as Big Tobacco, by urging them to become more like non-profits and less like corporations. Any companies “guilty of deceptive marketing” or have produced cancer-causing products like cigarettes would be banned from participating in the cannabis industry. It would also create franchise caps and set forth a network of federal regulations to ensure safety for consumers.
“As the country moves to recognize marijuana and drug use in general as a public health issue, it is crucial that communities directly impacted by criminalization are not left to continue suffering from collateral consequences of convictions or left out of legal economic opportunities,” Adesuyi added. “For other candidates to not consider these components in their platforms would be to deny the harrowing history of how communities of color have been targeted by these policies for the last century.”
The senator’s new policy represents the most ambitious and detailed plan of any presidential candidate thus far.
One of the biggest takeaways from Bernie Sanders’ newest policy announcement is also the goofiest. This strategy, which details the steps Sanders would take as president to “ensure permanent legalization of marijuana,” was released at 4:20 p.m. Apparently politicians still think this little bit of weed humor is still cheeky and original in 2019.
We mention that because that small note up top because that weed pun from Sanders’ campaign is potentially the only piece of his policy that wasn’t considered to its fullest extent. The marijuana legalization plan Sanders released this week is among the most ambitious, step-by-step pieces of marijuana policy we’ve seen in some time.
“Too many lives were ruined due to the disastrous criminalization of marijuana,” Sanders tweeted. “Today I am releasing my plan to: Legalize marijuana with executive action, expunge past marijuana convictions, [and] invest in communities most affected by the War on Drugs.”
Sanders first hinted at his plan on the Joe Rogan podcast: In his first 100 days in office, Bernie Sanders would direct the attorney general to declassify marijuana as a controlled substance. This act would effectively legalize cannabis by removing marijuana’s Schedule I drug status, which qualifies as any drug that has no established medical benefit and is considered a highly addictive substance. Both Beto O’Rourke and Elizabeth Warren have promised to deschedule marijuana through executive action, but only Sanders promised to do so within the first 100 days of office.
This plan is also the most detailed of any candidate. Revenue generated by the legal cannabis industry would go back to supporting communities disenfranchised by the War on Drugs, specifically communities of color. Included in that would be a $20 billion grant program positioned inside the Minority Business Development Agency with the intention of supporting “entrepreneurs of color who continue to face discrimination in access to capital.” In addition, Sanders’ plan would create a $10 billion grant program designed at funding businesses located where the effects from the War on Drugs is felt most acutely.
“When it comes to ending prohibition, we cannot go forward without looking back,” Queen Adesuyi, National Affairs Policy Manager for Drug Policy Action, said in a statement. “It is not enough to just legalize marijuana. We must do it the right way, and that means reinvesting in the communities that have been most harmed by the cruel and inhumane policies brought forth through the war on drugs.”
Under Sanders’ direction, there would be a review of all prior marijuana convictions at the state and federal levels. Any current marijuana sentences would be reconsidered by an independent clemency board with the intention of early release. Any old convictions would be expunged.
But nowhere does Sanders separate himself from other presidential candidates than in the world of cannabis business. The senator would urge marijuana businesses not to follow the same path as Big Tobacco, by urging them to become more like non-profits and less like corporations. Any companies “guilty of deceptive marketing” or have produced cancer-causing products like cigarettes would be banned from participating in the cannabis industry. It would also create franchise caps and set forth a network of federal regulations to ensure safety for consumers.
“As the country moves to recognize marijuana and drug use in general as a public health issue, it is crucial that communities directly impacted by criminalization are not left to continue suffering from collateral consequences of convictions or left out of legal economic opportunities,” Adesuyi added. “For other candidates to not consider these components in their platforms would be to deny the harrowing history of how communities of color have been targeted by these policies for the last century.”
Baron23
Well-Known Member
I cannot comment on the contents of this article without going on a rant....so, I will just leave it here.
Bernie Sanders' Marijuana Legalization Plan: What's He Smoking?
Although legalizing cannabis is what the American public wants, one focus of Sanders' bill would cripple the legal pot industry.
In terms of sales, the marijuana industry has been budding before our eyes. Global revenue more than tripled between 2014 and 2018 to $10.9 billion, and forecasts suggest that legal weed sales will grow many times over in the years that lie ahead.
Yet -- and this may seem strange – marijuana remains illegal in what can easily be called the most lucrative market in the world, the United States.
According to various estimates, the U.S. should be responsible for a third, to perhaps more than half, of global cannabis sales. But this hinges on the federal government's willingness to change its tune on pot. As it has remained for decades, marijuana is classified as a Schedule I drug. That means it's entirely illegal, considered prone to abuse, and not recognized as having any medical benefits.
Right now, the prospects of cannabis reform look terrible at the federal level. However, Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wants to change that perception.
Bernie Sanders unveils his cannabis legalization plan
Last week, Sanders released a multipoint plan designed to legalize marijuana at the federal level within the first 100 days of taking office as president. His plan detailed four major talking points:
To add to the final point, Sanders, who has called on significantly higher tax rates on the wealthy and corporations, would also institute market share and franchise caps that are designed to prevent excess profiteering from minimal competition.
Were Sanders' plan to come to fruition, it would be a major blow to Altria Group (NYSE:MO), which has already sunk $1.8 billion into Cronos Group (NASDAQ:CRON) for a 45% non-diluted stake in the company. Altria, the company behind the famed Marlboro brand, also owns a 35% stake in Juul, the most popular vaping device in the United States.
The thinking has been that Cronos would first work side by side with Altria in Canada to roll out a line of cannabis-based vape products, and eventually transition this then-established line of products to the U.S., if Capitol Hill ever changes its view of marijuana. Under Sanders' legalization plan, there would be no place for Altria in the U.S. market, which would cut off a major source of future revenue.
Sanders needs a reality check
In many respects, Sanders' legalization plan reflects the will of the people. For example, the latest national survey from Gallup earlier this month showed that 66% of Americans favor the idea of legalizing recreational pot. Using executive action to make this happen would probably sit well with a lot of Americans.
Furthermore, Sanders' plan follows in the footsteps of legislation recently passed in Illinois, which not only legalized recreational marijuana in the Land of Lincoln but also aims to expunge the convictions of nearly 800,000 non-violent criminals who purchased or possessed cannabis.
However, Sanders' planned usage of $50 billion in revenue from the sale of legal cannabis should have a lot of folks asking, "What's he smoking?"
One of the ways Sanders plans to help communities that were hit hard by the War on Drugs is by putting $50 billion in collected legal marijuana tax revenue to work in a variety of ways:
Sounds great, right? Just one problem -- Sanders didn't lay out any specifics on how the federal government is going to raise $50 billion in revenue from the sale of legal cannabis, other than through "new tax resources."
More importantly, Sanders needs a pretty serious reality check if he thinks the federal government is going to be able to slap an additional tax on top of legalized cannabis without adversely affecting legal channels.
California showed us what happens when you overtax legal marijuana
Take California as a perfect example. In November 2016, California residents voted to pass Proposition 64, thereby legalizing recreational marijuana. This legalization effort was expected to fairly quickly yield more than $1 billion in tax revenue for the Golden State. Yet in the first year of adult-use sales, aggregate pot revenue fell (yes, fell) by $500 million to $2.5 billion, and collected tax revenue was almost half of what was initially expected. In other words, California sold more medical marijuana in 2017 than it did of combined medical and recreational weed in 2018.
What gives? In addition to state and local sales tax, which are a fixture on all goods sold within the state, California tacks on a 15% excise tax for adult-use marijuana sales, as well as a wholesale tax on dried flower or cannabis leaves. As a whole, this tax rate can reach as high as 45% in some locales, and it still doesn't account for other added costs that are passed onto consumers, such as laboratory testing by cannabis distributors to ensure product purity and quality. In essence, legal marijuana is so much pricier than black-market weed that consumers have simply decided to stick with their black-market suppliers.
With this evidence in mind, Sanders' plan to raise $50 billion in marijuana tax revenue at the federal level without leading to any adverse repercussions to the legal channel is just absurd. Mind you, I'm not picking on any other specifics of Sanders' plan here, which seem to jibe with the popular opinion of Americans. Rather, my beef with Sanders' plan lies solely with the tax component, which would make legal marijuana even more expensive and further widen the pricing gap between legal pot and illicit producers.
To be blunt, Sanders' plan has virtually no chance of succeeding.
Bernie Sanders' Marijuana Legalization Plan: What's He Smoking?
Although legalizing cannabis is what the American public wants, one focus of Sanders' bill would cripple the legal pot industry.
In terms of sales, the marijuana industry has been budding before our eyes. Global revenue more than tripled between 2014 and 2018 to $10.9 billion, and forecasts suggest that legal weed sales will grow many times over in the years that lie ahead.
Yet -- and this may seem strange – marijuana remains illegal in what can easily be called the most lucrative market in the world, the United States.
According to various estimates, the U.S. should be responsible for a third, to perhaps more than half, of global cannabis sales. But this hinges on the federal government's willingness to change its tune on pot. As it has remained for decades, marijuana is classified as a Schedule I drug. That means it's entirely illegal, considered prone to abuse, and not recognized as having any medical benefits.
Right now, the prospects of cannabis reform look terrible at the federal level. However, Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wants to change that perception.
Bernie Sanders unveils his cannabis legalization plan
Last week, Sanders released a multipoint plan designed to legalize marijuana at the federal level within the first 100 days of taking office as president. His plan detailed four major talking points:
- Marijuana would be legalized by executive order within the first 100 days.
- All previous cannabis convictions at the federal and state level would be reviewed for expungement and/or resentencing.
- Communities hit hardest by the War on Drugs would be the likeliest to benefit from marijuana's legalization.
- Cannabis nonprofits would be promoted while ensuring that Big Tobacco is excluded from participating in the rise of the U.S. cannabis industry.
To add to the final point, Sanders, who has called on significantly higher tax rates on the wealthy and corporations, would also institute market share and franchise caps that are designed to prevent excess profiteering from minimal competition.
Were Sanders' plan to come to fruition, it would be a major blow to Altria Group (NYSE:MO), which has already sunk $1.8 billion into Cronos Group (NASDAQ:CRON) for a 45% non-diluted stake in the company. Altria, the company behind the famed Marlboro brand, also owns a 35% stake in Juul, the most popular vaping device in the United States.
The thinking has been that Cronos would first work side by side with Altria in Canada to roll out a line of cannabis-based vape products, and eventually transition this then-established line of products to the U.S., if Capitol Hill ever changes its view of marijuana. Under Sanders' legalization plan, there would be no place for Altria in the U.S. market, which would cut off a major source of future revenue.
Sanders needs a reality check
In many respects, Sanders' legalization plan reflects the will of the people. For example, the latest national survey from Gallup earlier this month showed that 66% of Americans favor the idea of legalizing recreational pot. Using executive action to make this happen would probably sit well with a lot of Americans.
Furthermore, Sanders' plan follows in the footsteps of legislation recently passed in Illinois, which not only legalized recreational marijuana in the Land of Lincoln but also aims to expunge the convictions of nearly 800,000 non-violent criminals who purchased or possessed cannabis.
However, Sanders' planned usage of $50 billion in revenue from the sale of legal cannabis should have a lot of folks asking, "What's he smoking?"
One of the ways Sanders plans to help communities that were hit hard by the War on Drugs is by putting $50 billion in collected legal marijuana tax revenue to work in a variety of ways:
- $20 billion is to be used to "provide grants to entrepreneurs of color who continue to face discrimination in access to capital."
- $10 billion will go to create a grant access program for business that are at least 51% owned or controlled by folks who were arrested or convicted of a marijuana offense, or live in a community disproportionately affected by the War on Drugs.
- $10 billion would set up a U.S. Department of Agriculture grant program to help disproportionately affected areas and people who've been arrested or convicted of a cannabis offense.
- $10 billion would go toward a "targeted economic and community development fund to provide grants to communities hit hardest by the War on Drugs."
Sounds great, right? Just one problem -- Sanders didn't lay out any specifics on how the federal government is going to raise $50 billion in revenue from the sale of legal cannabis, other than through "new tax resources."
More importantly, Sanders needs a pretty serious reality check if he thinks the federal government is going to be able to slap an additional tax on top of legalized cannabis without adversely affecting legal channels.
California showed us what happens when you overtax legal marijuana
Take California as a perfect example. In November 2016, California residents voted to pass Proposition 64, thereby legalizing recreational marijuana. This legalization effort was expected to fairly quickly yield more than $1 billion in tax revenue for the Golden State. Yet in the first year of adult-use sales, aggregate pot revenue fell (yes, fell) by $500 million to $2.5 billion, and collected tax revenue was almost half of what was initially expected. In other words, California sold more medical marijuana in 2017 than it did of combined medical and recreational weed in 2018.
What gives? In addition to state and local sales tax, which are a fixture on all goods sold within the state, California tacks on a 15% excise tax for adult-use marijuana sales, as well as a wholesale tax on dried flower or cannabis leaves. As a whole, this tax rate can reach as high as 45% in some locales, and it still doesn't account for other added costs that are passed onto consumers, such as laboratory testing by cannabis distributors to ensure product purity and quality. In essence, legal marijuana is so much pricier than black-market weed that consumers have simply decided to stick with their black-market suppliers.
With this evidence in mind, Sanders' plan to raise $50 billion in marijuana tax revenue at the federal level without leading to any adverse repercussions to the legal channel is just absurd. Mind you, I'm not picking on any other specifics of Sanders' plan here, which seem to jibe with the popular opinion of Americans. Rather, my beef with Sanders' plan lies solely with the tax component, which would make legal marijuana even more expensive and further widen the pricing gap between legal pot and illicit producers.
To be blunt, Sanders' plan has virtually no chance of succeeding.
Baron23
Well-Known Member
Thsi goes directly to some local police putting truck drivers in jail for transporting hemp.
Getting hemp across State lines just got easier thanks to a new Law that just passed
The Trump administration has announced a long-awaited rule on domestic hemp production that could help relieve legal snags for trucking companies and drivers hauling the crop across state lines.
The U.S. Domestic Hemp Production Program, announced today (Oct. 29) by U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Sonny Perdue, creates "a consistent regulatory framework around hemp production throughout the United States," as required by the 2018 Farm Bill, which removed hemp from the list of controlled substances.
"At USDA, we are always excited when there are new economic opportunities for our farmers, and we hope the ability to grow hemp will pave the way for new products and markets," Perdue said in a statement. "We have had teams operating with all hands on deck to develop a regulatory framework that meets congressional intent while seeking to provide a fair, consistent and science-based process for states, tribes and individual producers who want to participate in this program."
Concurrent with the rule, USDA also issued guidelines for sampling and testing procedures to provide additional information for sampling agents and hemp testing laboratories.
The agency said the 160-page interim rule will aid in the production, harvesting, transportation, storage and processing of hemp and hemp products. "Absent an interim rule promptly implementing the regulatory program required by the 2018 Farm Bill, there are no procedures in place to determine whether a cannabis crop qualifies as hemp" as defined by current law, the agency said.
Prior to the administration's rolling out this interim final rule (IFR), trucking companies and drivers hauling hemp across state lines have come up against legal problems in states that don't distinguish between hemp and marijuana. The IFR provides more guidance for law enforcement officials who must make those distinctions, according to USDA.
"While the States and Tribes may not prohibit the transportation of hemp produced under the 2014 Farm Bill, law enforcement does not currently have the means to quickly verify whether the cannabis being transported is hemp or marijuana," the agency states. "The IFR will assist law enforcement in identifying lawfully produced hemp versus other forms of cannabis that may not be lawfully transported in interstate commerce."
The IFR will also presumably put regulatory force behind a legal opinion issued by USDA earlier this year that helped mitigate some of the uncertainty for drivers hauling hemp across state lines.
USDA noted that the IFR doesn't address hemp exports. "Should there be sufficient interest in exporting hemp in the future, USDA will work with industry and other Federal agencies to help facilitate this process."
The IFR becomes effective upon publication in the Federal Register, which is expected later in the week, and USDA will also provide for a comment period. If the agency had added a subsequent formal notice and comment period after that, it would have pushed the effective date of the program "well beyond 2020 and into 2021 and [delayed] guidance that stakeholders sorely need," it stated.
The banking industry, for example, has been waiting for regulations to develop their own guidance regarding deposits derived from hemp operations, according to USDA, without which they're not willing risk accepting deposits or lending money to hemp businesses.
In addition, USDA stated, having a rule that goes into effect this fall will allow producers to plan for the 2020 crop year, including identifying planting acreage, obtaining financing and contracting with potential buyers.
Getting hemp across State lines just got easier thanks to a new Law that just passed
The Trump administration has announced a long-awaited rule on domestic hemp production that could help relieve legal snags for trucking companies and drivers hauling the crop across state lines.
The U.S. Domestic Hemp Production Program, announced today (Oct. 29) by U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Sonny Perdue, creates "a consistent regulatory framework around hemp production throughout the United States," as required by the 2018 Farm Bill, which removed hemp from the list of controlled substances.
"At USDA, we are always excited when there are new economic opportunities for our farmers, and we hope the ability to grow hemp will pave the way for new products and markets," Perdue said in a statement. "We have had teams operating with all hands on deck to develop a regulatory framework that meets congressional intent while seeking to provide a fair, consistent and science-based process for states, tribes and individual producers who want to participate in this program."
Concurrent with the rule, USDA also issued guidelines for sampling and testing procedures to provide additional information for sampling agents and hemp testing laboratories.
The agency said the 160-page interim rule will aid in the production, harvesting, transportation, storage and processing of hemp and hemp products. "Absent an interim rule promptly implementing the regulatory program required by the 2018 Farm Bill, there are no procedures in place to determine whether a cannabis crop qualifies as hemp" as defined by current law, the agency said.
Prior to the administration's rolling out this interim final rule (IFR), trucking companies and drivers hauling hemp across state lines have come up against legal problems in states that don't distinguish between hemp and marijuana. The IFR provides more guidance for law enforcement officials who must make those distinctions, according to USDA.
"While the States and Tribes may not prohibit the transportation of hemp produced under the 2014 Farm Bill, law enforcement does not currently have the means to quickly verify whether the cannabis being transported is hemp or marijuana," the agency states. "The IFR will assist law enforcement in identifying lawfully produced hemp versus other forms of cannabis that may not be lawfully transported in interstate commerce."
The IFR will also presumably put regulatory force behind a legal opinion issued by USDA earlier this year that helped mitigate some of the uncertainty for drivers hauling hemp across state lines.
USDA noted that the IFR doesn't address hemp exports. "Should there be sufficient interest in exporting hemp in the future, USDA will work with industry and other Federal agencies to help facilitate this process."
The IFR becomes effective upon publication in the Federal Register, which is expected later in the week, and USDA will also provide for a comment period. If the agency had added a subsequent formal notice and comment period after that, it would have pushed the effective date of the program "well beyond 2020 and into 2021 and [delayed] guidance that stakeholders sorely need," it stated.
The banking industry, for example, has been waiting for regulations to develop their own guidance regarding deposits derived from hemp operations, according to USDA, without which they're not willing risk accepting deposits or lending money to hemp businesses.
In addition, USDA stated, having a rule that goes into effect this fall will allow producers to plan for the 2020 crop year, including identifying planting acreage, obtaining financing and contracting with potential buyers.
Baron23
Well-Known Member
I'm going to quit posting these polls. They have been very consistent and very clear that a majority of the American electorate favor legalization.
Our elected and over paid "representatives" should be ashamed of themselves looking at these numbers and their refusal to take appropriate representative action. But politicians in American have had no shame or capacity for embarassment for quite some time. Mendacity is the word of the day.
60 percent of Americans support marijuana legalization — times are changing
According to a poll released last week by Gallup, there appears to be no buyer’s remorse on the part of the American people when it comes to their support for the legalization of marijuana. In fact, as more states move to end cannabis criminalization, Americans’ support for legalizing and regulating marijuana has only grown stronger.
Sixty-six percent of Americans now say that they endorse legalization, a total that is consistent with other recent polls and that is nearly 30 percent higher than 2012 totals — when Colorado and Washington became the first two states to legalize adult marijuana use.
A separate nationwide poll also released last week by PPRI (the Public Religion Research Institute) similarly reported that two in three Americans support legalizing and regulating the plant.
The new Gallup poll finds that support for legalization is held by majorities of Democrats (76 percent), Republicans (51 percent), and Independents (68 percent). Further, every age demographic below 65, representing the overwhelming majority of the taxpaying public, would rather their dollars be spent to regulate cannabis, not incarcerate its consumers.
Right now, many states are light-years ahead of Congress when it comes to regulating marijuana. To date, eleven states and Washington, D.C. have legalized the adult-use and possession of cannabis.
Furthermore, 33 states and Washington, D.C. have enacted regulatory access laws that allow qualified patients to obtain and use cannabis therapeutically and many of these states continue to pass significant expansions to their programs. An additional thirteen states have passed laws specific to the possession of cannabidiol (CBD) extracts for therapeutic purposes. CBD is an organic compound in the cannabis plant.
In total, 46 states have enacted statutory laws specific to the possession and use of either whole-plant cannabis or extracted cannabinoids that are in direct violation of the federal law, which classifies cannabis as a Schedule 1 prohibited substance. This contradiction undermines the very premise of the American belief in the rule of law.
But, even within the halls of Congress, there are signs that times are changing.
Just last month, The SAFE Banking Act was taken up by the full House and passed by a bipartisan vote of 321-103, becoming the first stand-alone cannabis legislation to legitimize the retail sale of marijuana in the U.S.
At the time of the bill’s passage, multiple commitments were made to take up a Judiciary Committee bill.
Conveniently waiting in the wings is Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) Marijuana Opportunity, Reinvestment, and Expungement (MORE) Act, comprehensive legislation to end federal marijuana criminalization.
The act removes the marijuana plant from the federal Controlled Substances Act, requires the federal courts to expunge prior marijuana-related convictions, and provides grants to communities that have been disproportionately impacted by the drug war to facilitate record expungements, assist local governments in setting up accessible licensing structures that promote consumer safety, and other needed changes.
Clearly, the age of marijuana prohibition is nearing its end. The question is which political leaders will cast their votes on the right side of history and how long will it take until we find out.
Our elected and over paid "representatives" should be ashamed of themselves looking at these numbers and their refusal to take appropriate representative action. But politicians in American have had no shame or capacity for embarassment for quite some time. Mendacity is the word of the day.
60 percent of Americans support marijuana legalization — times are changing
According to a poll released last week by Gallup, there appears to be no buyer’s remorse on the part of the American people when it comes to their support for the legalization of marijuana. In fact, as more states move to end cannabis criminalization, Americans’ support for legalizing and regulating marijuana has only grown stronger.
Sixty-six percent of Americans now say that they endorse legalization, a total that is consistent with other recent polls and that is nearly 30 percent higher than 2012 totals — when Colorado and Washington became the first two states to legalize adult marijuana use.
A separate nationwide poll also released last week by PPRI (the Public Religion Research Institute) similarly reported that two in three Americans support legalizing and regulating the plant.
The new Gallup poll finds that support for legalization is held by majorities of Democrats (76 percent), Republicans (51 percent), and Independents (68 percent). Further, every age demographic below 65, representing the overwhelming majority of the taxpaying public, would rather their dollars be spent to regulate cannabis, not incarcerate its consumers.
Right now, many states are light-years ahead of Congress when it comes to regulating marijuana. To date, eleven states and Washington, D.C. have legalized the adult-use and possession of cannabis.
Furthermore, 33 states and Washington, D.C. have enacted regulatory access laws that allow qualified patients to obtain and use cannabis therapeutically and many of these states continue to pass significant expansions to their programs. An additional thirteen states have passed laws specific to the possession of cannabidiol (CBD) extracts for therapeutic purposes. CBD is an organic compound in the cannabis plant.
In total, 46 states have enacted statutory laws specific to the possession and use of either whole-plant cannabis or extracted cannabinoids that are in direct violation of the federal law, which classifies cannabis as a Schedule 1 prohibited substance. This contradiction undermines the very premise of the American belief in the rule of law.
But, even within the halls of Congress, there are signs that times are changing.
Just last month, The SAFE Banking Act was taken up by the full House and passed by a bipartisan vote of 321-103, becoming the first stand-alone cannabis legislation to legitimize the retail sale of marijuana in the U.S.
At the time of the bill’s passage, multiple commitments were made to take up a Judiciary Committee bill.
Conveniently waiting in the wings is Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) Marijuana Opportunity, Reinvestment, and Expungement (MORE) Act, comprehensive legislation to end federal marijuana criminalization.
The act removes the marijuana plant from the federal Controlled Substances Act, requires the federal courts to expunge prior marijuana-related convictions, and provides grants to communities that have been disproportionately impacted by the drug war to facilitate record expungements, assist local governments in setting up accessible licensing structures that promote consumer safety, and other needed changes.
Clearly, the age of marijuana prohibition is nearing its end. The question is which political leaders will cast their votes on the right side of history and how long will it take until we find out.
Baron23
Well-Known Member
Senate Approves Bill Protecting Medical Marijuana States From Federal Intervention
The Senate approved spending legislation on Thursday that extends a provision protecting medical marijuana states from federal interference—but the question remains as to whether a House-passed version with broader protections for all state cannabis programs could still be adopted in the final bill that’s sent to the president.
The so-called “minibus” appropriations legislation covers funding for Commerce, Justice, Science, Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, Interior, Environment, Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, Transportation and Housing and Urban Development for the 2020 fiscal year.
The vote on the bill, which also includes new hemp and CBD-related language, was 84 to 9.
The medical cannabis provision in question prohibits the Department of Justice from using its resources to prosecute individuals acting in compliance with state laws. The rider has been in place and renewed each year since 2014.
But after the House passed a Justice Department spending bill in June that for the first time would extend those protections to all state cannabis programs, including those allowing recreational use and sales, some advocates hoped the Senate would follow suit. In the lead up to a committee markup where that would have happened, however, several senators told Marijuana Moment that the prospects were unlikely, as congressional leaders made a bicameral agreement not to add new policy riders in the appropriations process unless agreed to by leadership on a bipartisan basis.
Now the only chance that Congress will send the broader provision to President Trump’s desk for 2020 is if negotiators on a bicameral conference committee agree to put the House language in the final package, though there is a chance that the larger chamber could simply approve the bill as passed by the Senate in an effort to avoid a government shutdown that would occur if no spending legislation is signed into law by November 21.
“It’s our hope that the House will insist that today’s minibus appropriations package include the provision to restrict the Department of Justice from interfering with state-legal marijuana programs that passed with bipartisan support,” said Justin Strekal, political director for NORML.
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) introduced a separate amendment to the large-scale appropriations bill last week that would have called on the attorney general to study the criminal justice implications of marijuana legalization, but the measure was not considered on the Senate floor.
The medical marijuana protections language isn’t the only cannabis-related rider that has advanced via the spending process this year. The Senate Appropriations Committee also approved legislation that includes existing policies barring Washington, D.C. from using its local tax dollars to implement a legal marijuana market, in addition to a provision providing funds to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to enact regulations for a legal hemp program.
The latter language is included in the minibus the Senate approved on Thursday, as are report provisions urging the Food and Drug Administration to issue enforcement discretion guidelines for CBD, encouraging the Farm Credit Administration to provide services to hemp businesses and supporting “competitive USDA grants for hemp projects.”
The hemp riders are timely given that USDA unveiled draft rules for hemp, which was federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill, on Tuesday. The interim final rule will be formally adopted following a 60-day public comment period.
Another House-passed appropriations bill also includes protections for banks that work with the marijuana industry, and the rider preventing D.C. from establishing a cannabis market was removed from the chamber’s version of the legislation.
While the Republican-controlled Senate is mostly sticking to the agreement not to add new policy riders to appropriations legislation, it could soon take up a separate, standalone marijuana bill: the Secure and Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act, which would allow banks to service cannabis businesses without being penalized by federal regulators.
The House overwhelmingly approved that legislation in September, along largely bipartisan lines, and the chair of the Senate Banking Committee said recently that he plans to take up the legislation in his panel before the year’s end. He also outlined several changes he’d like to see to the House-passed version in an interview with Marijuana Moment.
The Senate approved spending legislation on Thursday that extends a provision protecting medical marijuana states from federal interference—but the question remains as to whether a House-passed version with broader protections for all state cannabis programs could still be adopted in the final bill that’s sent to the president.
The so-called “minibus” appropriations legislation covers funding for Commerce, Justice, Science, Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, Interior, Environment, Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, Transportation and Housing and Urban Development for the 2020 fiscal year.
The vote on the bill, which also includes new hemp and CBD-related language, was 84 to 9.
The medical cannabis provision in question prohibits the Department of Justice from using its resources to prosecute individuals acting in compliance with state laws. The rider has been in place and renewed each year since 2014.
But after the House passed a Justice Department spending bill in June that for the first time would extend those protections to all state cannabis programs, including those allowing recreational use and sales, some advocates hoped the Senate would follow suit. In the lead up to a committee markup where that would have happened, however, several senators told Marijuana Moment that the prospects were unlikely, as congressional leaders made a bicameral agreement not to add new policy riders in the appropriations process unless agreed to by leadership on a bipartisan basis.
Now the only chance that Congress will send the broader provision to President Trump’s desk for 2020 is if negotiators on a bicameral conference committee agree to put the House language in the final package, though there is a chance that the larger chamber could simply approve the bill as passed by the Senate in an effort to avoid a government shutdown that would occur if no spending legislation is signed into law by November 21.
“It’s our hope that the House will insist that today’s minibus appropriations package include the provision to restrict the Department of Justice from interfering with state-legal marijuana programs that passed with bipartisan support,” said Justin Strekal, political director for NORML.
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) introduced a separate amendment to the large-scale appropriations bill last week that would have called on the attorney general to study the criminal justice implications of marijuana legalization, but the measure was not considered on the Senate floor.
The medical marijuana protections language isn’t the only cannabis-related rider that has advanced via the spending process this year. The Senate Appropriations Committee also approved legislation that includes existing policies barring Washington, D.C. from using its local tax dollars to implement a legal marijuana market, in addition to a provision providing funds to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to enact regulations for a legal hemp program.
The latter language is included in the minibus the Senate approved on Thursday, as are report provisions urging the Food and Drug Administration to issue enforcement discretion guidelines for CBD, encouraging the Farm Credit Administration to provide services to hemp businesses and supporting “competitive USDA grants for hemp projects.”
The hemp riders are timely given that USDA unveiled draft rules for hemp, which was federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill, on Tuesday. The interim final rule will be formally adopted following a 60-day public comment period.
Another House-passed appropriations bill also includes protections for banks that work with the marijuana industry, and the rider preventing D.C. from establishing a cannabis market was removed from the chamber’s version of the legislation.
While the Republican-controlled Senate is mostly sticking to the agreement not to add new policy riders to appropriations legislation, it could soon take up a separate, standalone marijuana bill: the Secure and Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act, which would allow banks to service cannabis businesses without being penalized by federal regulators.
The House overwhelmingly approved that legislation in September, along largely bipartisan lines, and the chair of the Senate Banking Committee said recently that he plans to take up the legislation in his panel before the year’s end. He also outlined several changes he’d like to see to the House-passed version in an interview with Marijuana Moment.
ClearBlueLou
Well-Known Member
What-abouting evades the subject, doesn’t deal with it. I leave it here.
Baron23
Well-Known Member
Senate Approves Bill Protecting Medical Marijuana States From Federal Intervention
The U.S. Senate on Thursday approved a spending bill that includes a provision that would continue to protect state-legal medical marijuana programs from U.S. Department of Justice interference.
The provision, which would be good for a year, was included for the first time in the House fiscal year 2020 Commerce-Justice-Science bill.In the past, the provision has been tacked on as an amendment either on the House floor or in committee.
The Senate passed the spending bill with the medical marijuana protections by an 84-9 vote.
The measure specifically prohibits the Justice Department from using any funds to prevent states from implementing medical marijuana laws.
It doesn’t protect recreational marijuana programs, however.
In a landmark step earlier this year, the U.S. House voted to protect both state-legal medical and recreational marijuana programs.
But such broad protection isn’t seen as likely to be included in the final congressional spending bill.
Marijuana industry officials want a permanent solution to these temporary protections.
The leading comprehensive federal reform bill is the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act of 2019 introduced by U.S. House Judiciary Chair Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, and Sen. Kamala Harris, a California Democrat and presidential candidate.
The U.S. Senate on Thursday approved a spending bill that includes a provision that would continue to protect state-legal medical marijuana programs from U.S. Department of Justice interference.
The provision, which would be good for a year, was included for the first time in the House fiscal year 2020 Commerce-Justice-Science bill.In the past, the provision has been tacked on as an amendment either on the House floor or in committee.
The Senate passed the spending bill with the medical marijuana protections by an 84-9 vote.
The measure specifically prohibits the Justice Department from using any funds to prevent states from implementing medical marijuana laws.
It doesn’t protect recreational marijuana programs, however.
In a landmark step earlier this year, the U.S. House voted to protect both state-legal medical and recreational marijuana programs.
But such broad protection isn’t seen as likely to be included in the final congressional spending bill.
Marijuana industry officials want a permanent solution to these temporary protections.
The leading comprehensive federal reform bill is the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act of 2019 introduced by U.S. House Judiciary Chair Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, and Sen. Kamala Harris, a California Democrat and presidential candidate.
Baron23
Well-Known Member
"California residents could be paying up to a 45% tax rate on cannabis."
Well, the politicians in CA are getting what they deserve for their greed, a thriving black market that undermines the legal market. Like this was not at all foreseeable by those sages we elect to office, eh?
Cannabis industry pink slips keep rolling in
Over the coming decade, cannabis is liable to be one of the fastest-growing industries in the world. Although estimates on Wall Street vary wildly -- which is to be expected in an industry that has no modern legal precedent -- the legal pot industry could see sales rise between five and 18 times by 2030 over the $10.9 billion generated in 2018.
Marijuana is also forecast to be a significant job creator. As of early 2019, more than 211,000 jobs were now tied to the U.S. cannabis industry -- the U.S. is the crown jewel of the global marijuana market -- with 64,000 jobs added in 2018 alone.
As the North American weed market expands, the expectation is that job opportunities will continue to bud in the marijuana space. And remember, this isn't just about growing. Opportunities exist for processors, delivery, and a host of ancillary needs, such as financing, real estate, and consulting specialists.
Job cuts are becoming a norm in the marijuana industry
However, the rapidly growing cannabis jobs market appears to have hit a snag. Over the past month, five notable public and private players have announced job cuts. In no particular order, these are:
- HEXO (NYSE:HEXO): In its preliminary fourth-quarter update, HEXO announced that it would be cutting 200 jobs from a variety of departments to better align with industry challenges. HEXO wound up blaming a trio of problems for this surprising move.
- CannTrust (NYSE:CTST): On the same day that HEXO gave word of pending job cuts, embattled grower CannTrust said that it would be temporarily shedding up to 140 jobs, given that its cultivation and sales licenses are suspended by Health Canada. CannTrust hopes to rehire these workers next year, after it regains compliance (and its licenses). The company aims to save 400,000 Canadian dollars a month with these layoffs.
- Eaze: California-based delivery service Eaze announced in early October that it would be cutting about 20% of its workforce (36 people), although it didn't offer much in the way of specifics behind why the cuts were needed.
- Weedmaps: In mid-October, marijuana advertiser Weedmaps announced that it was laying off 100 workers, or a quarter of its workforce. The company cited weaker funding prospects and a slower-than-expected launch of recreational marijuana in California and Massachusetts for the cuts.
- PAX Labs: Just this past week, popular vape device-maker PAX Labs disclosed that it was cutting 65 jobs, or a quarter of its labor force, following a revenue miss. The ongoing vape-related health scare may also have something to do with these layoffs, but PAX didn't mention this in its disclosure.
Why Canadian pot companies are cutting jobs
In Canada, there are a variety of regulatory and procedural issues pressuring the marijuana industry.
Regulatory agency Health Canada, for instance, has been unable to keep up with an enormous backlog of cultivation and sales license applications. Even though changes have been made to the growing license-application process, Health Canada isn't going to work its way through this backlog anytime soon. This has led to exceptionally long wait times to gain clearance to grow or sell cannabis, and it's driven a lot of consumers to illicit producers.
Likewise, marijuana shortages can be traced to the slow rollout of physical dispensaries in certain provinces. Ontario, for example, has one open dispensary for every 604,200 people in the province. Ontario could probably house as many as 1,000 retail locations, and this slow rollout is ensuring that little legal product is winding up in the hands of consumers. HEXO specifically cited the lack of retail dispensaries in certain provinces as one of the reasons it trimmed its fourth-quarter sales guidance and cut 200 jobs.
Canadian pot companies are also dealing with a practically insurmountable pricing gap between legal weed and black market marijuana. In the third quarter, Statistics Canada reported that black market marijuana was 45% cheaper on a per-gram basis than legal pot. This is what coerced HEXO to recently announce the launch of Original Stash, a value brand designed to compete with black market marijuana on price. Though this line could be successful on a volume basis, it could cripple HEXO's margins.
Here's why U.S. cannabis businesses are trimming jobs
Comparatively, U.S. cannabis jobs are being lost predominantly as a result of high tax rates.
In California, legal marijuana consumers are paying a state and local tax, as well as a 15% excise tax, and a wholesale tax that varies based on whether the product is in the form of leaves or dried flower. Depending on the locale, California residents could be paying up to a 45% tax rate on cannabis.
Additionally, this doesn't factor in the costs of laboratory testing done by distributors, which you can be sure are being passed along in the final price of legal pot. There's simply no way that legal marijuana in the Golden State can compete with black market prices, which is why total weed sales actually fell in 2018, the first year of recreational pot legalization, to $2.5 billion from $3 billion in 2017, when only medical marijuana was legal.
A sort of Swiss cheese legalization effort at the state level is also causing problems. Even though 11 states have given the green light to adult-use marijuana, municipalities have the final say on whether a retail location can be opened or not. In California, close to 80% of the state's municipalities have banned recreational pot stores thus far. This is another means by which consumers continue to be funneled into the black market.
And don't forget the lack of financing options in the United States. Since cannabis remains classified as a Schedule I drug at the federal level -- i.e., entirely illegal, prone to abuse, and not recognized as having medical benefits -- banks have been mostly unwilling to work with pot businesses. This means little or no access to basic banking services, even including something as simple as a checking account.
While many of these North American problems are fixable, none of these issues is going to be remedied overnight. This means cannabis companies have no choice but to align their workforces to match up with the currently challenging conditions throughout North America.
ClearBlueLou
Well-Known Member
Reads like a hit piece.
No link to Sanders’ plan, no confidence in the conveyance of the elements of Sanders plan.
The problem comes when the rendered version of Sander’s plan is used to support unwarranted assumptions (“Bernie’s plan” NOT in evidence), then used those unsupported and unchecked assumption to declare “the plan” dead on arrival.
i strongly suspect Sanders referred to a breakdown of a HYPOTHETICAL 50b of pot-tax revenue.
I strongly suspect it was left out deliberately in order to paint it as another leftist excuse to “raise those taxes...”
I will go find out.
(musical interlude)
Okay, it was not as I suspected. There IS a link to his plan page, dunno what it wasn’t working before.
However, there much more to his proposal than mentioned in the article: which focuses almost entirely on business impact and Bernie’s stated tax use. I still think that the ’conservative’ talking point is obvious. Remember, taxes are only imposed by fiat when it’s a *private* party imposing them.
I would be disappointed if tax pressure were INCREASED by descheduling/decriminalization. I think that would prove we’re doing it wrong.
No link to Sanders’ plan, no confidence in the conveyance of the elements of Sanders plan.
The problem comes when the rendered version of Sander’s plan is used to support unwarranted assumptions (“Bernie’s plan” NOT in evidence), then used those unsupported and unchecked assumption to declare “the plan” dead on arrival.
i strongly suspect Sanders referred to a breakdown of a HYPOTHETICAL 50b of pot-tax revenue.
I strongly suspect it was left out deliberately in order to paint it as another leftist excuse to “raise those taxes...”
I will go find out.
(musical interlude)
Okay, it was not as I suspected. There IS a link to his plan page, dunno what it wasn’t working before.
However, there much more to his proposal than mentioned in the article: which focuses almost entirely on business impact and Bernie’s stated tax use. I still think that the ’conservative’ talking point is obvious. Remember, taxes are only imposed by fiat when it’s a *private* party imposing them.
I would be disappointed if tax pressure were INCREASED by descheduling/decriminalization. I think that would prove we’re doing it wrong.
Last edited:
Baron23
Well-Known Member
You just had to go there, yeah?
I mean, everybody knows that High Green News and the Motley Fool (the OG source of the article) are well known conservative rag sheets, right?
Have a great day, mate.
ClearBlueLou
Well-Known Member
I went to both sites, read the original
Guess I ‘had to go there’, but my perspective may be flawed and my perception faulty.
It would help if you would point out the justification in the amalgamated article for declaring Sanders‘ determination to raise taxes, ’cause I sure looked for it.
Or we can drop it, and I can stop commenting: I’m not here to start anything...but I’m not here to keep quiet just because I see something differently, either.
Guess I ‘had to go there’, but my perspective may be flawed and my perception faulty.
It would help if you would point out the justification in the amalgamated article for declaring Sanders‘ determination to raise taxes, ’cause I sure looked for it.
Or we can drop it, and I can stop commenting: I’m not here to start anything...but I’m not here to keep quiet just because I see something differently, either.
Number Of Banks Working With Marijuana Businesses Levels Off, Federal Data Shows
The number of banks and credit unions that service the marijuana industry largely leveled off in the last quarter, according to new federal data released late last week. And that market trend could reflect shifting expectations among financial institutions about the likelihood of Congress approving cannabis banking legislation.
While the House did eventually pass the Secure and Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act, which would shield banks that accept marijuana business clients from being penalized by federal regulators, that vote happened just five days before the end of the fourth quarter of the federal fiscal year and not prior to the summer recess weeks earlier, as had previously been expected.
Marijuana Moment first reported that a vote was imminent about two weeks prior to the House action.
It’s possible that banks were waiting to see the congressional action before further servicing the market and were disappointed that the Democratic-controlled chamber did not act on the legislation before lawmakers broke for the summer break. Previous quarters have seen significant upticks in the number of banks and credit unions working with marijuana businesses, especially since the end of 2018.
But this last quarter, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) reported that 563 banks and 160 credit unions were serving cannabis companies as of September 30, compared to 553 banks and 162 credit unions at the end of the previous quarter. That’s a small increase for banks and a slight dip for credit unions, signaling a shift in pace as lawmakers work to get the bipartisan banking bill to the president’s desk.
But now that the House has acted, and signals point to the Senate following suit, industry watchers are bullish about getting the key reform across the finish line this Congress.
“I get the sense that people in the financial community are optimistic about the chances of cannabis banking reform happening in the near future from our work with groups like the [American Bankers Association] and [Credit Union National Association] on the SAFE Banking Act,” Morgan Fox, media relations director for the National Cannabis Industry Association, told Marijuana Moment.
FinCEN also said that short-term declines in these numbers “may be explained by filers exceeding the 90 day follow-on Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) filing requirement,” a process that banks are mandated to follow in accordance with 2014 cannabis banking guidance issued under the Obama administration.
“Several filers take 180 days or more to file a continuing activity report,” the agency said. “After 90 days, a depository institution is no longer counted as providing banking services until a new guidance-related SAR is received.”
Those caveats were also included in previous quarterly reports that had shown increases in the number of financial institutions working with the cannabis industry, however.
The latest update also contains data on the number of marijuana-related SARs that have been filed, which exceeded 100,000 for the first time as of the quarter’s end. (There appears to be a mistake in the narrative of FinCEN’s report, as it states the numbers reflect SARs filed by the end of June instead of September.)
FinCEN also placed the SARs in one of three categories: marijuana limited, marijuana priority and marijuana termination.
As usual, most (76,203) were considered “marijuana limited,” which refers to cannabis businesses that seem to be operating in compliance with state law, and therefore meet the agency’s standard for being serviceable under existing federal guidelines.
The second largest category was for “marijuana termination” SARs, or marijuana businesses that violated at least one federal enforcement priority or state regulation and so “the financial institution has decided to terminate its relationship with” the firm.
About 7,800 SARs fit the definition of “marijuana priority,” which is defined as a business that “may raise one or more of the red flags” under federal guidelines, or they “may not be fully compliant with the appropriate state’s regulations” and so they’d be under investigation.
Whether the leveling off trend will continue is yet to be seen. However, if the Senate does advance the SAFE Banking Act and it is enacted, advocates expect a surge in banks embracing the cannabis industry. The chair of the Senate Banking Committee has said that his panel will vote on marijuana banking legislation before the year’s end, though he suggested he’d like certain changes from the House-passed version.
Baron23
Well-Known Member
And I'm not trying to start anything either.
I just post the articles...well, sometimes with a bit of comment, sometimes not.
And certainly its completely your prerogative to comment.
Now as to taxes, from Bernie's official site:
With new tax resources from legal marijuana sales, we will:
- Create a $20 billion grant program within the Minority Business Development Agency to provide grants to entrepreneurs of color who continue to face discrimination in access to capital.
- With this revenue we will also create a $10 billion grant program to focus on businesses that are at least 51% owned or controlled by those in disproportionately impacted areas or individuals who have been arrested for or convicted of marijuana offenses.
- Provide formerly incarcerated individuals with training and resources needed to start their own businesses and worker owned businesses, and guarantee jobs and free job training at trade schools and apprenticeship programs related to marijuana businesses.
- In states like Vermont, Pennsylvania and Ohio, employee ownership centers promote worker ownership and provide valuable technical support for businesses and workers. We will expand on this success and create employee ownership centers across the country and expand existing organizations. These employee ownership centers will work in coordination with the Minority Business Development Agency grant program to provide the training and technical support needed to formerly incarcerated individuals and people in areas disproportionately impacted by the war on drugs to start worker owned businesses and cooperatives.
- Use revenue from marijuana sales to establish a targeted $10 billionUSDA grant program to help disproportionately impacted areas and individuals who have been arrested for or convicted of marijuana offenses start urban and rural farms and urban and rural marijuana growing operations to ensure people impacted by the war on drugs have access to the entire marijuana industry.
- These grants will be used for design, technical assistance, purchasing equipment, installing infrastructure, and more. We will help disproportionately impacted areas and individuals who have been arrested for or convicted of marijuana offenses get fair access to land and resources through the Disadvantaged and Beginning Farm State Coordinator program.
- Allocate funds for bilingual and multi-racial outreach to affected communities, including immigrant communities, to diversify economic development.
- We will ensure these marijuana farmers are paid a fair price for their products with tools like supply management and reserves and transition toward a parity system to guarantee marijuana farmers a living wage. And we will establish a national system to certify organic marijuana to give consumers the information they need to make an informed decision.
- Create a $10 billiontargeted economic and community development fund to provide grants to communities hit hardest by the War on Drugs.
- We will also ensure that every community in the country has the resources they need to address our opioid addiction crisis and prevent the abuse of other hard drugs. And we will work with states to fund and pursue innovative overdose prevention initiatives.
Last edited:
ClearBlueLou
Well-Known Member
Like I said, I went to the site & read that. I read such things as aspirational: a statement of intention - not a guarantee that he’ll try to make it happen WITHOUT those new weed-sale tax resources, should they not materialize. Sanders probably knows better than we do how poorly that would be received.
OTOH, in the event of actual descheduling, decriminalization, and expungement, I expect there will be money that can be reallocated for purposes other than hunting down, punishing, and incarcerating the cannabis community...although McConnell and the Senate will do McConnell decides.
gaaah...don’t come here to talk politics.... bless you, Baron, for all the news and good perspective you bring. I enjoy your company, I would like that to continue; I like that cannabis law is opening up / moderating, I would like *that* to continue.
i like this site, and I would like IT to continue
OTOH, in the event of actual descheduling, decriminalization, and expungement, I expect there will be money that can be reallocated for purposes other than hunting down, punishing, and incarcerating the cannabis community...although McConnell and the Senate will do McConnell decides.
gaaah...don’t come here to talk politics.... bless you, Baron, for all the news and good perspective you bring. I enjoy your company, I would like that to continue; I like that cannabis law is opening up / moderating, I would like *that* to continue.
i like this site, and I would like IT to continue
|
Sponsored by |
|---|
|
|
|