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

Law The Cannabis Chronicles - Misc Cannabis News

Will the UN point of view on cannabis be modified or not?

Will it come to a vote in March or not? To date it is unclear whether the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) will adopt the six recommendations from the World Health Organization (WHO) regarding the reclassification of cannabis. The European Commission advises EU Member States to reject one of the recommendations and to postpone the vote on other two recommendations. Does this mean the loss of an historic moment, where cannabis is ascribed medicinal value by the highest health organisation for the first time in history?

The Dutch expert on UN Drugs Conventions, Martin Jelsma, associated with the Transnational Institute, doesn’t think so. “In case one or several WHO recommendations are not adopted, countries may continue with medicinal cannabis. That happens anyway.” In addition, member states should not question the scientific opinion of the Expert Committee on Drug Dependence (ECDD), the advisory body of the WHO. “The WHO’s recognition and scientific substantiation of medicinal applications remain in force, even if the recommendations are not adopted.“

bedrocan-infographic-vn-who-definitief-1000px.png



  1. Extracts and tinctures are removed from Schedule I of the 1961 Convention.
  2. THC (dronabinol) is added to Schedule I of the 1961 Convention under the category Cannabis & Resin. Subsequently, THC is removed from Schedule II of the 1971 Convention.
  3. THC isomers are added to Schedule I of the 1961 Convention under the category Cannabis & Resin. Subsequently, THC isomer is removed from the 1971 Convention.
  4. Pure CBD and CBD preparations with maximum 0.2% THC are not included in the international conventions on controlling drugs
  5. If they comply with certain criteria, pharmaceutical preparations that contain delta-9-THC should be added to Schedule III of the Convention of 1961, recognising the unlikelihood of abuse and for which a number of exemptions apply.
  6. Cannabis and cannabis resin are removed from Schedule IV, the category reserved for the most dangerous substances, in the 1961 Convention.

Back in 2018, the WHO issued an historic recommendation to reclassify cannabis at international level. In doing so, the WHO gave a clear signal that cannabis has therapeutic value. The final link in this process of change, where 53 countries may vote on the recommendations, was postponed last year. Now the official vote by the UN body that determines which drugs come under international control, is planned for the first week of March.

One of the recommendations is the removal of cannabis from list IV, intended for dangerous drugs without relevant medicinal usages. According to Mr Jelsma, this recommendation is not at all as “ground-breaking” as is supposed. “The WHO still sees cannabis as a public health hazard. That is why the WHO recommends removing it from Schedule IV only and not from Schedule I, the same list for cannabis, opium, heroin and cocaine. Even if the WHO recommendations are adopted cannabis is still on the same list as heroin and cocaine and all criminal treaty provisions remain in force for cannabis. So the WHO does not in any way follow the distinction between “hard” and “soft” drugs such as in the Netherlands and explicitly confirms with this package of recommendations that cannabis should be kept as strictly controlled as cocaine.”


Lack of clarity
Mr Jelsma, who keeps a close eye on the change process of the UN Drugs Conventions, said there are many critical questions regarding the consequences of the new classification. “There is still lack of clarity about the annual reporting obligations. Each year, every member state should report the use and trade in all types of drugs, including medicinal cannabis, to the INCB (International Narcotics Control Board, ed). The recommendation to transfer the substance THC from the 1971 Convention to the 1961 Convention doesn’t make that process any easier.”

Administrative problems
Another important WHO recommendation is to remove products with cannabidiol (CBD) and less than 0.2 percent THC from the Schedule completely. Mr Jelsma fears that the control on cannabis will actually become more stringent and that this will generate administrative problems. He said “Not everyone is aware of this. Indirectly, transferring THC to the 1961 Convention means that even the plant material that contains THC will have to be controlled in the same way. The Convention does not distinguish between the content and the materials they were extracted from. It means that more will have to be controlled, including leaves and stems. The recommendation was supposed to be an improvement, but if you scrutinize it, it actually deteriorates the situation.” Countries with a major hemp industry, don’t need that at all. Hemp is cultivated for its low THC content and high CBD concentrations. With the extremely low threshold criterion of 0.2%, many hemp products and derivatives are likely to fall under the stricter control regime. “I believe that this is one of the possible consequences that was overlooked by the ECDD. This was never the intention”, according to Mr Jelsma.


Majority
Fate is in the hands of 53 countries with voting rights. If they proceed to a vote in March, the question remains as to how those 53 countries will vote. This will depend strongly on whether a country has a medicinal-cannabis programme or not. A total of 24 of the 53 countries have legislation on this issue or have plans to issue legislation. That is just not enough to achieve the necessary 50% majority required for an amendment to the 1961 treaty. The further complicating factor is that an amendment to the 1971 treaty requires a majority of at least two thirds. Although the EU*, including the United Kingdom, represents nearly a quarter of the total number of countries with voting rights, a majority is not guaranteed. Mr Jelsma is concerned, as there is a significant chance that EU countries will vote as one block and the voting advice of the European Commission has quite a few flaws. “The vote will be extremely important, because some WHO recommendations can worsen the current situation.”



UN Conventions
The CND, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, is a UN body that determines which drugs come under international control. The CND regularly amends the schedules of substances that are included in the drugs conventions on the basis of recommendations from the World Health Organization (WHO), which in turn is advised by its Expert Committee on Drug Dependence (ECDD).
There are three important UN Conventions that control drugs throughout the world:
In the current 1961 treaty, cannabis and cannabis preparations are in Schedule IV. The drugs in this Schedule are a partial selection of the drugs in Schedule I that are considered the most dangerous and have the least medicinal value. Heroin is therefore placed on both lists.
In recent years, the WHO has started up a quiet but powerful change process behind the scenes. The process started in 2016 with the scientific assessment of cannabis by ECDD as its highlight.

Internationally it was agreed that countries undertake to protect their citizens against cannabis abuse, production is only permitted for medical or research purposes and marketing only by a cannabis agency managed by the government. In the Netherlands that is organised through the Office of Medicinal Cannabis.

*) As of 1 January 2020, the following 13 EU Member States have a voting right on the CND: Belgium, Germany, France, Hungary, Italy, Croatia, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Spain, the Czech Republic, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

Important dates
  • CND intersessional in Vienna on Monday 17 February where the basic decision must be made about the vote in March
  • Horizontal Working Party on Drugs (HDG) in Brussels on Wednesday 19 February, where the EU must determine the joint position
  • The final vote of the CND from Monday 2 to Friday 6 March 2020 in Vienna
 

Trump Budget Proposes Ending State Medical Marijuana Protections And Blocking DC From Legalizing

President Trump proposed ending an existing policy that protects state medical marijuana programs from Justice Department interference as part of his fiscal year 2021 budget plan released on Monday.

The rider, which has been renewed in appropriations legislation every year since 2014, stipulates the the Justice Department can’t use its funds to prevent states or territories “from implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.”

This isn’t the first time that an administration has requested that the rider be stricken. Trump’s last two budgets omitted the medical cannabis protections language, and President Obama similarly asked for the policy to be removed. In all cases, Congress has ignored those requests and renewed the protections in spending bills.

During last year’s appropriations season, the House approved an even more expansive amendment that would have provided protections for all state and territory marijuana programs, rather than just medical cannabis systems. But the Senate did not follow suit and the provision was not included in final fiscal year 2020 legislation sent to Trump’s desk.

When Trump signed that large-scale spending legislation in December, he attached a statement that said he is empowered to ignore the congressionally approved medical cannabis rider, stating that the administration “will treat this provision consistent with the President’s constitutional responsibility to faithfully execute the laws of the United States.”

Cannabis is also mentioned in several other places in Trump’s new budget proposal for next year. For example, it contains another long-standing rider that blocks Washington, D.C. from using local tax dollars to legalize marijuana sales.

Separately, the plan requests that funds be set aside to help the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) invest “in priority activities,” including the “regulation of cannabis and cannabis derivatives.” FDA is actively developing regulations for CBD since hemp and its derivatives were federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill.

“FDA recognizes the potential opportunities that cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds may offer, and acknowledges the significant interest in these possibilities,” the agency saidin a summary. “FDA is aware that companies market products containing cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds in ways that violate the law and may put consumer health and safety at risk.”

“Questions remain regarding the safety of these compounds,” it continued. “FDA is committed to protecting the public health and improving regulatory pathways for the lawful marketing of cannabis and cannabis-derived products within the agency’s jurisdiction.”

FDA said it was important to fund these regulatory efforts because it’s an example of an issue with “rising public health needs as growing
markets outpace increases to Agency resources.”

The agency requested $5 million to “continue enforcing the law to protect patients and the public while also providing potential regulatory pathways, to the extent permitted by law, for products containing cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds.”

“FDA is seeing a significant increase in activity relating to the marketing of unlawful cannabis-derived products, especially those containing cannabidiol (CBD), since the Farm Bill passed. In many cases, product developers make unproven claims to treat serious or life-threatening diseases, and patients may be misled to forgo otherwise effective, available therapy and opt instead for a product that has no proven value or may cause them serious harm.”

It also outlined how it intends to use the funds across four different branches within FDA.

About $4 million will be allocated to an initiative designed to “better regulate the usage of cannabis-derived substances, such as cannabidiol (CBD), in FDA-regulated products such as dietary supplements and when used as unapproved food additives.”

It will also “support regulatory activities, including developing policies and continue to perform its existing regulatory responsibilities including review of product applications, inspections, enforcement, and targeted research.”

Half a million dollars will go toward FDA’s Animal Drugs and Feeds Program in order to “strengthen its capacity to evaluate scientific data related to the safe use of cannabis and cannabis derivatives in animal products.”

FDA’s Office of Regulatory Affairs would receive $2 million to help “regulate and inspect establishments manufacturing FDA regulated products containing cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds.”

“The initiative will support regulatory activities, including developing policies and continue to perform its existing regulatory responsibilities including review of product applications, inspections, enforcement, and targeted research,” the agency said. “FDA must support oversight of increasing numbers of marketed FDA-regulated products containing cannabis-derived substances that may put the public at risk.”

Another “priority component” of the budget is to fund cleanup efforts for illicit marijuana grows on federal public lands.

The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) would also take a serious budget hit under the president’s proposal. If enacted, ONDCP’s funding would go from the $425 million it was allotted for 2020 to just $29 million for 2021—an approximately 90 percent cut. Trump included a similar request in prior budgets, but Congress rejected the cuts

Some of those dollars for ONCDP would be transferred to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to “improve coordination of drug enforcement efforts among Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies in the U.S.” through the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area program, the document states. Other dollars for grants to local anti-drug groups would be moved to the Department of Health and Human Services.

ONDCP, which is an office within the White House, applauded Trump’s request for $35.7 billion to fund “counter-drug efforts” in a press release. Jim Carroll, the offices’s director, said “President Trump has brought a relentless, whole-of-government approach to combating the crisis of addiction in our country.”

“The FY 2021 budget request sends a strong message that, although we’ve seen signs of real progress, the Trump Administration will not let up in our efforts to save American lives,” he said. “Whether it is going after drug traffickers, getting people struggling with addiction the help they need, or stopping drug misuse before it starts, this budget request ensures our partners will have the resources needed to create safer and healthier communities across the Nation.”

The budget also prioritizes funding for the implementation of a domestic hemp program since the crop was legalized. It calls for $17 million for 2021 for the program, which “provides a national regulatory framework for commercial production of industrial hemp production in the U.S. through regulations and guidance.”

“In addition to those regulated under USDA plans, USDA approves state and Tribal nation plans to provide licensing services, technical assistance, compliance, and program management support,” the budget states. “In 2021, USDA will administratively implement fees to cover the Government’s full cost for providing services to beneficiaries of this program.”

Another current rider that prohibits the Justice Department from contravening an industrial hemp research program was proposed to be removed. However, that provision is essentially redundant under the new agriculture law, which transferred jurisdiction of the crop from DEA to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
 
momofthegoons said:
Trump Budget Proposes Ending State Medical Marijuana Protections And Blocking DC From Legalizing

President Trump proposed ending an existing policy that protects state medical marijuana programs from Justice Department interference as part of his fiscal year 2021 budget plan released on Monday.

The rider, which has been renewed in appropriations legislation every year since 2014, stipulates the the Justice Department can’t use its funds to prevent states or territories “from implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.”

This isn’t the first time that an administration has requested that the rider be stricken. Trump’s last two budgets omitted the medical cannabis protections language, and President Obama similarly asked for the policy to be removed. In all cases, Congress has ignored those requests and renewed the protections in spending bills.

During last year’s appropriations season, the House approved an even more expansive amendment that would have provided protections for all state and territory marijuana programs, rather than just medical cannabis systems. But the Senate did not follow suit and the provision was not included in final fiscal year 2020 legislation sent to Trump’s desk.

When Trump signed that large-scale spending legislation in December, he attached a statement that said he is empowered to ignore the congressionally approved medical cannabis rider, stating that the administration “will treat this provision consistent with the President’s constitutional responsibility to faithfully execute the laws of the United States.”

Cannabis is also mentioned in several other places in Trump’s new budget proposal for next year. For example, it contains another long-standing rider that blocks Washington, D.C. from using local tax dollars to legalize marijuana sales.

Separately, the plan requests that funds be set aside to help the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) invest “in priority activities,” including the “regulation of cannabis and cannabis derivatives.” FDA is actively developing regulations for CBD since hemp and its derivatives were federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill.

“FDA recognizes the potential opportunities that cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds may offer, and acknowledges the significant interest in these possibilities,” the agency saidin a summary. “FDA is aware that companies market products containing cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds in ways that violate the law and may put consumer health and safety at risk.”

“Questions remain regarding the safety of these compounds,” it continued. “FDA is committed to protecting the public health and improving regulatory pathways for the lawful marketing of cannabis and cannabis-derived products within the agency’s jurisdiction.”

FDA said it was important to fund these regulatory efforts because it’s an example of an issue with “rising public health needs as growing
markets outpace increases to Agency resources.”

The agency requested $5 million to “continue enforcing the law to protect patients and the public while also providing potential regulatory pathways, to the extent permitted by law, for products containing cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds.”

“FDA is seeing a significant increase in activity relating to the marketing of unlawful cannabis-derived products, especially those containing cannabidiol (CBD), since the Farm Bill passed. In many cases, product developers make unproven claims to treat serious or life-threatening diseases, and patients may be misled to forgo otherwise effective, available therapy and opt instead for a product that has no proven value or may cause them serious harm.”

It also outlined how it intends to use the funds across four different branches within FDA.

About $4 million will be allocated to an initiative designed to “better regulate the usage of cannabis-derived substances, such as cannabidiol (CBD), in FDA-regulated products such as dietary supplements and when used as unapproved food additives.”

It will also “support regulatory activities, including developing policies and continue to perform its existing regulatory responsibilities including review of product applications, inspections, enforcement, and targeted research.”

Half a million dollars will go toward FDA’s Animal Drugs and Feeds Program in order to “strengthen its capacity to evaluate scientific data related to the safe use of cannabis and cannabis derivatives in animal products.”

FDA’s Office of Regulatory Affairs would receive $2 million to help “regulate and inspect establishments manufacturing FDA regulated products containing cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds.”

“The initiative will support regulatory activities, including developing policies and continue to perform its existing regulatory responsibilities including review of product applications, inspections, enforcement, and targeted research,” the agency said. “FDA must support oversight of increasing numbers of marketed FDA-regulated products containing cannabis-derived substances that may put the public at risk.”

Another “priority component” of the budget is to fund cleanup efforts for illicit marijuana grows on federal public lands.

The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) would also take a serious budget hit under the president’s proposal. If enacted, ONDCP’s funding would go from the $425 million it was allotted for 2020 to just $29 million for 2021—an approximately 90 percent cut. Trump included a similar request in prior budgets, but Congress rejected the cuts

Some of those dollars for ONCDP would be transferred to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to “improve coordination of drug enforcement efforts among Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies in the U.S.” through the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area program, the document states. Other dollars for grants to local anti-drug groups would be moved to the Department of Health and Human Services.

ONDCP, which is an office within the White House, applauded Trump’s request for $35.7 billion to fund “counter-drug efforts” in a press release. Jim Carroll, the offices’s director, said “President Trump has brought a relentless, whole-of-government approach to combating the crisis of addiction in our country.”

“The FY 2021 budget request sends a strong message that, although we’ve seen signs of real progress, the Trump Administration will not let up in our efforts to save American lives,” he said. “Whether it is going after drug traffickers, getting people struggling with addiction the help they need, or stopping drug misuse before it starts, this budget request ensures our partners will have the resources needed to create safer and healthier communities across the Nation.”

The budget also prioritizes funding for the implementation of a domestic hemp program since the crop was legalized. It calls for $17 million for 2021 for the program, which “provides a national regulatory framework for commercial production of industrial hemp production in the U.S. through regulations and guidance.”

“In addition to those regulated under USDA plans, USDA approves state and Tribal nation plans to provide licensing services, technical assistance, compliance, and program management support,” the budget states. “In 2021, USDA will administratively implement fees to cover the Government’s full cost for providing services to beneficiaries of this program.”

Another current rider that prohibits the Justice Department from contravening an industrial hemp research program was proposed to be removed. However, that provision is essentially redundant under the new agriculture law, which transferred jurisdiction of the crop from DEA to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Click to expand...
His budget will have little to do with what comes out of the House appropriations process.....nor the Senate's actually.

He will be confronted at some point in the campaign with his past promises and statements of support for medical cannabis from the last election and beyond and this budget.

I feel confident that Congress will continue to fund this rider and the Executive branch will not pick a fight over this item which is small potatoes in the grand scheme of things.

@momofthegoons - if this post is too political, please just delete....but its hard to talk about these subjects without dipping a toe in there at all. Thanks
 
Pete Buttigieg Pressed On Marijuana Enforcement And Decriminalizing Drugs In Debate





Drug reform policy took center stage at the 2020 Democratic presidential debate in New Hampshire on Friday, with candidates weighing in on issues such as decriminalizing possession of controlled substances and how to address substance misuse.
At one point, former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg was pressed to defend racial disparities in his city’s marijuana enforcement rates.
In a separate exchange, Buttigeig was asked about his proposal to decriminalize possession of all drugs—a plank included in both his mental health and racial justice plans. But the candidate contested the premise of the question, saying that he simply wants to end incarceration for possessing illegal substances, a semantic distinction that he’s made before.
“No, what I’ve called for is that incarceration should no longer be the response to drug possession. What I’m calling for is that we end the use of incarceration as a response,” he said. “This does not mean that it will be lawful to produce or distribute those kinds of harmful drugs, but also, as we know from the opioid crisis, some of this has been driven by companies that were acting irresponsibly with substances that were lawful.”

The remarks are a continuation of Buttigieg’s resistance to embracing terminology commonly used by drug reform advocates. In December, the candidate stressed that his proposal to end the threat of incarceration for drug offenses is not a “blanket decriminalization of a lot of other harmful substances.”
Major drug policy reform groups have long characterized removing the threat of incarceration for drug offenses—particularly first offenses—as decriminalization. However, others contend that the imposition of any criminal penalties, whether or not they come with time in jail, does not reflect a true decriminalization policy.
“These kinds of addictions are a medical issue, not a moral failure on the part of somebody battling that addiction,” the former mayor said, adding that the country should invest in harm reduction policies such as medication-assisted treatment to mitigate the risk of drug overdoses.
Later, Buttigieg was center stage for a discussion about the way marijuana criminalization is enforced across racial lines.
The candidate was asked about the rate of cannabis possession arrests during his time as mayor, with the moderator saying that racial disparities increased after he took office.
“On my watch, drug arrests in South Bend were lower than the national average—and specifically to marijuana, lower than Indiana,” he countered, saying that his administration made a decision to target drug enforcement resources in cases connected to gang murders.
The former mayor added that there’s “no question” that systemic racial bias has been a factor in cannabis arrests.
Buttigieg revisited a point he made during campaign stops in Iowa prior to this week’s caucus: while it has become a largely mainstream idea that the country needs to take a more health-focused approach to substance misuse amid the opioid crisis, many voices were missing decades ago when the government increased criminal penalties for drug offenses that disproportionately impacted communities of color.
“That is one of the reasons why I am calling for us as a country to take up those reforms that end incarceration as a response to possession,” he said.
The candidate emphasized that legalization of cannabis would be coupled with policies that retroactively removed criminal records for those previously convicted.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) was prompted by the moderators to weigh on whether Buttigieg offered a sufficient explanation for his city’s cannabis enforcement record.
“No,” she said. “You have to own up to the facts. And it’s important to own up to the facts about how race has totally permeated our criminal justice system.”

“We need to rework our criminal justice system from the front end on what we make illegal all the way through the system and how we help people come back into the community,” she said.
Earlier in the debate, entrepreneur Andrew Yang was asked about his support for decriminalizing opioids. Pressed about the potential cost of his campaign proposal that people who overdose “should be sent to mandatory treatment centers for three days to convince them to seek long-term treatment,” the candidate said pharmaceutical companies should foot the bill.
“As president, we will take back those profits [from drug companies that market opioids] and put them to work right here in New Hampshire so that if you are seeking treatment, you have resources to be able to pursue it,” he said. “This is not a money problem fundamentally, this is a human problem. But money cannot be the obstacle.”
Yang also voiced support for opening supervised consumption sites for illegal drugs, adding that “if you are seeking treatment, you have to know you are not going to be sent to jail.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), for his part, said he wants to “end the war on drugs, which has disproportionately impacted African Americans, Latinos and Native Americans.”
Decrying a “racist system, from top to bottom,” the senator called for an end to private prisons.

Former Vice President Joe Biden, who as a senator played a leading role in enacting several punitive drug laws, made a point during the debate of saying that he now wants “no one going to jail for a drug offense.”
“They go mandatory treatment,” he said. “No prison.”
Biden also pointed to his early work to support and fund drug courts. “I set them up,” he said. “I wrote it into law.”
As the candidates were on stage, the Republican National Committee targeted Biden’s drug war record in a tweet.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) faced a question about her record as a prosecutor and whether she regrets sending people to jail for drugs.
The senator replied by pointing to her record running what she called “one of the most successful drug courts in the country.”
 
Politics
Joe Biden’s New Marijuana Comment ‘A Big Nothing,’ Says Advocate Who Spoke To Him






Joe Biden seemed to get pretty close to backing marijuana legalization at a New Hampshire campaign event this week—but after seeming to acknowledge that the policy change as inevitable, he reaffirmed he wouldn’t pursue it until more research is done.
The former vice president told Marijuana Policy Project’s Don Murphy on Tuesday that “I think it is at the point where it has to be basically legalized” in a recording first reported by Politico on Thursday.
“But I’m not prepared to do it as long as there’s serious medical people saying we should determine what other side effects would occur,” he said.
Listen to Biden’s marijuana comments:

Biden’s line about marijuana needing to be “basically legalized” stands out, as he’s one of the only 2020 Democratic presidential candidates who opposes the reform move, alongside billionaire Michael Bloomberg.
But while it sounds like the candidate was on the precipice of endorsing legalization in the brief comment, he ultimately stuck to his existing position, which he’s previously said includes federally decriminalizing marijuana, legalizing medical cannabis, rescheduling the substance to promote research, expunging prior cannabis convictions and letting states set their own policies.
Murphy told Marijuana Moment that the conversation “turned out to be a big nothing.”
“He clearly didn’t clarify his position. He made it as unclear as ever,” he said. “Maybe, to his credit, he spent 40 years with this position. I would actually feel better about his position if he just dug his heels in. He’s trying to have it both ways. You’re either a yes or a no on this.”
Erik Altieri, executive director of NORML, told Marijuana Moment that cannabis “doesn’t need to be ‘basically’ legalized, it needs to be legalized full stop.”
“We also cannot afford to delay any longer on advancing serious cannabis law reform at the federal level,” he said. “Over 600,000 Americans are still being arrested every year while politicians like Joe Biden still refuse to read and accept the current research. He needs to join the majority of his fellow candidates and the overwhelming majority of Americans who want to stop our failed prohibition and push for it with the urgency it deserves.”
“The science is clear and the morality is clear, marijuana is objectively less harmful than other legal substances and our continued enforcement of prohibition is a disastrous national embarrassment that must end,” he said.
Also in the conversation, Biden said a few times that he doesn’t believe cannabis is a gateway drug, apparently trying to distance himself from remarks he made last year that got him in hot water with reform advocates and called out on a presidential debate stage. Biden quickly reversed himself after saying at the time that he thinks marijuana might lead to more dangerous substance use, citing it as one reason he opposes legalization.
“It’s not a gateway drug. It’s not a gateway drug,” he said in the new recording. “I think science matters, and I would have the [National Institute of Health] looking and the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] looking at it.”
Maritza Perez, national affairs director for Drug Policy Action, told Marijuana Moment that Biden’s “positions on marijuana continue to feel out of touch and unhelpful to the current conversations on marijuana policy.”
“The fact is that a majority of Americans across demographic groups support legalizing marijuana. Lawmakers should heed the public’s call and remove marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act,” she said. “This should be accompanied by robust protections for people most adversely impacted by the war on drugs, such as providing for the expungement and resentencing of old marijuana convictions.”
Murphy told Biden at the end of their conversation that “I’d encourage you to talk about that on the debate stage because there are a lot of people in New England who are in states that allow this but the federal government doesn’t. This conflict needs to be fixed, and you get a chance to do it if you’re president.”
Campaign staff also told Politico that Biden hasn’t budged on the issue and that he was simply “restating his cannabis policy.”
 
A very good question and one I would personally like to see answered given Trumps past campaign promises.

Some thoughts of mine....for the past three years Trump has not put Rohrabacher-Blumenauer type amendment restrictions in his budget proposal but Congress did and the WH signed off on the eventual funding bills. I expect that to happen again.

But before there is too much bleating from Congress...and in particular the House....the question arises as to why there has to be this annual angst over this amendment or similar language. Well, its because Congress has done fuck all to put these protections in place via proper legislation that would not require annual resubmission's and approval. Actually, they have done fuck all about a number of MJ related issues, IMO.

In my view, they are all playing a shell game.

Why is Trump targeting medical marijuana in an election year?

Donald Trump has long claimed to support cannabis legalization.
In 1990, he said the US was “losing badly the war on drugs” and would “have to legalize drugs to win that war.” As a candidate for president in 2015, he said that “medical should happen” while adult-use legalization “should be a state issue.” In 2018, he said he would “probably end up supporting” a bill to end the federal prohibition and allow states to chart their own course.
But for all his talk, President Trump’s actions tell a different tale. On Monday, the president unveiled his proposed budget for the coming fiscal year, and it’s yet again a sour deal for medical marijuana patients and legalization advocates.
Trump going after medical marijuana patients
Most notably, Trump’s proposed 2021 federal budget aims to end a key protection for state-legal medical marijuana programs. Cannabis remains illegal under federal law, so the protection works by prohibiting federal law enforcement officials from interfering with state-legal medical cannabis programs.
“Basically it disallows the [Department of Justice] from using federal funds to go after medical marijuana programs in states where those programs are legal,” said Maritza Perez, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance. Those protections have previously been known as the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer amendment, named for the two Congress members who sponsored the rider.
The provision has been included in congressional spending bills since 2014, inserted as a budget rider—an attached provision that limits how allocated funds can be spent. Trump’s proposed budget scraps that rider, leaving state-legal medical marijuana patients and businesses vulnerable to federal prosecution.
“Basically what we saw in the president’s budget was granting permission to the DOJ to go after legal medical marijuana programs,” Perez told Leafly. “It’s not something that’s totally unexpected, and in fact it’s in line with this administration’s harsh views on drug policy.”
Is it time to panic?
Not yet, no. The president’s annual budget proposal is just that—a proposal. It’s an opening bid. Trump’s move has a long way to go before it becomes law.
Members of Congress will likely attempt to re-insert the protection before the budget bill goes much further. But Trump’s decision to scrap the provision from his budget is another indication that the president’s support for state-legal medical marijuana is superficial at best.
Trump acts for prohibitionistsTrump’s time in office has been marked by overtures to prohibitionists, even as the president has himself claimed to support states’ rights. In early 2018, Trump’s then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions without warning rescinded a Justice Department policy of noninterference with state-legal cannabis, shocking state leaders and legalization advocates alike.
And just this week, Trump applauded the death penalty as an effective way to discourage drug use, telling a group of state governors that countries “with a very powerful death penalty on drug dealers don’t have a drug problem.” (Fact check: That’s not true.)
As Kyle Jaeger at Marijuana Moment notes, this is Trump’s third consecutive budget proposal to omit the medical marijuana protection. In each of those cases, members of the House of Representatives revived the provision and the Senate later approved it.
Last year, the House went further by attempting to extend the provision to all state-legal cannabis, including adult-use programs. The Senate declined to include that more expansive language, but it nevertheless renewed the medical marijuana protections.
The real action is on Capitol Hill
Advocates will continue to push for Congress to reinsert the protection into this year’s budget, said Perez at the Drug Policy Alliance.
“I don’t think it’s going to be a huge uphill battle, just because this is something Congress has agreed with just in the past few years,” she said. “This is an area where I’d say the administration is definitely more conservative than Congress.”
Even as Trump signed last year’s budget bill, he lashed out against the reauthorization of the medical marijuana protections. In an attached statement, the White House wrote that the executive branch was free to ignore the congressionally approved rider, asserting that the administration “will treat this provision consistent with the President’s constitutional responsibility to faithfully execute the laws of the United States.”
More money for drug control, pharma research
Trump’s proposed budget also impacts cannabis on a number of other fronts. In what could be a benefit for pharmaceutical companies trying to develop cannabinoid-based drugs, Trump’s budget would set aside funding for the US Food and Drug Administration to invest in “regulation of cannabis and cannabis derivatives.”
The FDA is currently developing regulations around hemp and CBD, and the agency approved its first cannabis-derived drug, the CBD medication Epidiolex, in 2018.
Zero-ing out ONDCP
The proposed budget would also slash funding for the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), an arm of the White House that opposes drug use, by nearly 90%, from $425 million last fiscal year to $29 million in fiscal 2021. Some of that money would be transferred to the US Drug Enforcement Administration, which the administration says will improve coordination among federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies.
In a statement, ONDCP Director Jim Carroll was silent on the cuts, instead focusing on the president’s increased spending on anti-drug efforts overall. Trump’s budget proposal, the office said, “contains $35.7 billion for counter-drug efforts, an increase of $94 million from the previous year.
“The FY 2021 budget request sends a strong message that, although we’ve seen signs of real progress, the Trump Administration will not let up in our efforts to save American lives,” Carroll said.
Keeping a foot on D.C.’s neck
Trump’s proposal would also continue to prohibit Washington, D.C., from regulating the sale of cannabis—which is legal on all non-federal properties in the District—despite the best efforts of local leaders.
Voters in the District approved legal cannabis in 2014, but a separate federal budget rider introduced by Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD) blocked local officials from establishing retail regulations.
With his party out of power in the House, Harris no longer has the power to singlehandedly block D.C.’s attempts to make progress on cannabis regulation. But Republicans in the Senate may step in to squelch the possibility of legal retail stores opening locally.
Trump and cannabis: a political Rorschach test
Trump’s supporters and opponents have often seen what they want to see in the president’s comments about cannabis. This is in part because his statements lend themselves to various interpretations—sometimes simultaneously favoring and opposing legalization.
In a leaked transcript from 2018, for example, Trump is heard discussing cannabis legalization during a private meeting. The president initially claims that marijuana is a dangerous drug that causes people to “lose IQ points,” then reassures the room that a federal effort to allow banks to work with the legal cannabis industry is “all working out. That whole thing is working out.”
In 2015, a Leafly headline about then-candidate Trump described the problem thusly: “Where does Donald Trump stand on cannabis? It’s anyone’s guess.”
By last year, the balance of Trump’s actions toward cannabis pushed Leafly to revise its read. “Time to admit it,” wrote Deputy Editor Bruce Barcott, “Trump opposes cannabis legalization.”
92% support for medical marijuana
Meanwhile, support for legalization among US voters has been steadily growing for decades. A Pew survey in November found that nine out of 10 people polled supported either legalizing medical marijuana or allowing both medical and adult-use. Only 8% of respondents said they were against legalizing medical marijuana.
That makes legal cannabis more than twice as popular as Trump himself. Polls have shown the president’s approval rating hovering between about 35% and 45% for the past year or so.
“I don’t think that everything this administration does is consistent with what the public does,” said Perez at Drug Policy Alliance. “Marijuana’s a great example of that: He is consistent in that he’s consistently going against what the public wants.”
Making progress in the boring parts
For Perez, the battle over budget amendments underscores the way advocates can make a difference incrementally, without necessarily relying on blockbuster bills to legalize.
“When people think about D.C., we think we need these big bills to make drug policy that carries an impact,” she said, “but oftentimes it’s weird processes like the appropriations process where you can actually make an impact.”
As Trump’s proposed budget suggests, prohibitionists see the same opportunity.
 
Last edited:
Governors Across U.S. Step Up Push To Legalize Marijuana In Their States

State legislatures across the U.S. have convened for new sessions over the past month, and a growing number of governors are taking steps to push lawmakers to include legalizing marijuana as part of their 2020 agendas.


American Marijuana


Getty


At least 10 governors have gone so far as to put language ending marijuana prohibition in their annual budget requests, or used their State of the State speeches to pressure legislators to act on cannabis reform.

Some are proactively addressing the issue, while others appear to be mostly reacting to support that has already built up among lawmakers. But altogether, it’s clear that top state executives are now taking marijuana more seriously than ever before.

Here’s a look at how governors are taking action on marijuana as 2020 legislative sessions get underway.

Colorado

Gov. Jared Polis (D), who consistently led the fight for federal marijuana reform during his time in Congress, is continuing to champion cannabis now that he’s running his state.

This month, his administration rolled out a “roadmap” aimed at increasing the number of banks that serve legal cannabis businesses. He also announced an energy efficiency partnership between beer and marijuana companies that involves using carbon captured during the alcohol brewing process to grow cannabis plants.

And during his State of the State address last month Polis emphasized that “keeping Colorado the number one state in the nation for industrial hemp” is among his priorities for boosting the economy.

Connecticut

Gov. Ned Lamont (D) and leading lawmakers are pushing to make 2020 the year that Connecticut legalizes cannabis.

During his State of the State address, the governor spoke about how marijuana legalization in nearby states makes it illogical to continue prohibition. “Like it or not, legalized marijuana is a short drive away in Massachusetts and New York is soon to follow,” he said. “Right now do you realize that what you can buy legally in Massachusetts right across the border can land you in prison here in Connecticut for up to a year?”

To that end, Lamont has partnered with governors from neighboring states to develop a regional approach to cannabis.

On the governor’s behalf, the Senate president and House speaker have filed a bill to legalize marijuana in Connecticut, and Lamont’s budget proposal includes funding for new state employees to craft and implement a regulatory system for cannabis.

Illinois

Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D), who signed a marijuana legalization bill into law last year, has championed its implementation in 2020. His State of the State address included a line touting how the new policy’s out-of-state appeal “gives us a chance to collect tax revenue from the residents of Wisconsin, Missouri, Iowa and Indiana,” all of which continue to prohibit recreational cannabis.

Pritzker’s lieutenant governor was among the first people to purchase cannabis products when legal sales began on January 1. The day before, Pritzker pardoned more than 11,000 people with prior marijuana convictions. Nearly $40 million worth of adult-use cannabis products were purchased in the first month, an economic boost that the governor’s administration prominently touted.

New Mexico

Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) formally put marijuana legalization on the legislature’s agenda for the short, 30-day session ending later this month.

“It’s high time we stopped holding ourselves and our economy back: Let’s get it done this year and give New Mexicans yet another reason, yet another opportunity, to stay here and work and build a fulfilling 21st century career,” she said during her State of the State speech.

Last year, Lujan Grisham convened a working group to study cannabis. It issued a report that formed the basis of a legalization bill that is now advancing through the legislature.

New York

Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) unsuccessfully pushed lawmakers to send him a marijuana legalization bill in 2019, but he’s trying again this year.

“For decades, communities of color were disproportionately affected by the unequal enforcement of marijuana laws,” he said in his 2020 State of the State address. “Let's work with our neighbors New Jersey, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania to coordinate a safe and fair system, and let's legalize adult use of marijuana.”

The governor’s budget includes language to accomplish the end of cannabis prohibition, and he is also proposing to create a new Global Cannabis and Hemp Center for Science, Research and Education in the SUNY system.

Rhode Island

For the second year in a row, Gov. Gina Raimondo (D) put measures to legalize cannabis in her budget proposal.

Unlike the version that lawmakers rejected in 2019, the new language would create a system of state-owned stores to sell marijuana.

House and Senate leaders have thus far expressed reservations about Raimondo’s plan, but it remains to be seen if they will become more open to legalization as a growing number of nearby states—including Connecticut—move to end prohibition.

South Dakota

Gov. Kristi Noem (R) is no big fan of hemp, having vetoed a bill to legalize the crop that lawmakers sent to her desk last year. But in 2020, recognizing that the plant is incredibly popular and that other states are enacting new laws regulating hemp in light of its recent federal legalization, the governor is working with lawmakers to pass new compromise legislation.

Noem laid out what she called “guardrails” that need to be included in any hemp bill that could get her signature, and she also discussed the issue in her State of the State address.

“Federal guidelines have been put in place, a South Dakota tribe has been given the green light on production, and other states’ actions mean we need to address hemp transportation through our state,” she said.

New hemp legislation has already advanced through one legislative committee, and the governor seems poised to sign it into law this year as long as her concerns are addressed.

Vermont

Gov. Phil Scott (R) reluctantly signed a 2018 bill into law that legalizes low-level marijuana possession and home cultivation. Now, lawmakers are pushing to add legal cannabis sales to that, and the governor doesn’t appear as opposed as he once did.

A top lawmaker said that Scott is “at the table” in ongoing talks about legislative language. Although he still has concerns about impaired driving, the governor reportedly has his eye on using legal marijuana sales revenue to fund an after-school program he is proposing.

A cannabis commercialization bill cleared the Senate in 2019 and has already been amended and approved by a number of House committees this year, with a floor vote expected in the coming weeks.

While Scott hasn’t committed to signing it into law, advocates have become more hopeful that he won’t block it because of the tax money it can generate to support his other priorities.

U.S. Virgin Islands

Gov. Albert Bryan Jr. (D) called lawmakers into a special session in December to begin considering a marijuana legalization proposal that he says is needed to generate revenue to support a retirement fund for government employees.

“We must acknowledge the opportunities that regulated expansion of this industry can bring to the territory and the potential benefits” to the retirement program, he said during his State of the Territory address last month.

Virginia

Gov. Ralph Northam (D) campaigned on decriminalizing marijuana in 2017 and has continually pushed lawmakers to send him a bill on the topic. Now that the governor’s party won control of both chambers of the legislature in November’s elections, it might actually get done, and he put marijuana decriminalization at the top of his 2020 criminal justice agenda.

“We need to take an honest look at our criminal justice system to make sure we’re treating people fairly and using taxpayer dollars wisely,” he said in his State of the Commonwealth speech. “This means decriminalizing marijuana possession—and clearing the records of people who’ve gotten in trouble for it.”

Cannabis decriminalization legislation has advanced through several House of Delegates and Senate committees in recent weeks, and cleared the full House this week. A Senate floor vote is expected soon.

Wisconsin

Gov. Tony Evers (D) included language to legalize medical cannabis and decriminalize marijuana possession in his budget last year, but lawmakers removed those provisions.

But the governor is still pushing the issue, calling out the legislature in his 2020 State of the State speech for ignoring the will of the voters.

“When more than 80 percent of our state supports medical marijuana…and elected officials can ignore those numbers without consequence, folks, something’s wrong,” he said.

The GOP House speaker has expressed some openness to allowing medical cannabis in some form, but Senate leadership is more hostile to the idea. It remains to be seen if gubernatorial pressure can convince lawmakers to advance the issue.
 
Last edited:
Top Pro-Trump Lawmaker: Congress Will Ignore President’s Push To End Medical Marijuana Protections

Congress will ignore President Trump’s budget request to end a current policy protecting medical marijuana states from federal interference, a Republican lawmaker said on Tuesday.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), who is a key White House ally on Capitol Hill, was asked by Marijuana Moment on Twitter whether he feels concerned about the president’s proposal to eliminate the long-standing rider, which prohibits the Justice Department from using its funds to interfere wite the implementation of state and tribal medical cannabis programs.

“No,” he said. “We have the votes to continue the current policy through the appropriations process.”

Gaetz, who proudly said last year that he’s had conversations with Trump where the president has been “very supportive” of medical cannabis, did not respond to a follow up question about whether the budget request could be politically damaging to the president.

Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), who has been a leading sponsor of the medical cannabis protections amendment, also reacted to Trump’s proposal in a statement to Marijuana Moment.

“Trump’s latest budget is an attack on 8 years of progress at all levels. Luckily, Congress has fought back and defeated most of Trump’s misguided budget priorities,” he said. “I will continue to lead the effort to protect state legal medical cannabis programs and seek to get new protections for adult-use and tribal programs. These are critical as we continue our fight to reform hopelessly outdated federal cannabis policies.”

Gaetz’s Twitter response came amid a thread where the congressman fired back at his state’s Republican attorney general, who filed a court brief arguing that a proposed ballot initiative to legalize marijuana in Florida should not be allowed to proceed. The campaign behind the measure recently suspended its efforts to place the issue before voters in 2020 , but it is continuing to collect signatures for a 2022 push.

“Oh sure you can,” Gaetz said in response to the attorney general’s argument that states cannot allow use of a substance that is banned under federal law.

“Our federalist system contemplates the several states as laboratories of democracy—especially in cases where the federal government has failed so miserably,” he said. “Federal cannabis policy is an indefensible joke. States should give it no reverence.”

To that end, the medical cannabis protection language that the president is seeking to delete for fiscal year 2021 has given states a sense of autonomy over their marijuana policies.

Trump has omitted the rider in past requests—and President Obama similarly asked for the policy to be stricken—but Congress has consistently upheld it since its initial enactment in 2014.

The House approved an additional amendment to spending legislation last year that would have extended protections to state and tribal marijuana programs that allow recreational use and sales, but the Senate didn’t include a similar provision in its version and it was ultimately left out of the final bill that Trump signed.

The president approved the large-scale 2020 spending legislation that included a renewal of the medical cannabis rider, but he also included a statement stipulating that he is entitled to ignore the congressionally approved protections and that his administration “will treat this provision consistent with the President’s constitutional responsibility to faithfully execute the laws of the United States.”

Trump’s latest budget request also includes a provision continuing to bar Washington, D.C. from using its local tax dollars to implement a regulated marijuana market.

Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) said in a press release that she is “disappointed, but not surprised” that the president wants to continue the cannabis block on her city.

That said, while the medical marijuana rider and Trump’s request to end it have received the most attention, there are at least two other funding proposals that the cannabis industry is pleased with. One provides funding to the U.S. Department of Agriculture to continue implementing the hemp’s legalization and regulation. The other allocates money to the Food and Drug Administration to develop rules for CBD.
 
Baron23 said:
Governors Across U.S. Step Up Push To Legalize Marijuana In Their States

State legislatures across the U.S. have convened for new sessions over the past month, and a growing number of governors are taking steps to push lawmakers to include legalizing marijuana as part of their 2020 agendas.


American Marijuana


Getty


At least 10 governors have gone so far as to put language ending marijuana prohibition in their annual budget requests, or used their State of the State speeches to pressure legislators to act on cannabis reform.

Some are proactively addressing the issue, while others appear to be mostly reacting to support that has already built up among lawmakers. But altogether, it’s clear that top state executives are now taking marijuana more seriously than ever before.

Here’s a look at how governors are taking action on marijuana as 2020 legislative sessions get underway.

Colorado

Gov. Jared Polis (D), who consistently led the fight for federal marijuana reform during his time in Congress, is continuing to champion cannabis now that he’s running his state.

This month, his administration rolled out a “roadmap” aimed at increasing the number of banks that serve legal cannabis businesses. He also announced an energy efficiency partnership between beer and marijuana companies that involves using carbon captured during the alcohol brewing process to grow cannabis plants.

And during his State of the State address last month Polis emphasized that “keeping Colorado the number one state in the nation for industrial hemp” is among his priorities for boosting the economy.

Connecticut

Gov. Ned Lamont (D) and leading lawmakers are pushing to make 2020 the year that Connecticut legalizes cannabis.

During his State of the State address, the governor spoke about how marijuana legalization in nearby states makes it illogical to continue prohibition. “Like it or not, legalized marijuana is a short drive away in Massachusetts and New York is soon to follow,” he said. “Right now do you realize that what you can buy legally in Massachusetts right across the border can land you in prison here in Connecticut for up to a year?”

To that end, Lamont has partnered with governors from neighboring states to develop a regional approach to cannabis.

On the governor’s behalf, the Senate president and House speaker have filed a bill to legalize marijuana in Connecticut, and Lamont’s budget proposal includes funding for new state employees to craft and implement a regulatory system for cannabis.

Illinois

Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D), who signed a marijuana legalization bill into law last year, has championed its implementation in 2020. His State of the State address included a line touting how the new policy’s out-of-state appeal “gives us a chance to collect tax revenue from the residents of Wisconsin, Missouri, Iowa and Indiana,” all of which continue to prohibit recreational cannabis.

Pritzker’s lieutenant governor was among the first people to purchase cannabis products when legal sales began on January 1. The day before, Pritzker pardoned more than 11,000 people with prior marijuana convictions. Nearly $40 million worth of adult-use cannabis products were purchased in the first month, an economic boost that the governor’s administration prominently touted.

New Mexico

Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) formally put marijuana legalization on the legislature’s agenda for the short, 30-day session ending later this month.

“It’s high time we stopped holding ourselves and our economy back: Let’s get it done this year and give New Mexicans yet another reason, yet another opportunity, to stay here and work and build a fulfilling 21st century career,” she said during her State of the State speech.

Last year, Lujan Grisham convened a working group to study cannabis. It issued a report that formed the basis of a legalization bill that is now advancing through the legislature.

New York

Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) unsuccessfully pushed lawmakers to send him a marijuana legalization bill in 2019, but he’s trying again this year.

“For decades, communities of color were disproportionately affected by the unequal enforcement of marijuana laws,” he said in his 2020 State of the State address. “Let's work with our neighbors New Jersey, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania to coordinate a safe and fair system, and let's legalize adult use of marijuana.”

The governor’s budget includes language to accomplish the end of cannabis prohibition, and he is also proposing to create a new Global Cannabis and Hemp Center for Science, Research and Education in the SUNY system.

Rhode Island

For the second year in a row, Gov. Gina Raimondo (D) put measures to legalize cannabis in her budget proposal.

Unlike the version that lawmakers rejected in 2019, the new language would create a system of state-owned stores to sell marijuana.

House and Senate leaders have thus far expressed reservations about Raimondo’s plan, but it remains to be seen if they will become more open to legalization as a growing number of nearby states—including Connecticut—move to end prohibition.

South Dakota

Gov. Kristi Noem (R) is no big fan of hemp, having vetoed a bill to legalize the crop that lawmakers sent to her desk last year. But in 2020, recognizing that the plant is incredibly popular and that other states are enacting new laws regulating hemp in light of its recent federal legalization, the governor is working with lawmakers to pass new compromise legislation.

Noem laid out what she called “guardrails” that need to be included in any hemp bill that could get her signature, and she also discussed the issue in her State of the State address.

“Federal guidelines have been put in place, a South Dakota tribe has been given the green light on production, and other states’ actions mean we need to address hemp transportation through our state,” she said.

New hemp legislation has already advanced through one legislative committee, and the governor seems poised to sign it into law this year as long as her concerns are addressed.

Vermont

Gov. Phil Scott (R) reluctantly signed a 2018 bill into law that legalizes low-level marijuana possession and home cultivation. Now, lawmakers are pushing to add legal cannabis sales to that, and the governor doesn’t appear as opposed as he once did.

A top lawmaker said that Scott is “at the table” in ongoing talks about legislative language. Although he still has concerns about impaired driving, the governor reportedly has his eye on using legal marijuana sales revenue to fund an after-school program he is proposing.

A cannabis commercialization bill cleared the Senate in 2019 and has already been amended and approved by a number of House committees this year, with a floor vote expected in the coming weeks.

While Scott hasn’t committed to signing it into law, advocates have become more hopeful that he won’t block it because of the tax money it can generate to support his other priorities.

U.S. Virgin Islands

Gov. Albert Bryan Jr. (D) called lawmakers into a special session in December to begin considering a marijuana legalization proposal that he says is needed to generate revenue to support a retirement fund for government employees.

“We must acknowledge the opportunities that regulated expansion of this industry can bring to the territory and the potential benefits” to the retirement program, he said during his State of the Territory address last month.

Virginia

Gov. Ralph Northam (D) campaigned on decriminalizing marijuana in 2017 and has continually pushed lawmakers to send him a bill on the topic. Now that the governor’s party won control of both chambers of the legislature in November’s elections, it might actually get done, and he put marijuana decriminalization at the top of his 2020 criminal justice agenda.

“We need to take an honest look at our criminal justice system to make sure we’re treating people fairly and using taxpayer dollars wisely,” he said in his State of the Commonwealth speech. “This means decriminalizing marijuana possession—and clearing the records of people who’ve gotten in trouble for it.”

Cannabis decriminalization legislation has advanced through several House of Delegates and Senate committees in recent weeks, and cleared the full House this week. A Senate floor vote is expected soon.

Wisconsin

Gov. Tony Evers (D) included language to legalize medical cannabis and decriminalize marijuana possession in his budget last year, but lawmakers removed those provisions.

But the governor is still pushing the issue, calling out the legislature in his 2020 State of the State speech for ignoring the will of the voters.

“When more than 80 percent of our state supports medical marijuana…and elected officials can ignore those numbers without consequence, folks, something’s wrong,” he said.

The GOP House speaker has expressed some openness to allowing medical cannabis in some form, but Senate leadership is more hostile to the idea. It remains to be seen if gubernatorial pressure can convince lawmakers to advance the issue.
Click to expand...
Thank you for posting information that is helpful!
 
Pete Buttigieg wants to end the war on weed—but not in South Bend

Presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg says all the right things about cannabis legalization and criminal justice reform while out campaigning for the Democratic nomination.

But a close examination of his time as mayor of South Bend, Indiana, shows that his record in public office fails to live up to his lofty campaign rhetoric.

Most critically, he’s done little to stop rampant racial disparities in cannabis arrests during his time running a city of 102,000 people—and he forced South Bend’s first black police chief out of office amid pressure from a group of allegedly racist white police officers.

High achiever with a stellar resume

In a crowded Democratic primary field, Buttigieg stood out for his youth, his political inexperience, and his service as a combat veteran.

A Harvard graduate and Rhodes Scholar, Buttigieg began his civilian professional life at McKinsey & Co., working in Chicago for the high-powered consulting firm.

In 2009, two years after finishing his economics degree at Oxford, he joined the Navy Reserve. Even while serving in the Reserve and working for McKinsey, Buttigieg found time to run against Indiana’s incumbent state treasurer in the 2010 election.

He lost that race—it wasn’t even close—but the next year came roaring back to win the South Bend mayor’s race. At age 29, Buttigieg became the youngest mayor in the United States of a city with a population above 100,000. Two years later, he took a leave of absence to deploy to Afghanistan, where he was awarded multiple medals while serving in combat.

In recent interviews, Buttigieg has acknowledged that his impressive career path might have been derailed had he been saddled with a criminal arrest for cannabis possession. He said this during a sit-down talk at SXSW in Austin last year:

“I was standing outside my dorm [at Harvard]. I was on my way home from a party or something. I ran into a friend and he had an acquaintance with him, and we were chatting, and at some point I noticed that she was smoking a joint. And just out of curiosity—there was like a little bit left—I was like ‘Oh, is that…’ And she handed it to me. At exactly, precisely this instant, a police car drives by—university police—and I thought, well, that’s gotta go.”

Buttigieg says he tossed the roach over his shoulder, but the campus police officer witnessed him in the act.

That led to “Harvard Pete” getting searched and lectured on the spot—but nothing worse.

Buttigieg has since pointed to the story as the moment he learned about white male privilege.

“A lot of people probably had the exact same experience and would not have been believed,” he said. “[They] would have been a lot worse than yelled at, and would not have slept in their own beds that night—and maybe would have been derailed in their college career because of it.”

‘No thanks, I’m on the clock’

Buttigieg says he’s smoked cannabis “a handful of times in his life,” but it was “a long time ago.” In October, while touring a state-licensed cannabis store in Las Vegas, he declined to make a purchase.

“I’m on the clock,” he joked, “and it’s going to be a long work day for me.”

Buttigieg did take the opportunity to discuss the issue in some depth, though. He touched on everything from the stark racial disparities in marijuana arrests to the promise of cannabis as a treatment for PTSD among military veterans.

Drug decrim part of his ‘Douglass Plan’

More broadly, Buttigieg has made cannabis legalization—and the decriminalization of all drugs—a central part of his Douglass Plan, which his campaign calls “a proposal for comprehensively and intentionally dismantling racist structures and systems, fueled by an investment of unprecedented scale in the freedom and self-determination of Black Americans.”

He has also called for reducing incarceration in America by 50%, without a rise in crime, by “using clemency powers, working with states, ending incarceration as a response to drug possession, and when we legalize marijuana… [having] expungements as well for people whose incarceration is doing more harm than the original offense did.”

Those policy proposals put him near the front of the Democratic pack on drug reform—not as progressive and proven as Bernie Sanders, but far from the retrograde positions of Joe Biden and Mike Bloomberg.

Here’s the thing, though. When Mayor Pete had the chance to put those ideas into action in South Bend, he punted. When it comes to drug reform, Buttigieg has so far been all talk and no action.

Black and white in South Bend

When the Intercept’s Ryan Grim and Akela Lacy dug deep into Pete Buttigieg’s record on cannabis while serving as the mayor of South Bend, they found a legacy that clearly doesn’t live up to the kind of systemic change promised in the Douglass Plan.

In fact, during Buttigieg’s time in office, South Bend’s “black residents have been far more likely to be arrested for marijuana offenses than its white residents,” Grim and Lacy wrote. “[And] that disparity in South Bend under Buttigieg is in fact worse than in the rest of the country, or even the rest of Indiana.”

According to law enforcement data, between 2012 and 2018 black people were 4.3 times as likely to be arrested in South Bend for marijuana possession as white people— despite using cannabis at roughly the same rate. That same disparity was slightly less (3.4x) statewide and (3.7x) nationally.

The disparities in South Bend under Mayor Pete extended beyond simple possession arrests. Despite being a city with a 63% white majority, 22 black people were arrested for distributing cannabis in South Bend in 2018, versus only four white people arrested on the same charge.

A Buttigieg campaign spokesperson addressed the issue in this statement to Leafly:

“While mayors don’t make the law related to drug possession, Pete has been an outspoken advocate for legalization because he recognizes the disparate impact these laws have in devastating Black communities and the lives of Black Americans, particularly young Black men. It is also why he’s one of the only candidates to make eliminating incarceration for drug possession part of his presidential platform, and it’s why he’s proposed legalizing marijuana, expunging past convictions, reducing sentences for other drug offenses—and applying those reductions retroactively.”


Mistakes were made

Meanwhile, Buttigieg says that his “first serious mistake as mayor” was initially supporting South Bend Police Chief Darryl Boykins in a controversy over potentially illegal recordings that were made of some police phone lines—a policy which preceded Boykins’ term as police chief.

Amid public outrage, Boykins, the city’s first black police chief, rescinded his resignation a day after offering it, and was subsequently demoted to a new position with the city government. He later sued on the grounds of racial discrimination and won a $50,000 settlement.

Boykins says he never listened to the recorded calls, but a city employee named Karen DePaepe did—again per longstanding departmental policy—and she has described in sworn testimony hearing white South Bend police officers regularly use racist language in reference to Boykins, while coordinating amongst themselves on a plan to convince the mayor to remove him from his post.

Buttigieg fired DePaepe, who also sued the city, winning a $235,000 settlement. She has not commented on the recordings since.

Legalization as smart politics

So where does all this leave us? Which is the real Pete Buttigieg: Candidate Pete the ambitious reformer, or Mayor Pete the status-quo protector?

Either way, it’s worth noting that as one of the first crop of millennial candidates for President, Buttigieg has arrived on the national stage at a time when 66% of Americans (and 76% of Democrats) now support cannabis legalization. As does almost every one of his rivals for the nomination.

So backing an end to cannabis prohibition is no longer a politically bold or courageous stance.

It’s just smart politics.
 
As I stated above, I do not hyperventilate over this news as Congress will again put such protection in place via the appropriations bills.

However, I would like to note a missing piece of the info that this articles addresses.....that is, the Obama administration ALSO did not include such protection in its budgets and therefore required Congress to tack on the Rohrabacher–Blumenauer amendment..... and in fact the Obama administration asked Congress to strike this amendment from the bill, which Congress declined to do.

Just saying......try to know ALL of the facts.

Congress Fights Back after Trump’s Proposal against Marijuana

President Trump proposed a budget that will end the existing protection policy for state medical marijuana programs. Yesterday, in Trump Denies Protection to State Medical Marijuana Programs, I discussed how President Trump wants to ignore Congress’s introduced policy to protect the states that have legalized marijuana from federal interference. However, Congress decided to fight back against President Trump.

Congress fights back after Trump’s proposal
On Wednesday, a Marijuana Moment article discussed how a Republican lawmaker stated that Congress will ignore President Trump’s budget proposal against medical marijuana. In response to a tweet by Marijuana Moment, Representative Matt Gaetz, a White House ally, said, “We have the votes to continue the current policy through the appropriations process.”

Notably, a Republican lawmaker is fighting back in support of marijuana. In the past, we have seen that Republicans oppose marijuana. Most of the marijuana bills usually get either stuck or rejected by the Senate because of the Republican majority. However, some Republican lawmakers support this marijuana policy for state protection.
A Democratic lawmaker, Representative Earl Blumenauer, said, “Trump’s latest budget is an attack on 8 years of progress at all levels. Luckily, Congress has fought back and defeated most of Trump’s misguided budget priorities.” Blumenauer said that he will continue to lead the effort. He will ensure that outdated federal cannabis policies end.

Representative Matt Gaetz also stood up to a Republican attorney general in Florida who opposed a ballot initiative to legalize marijuana in the state. Floridians didn’t collect enough signatures for the 2020 ballot. However, they will collect signatures to qualify for the 2022 ballot. Meanwhile, lawmakers in Florida are pushing with bills to legalize cannabis in the state.

Trump wants the death penalty for drug offenders
President Trump is showing a sudden negative vibe towards medical marijuana, which he has always supported. Notably, he has applauded other countries’ stricter rules against drugs. President Trump applauded Singapore and China’s death penalty for drug offenders. He thinks countries that have the death penalty for drug offenders have fewer drug-related crimes. As a result, he would like to implement strong penalties on drug-related crimes in the US. I discussed how Singapore asked Netflix (NASDAQ:NFLX) to stop all marijuana shows as part of its strict regulations against cannabis.

Recently, Tulsi Gabbard discussed how she wants all drugs to be legal—not just marijuana. She thinks that a regulated market will keep illegal activities under control.
However, we can see two positive outcomes following President Trump’s proposed budget. One is more funding to the Department of Agriculture to continue its regulations for hemp. Second is funding for the FDA for more research on CBD products.

While marijuana legalization and regulation-related issues are heating up, two big cannabis players are gearing up to report their earnings results. Aurora Cannabis (NYSE:ACB) will report its earnings for the second quarter of fiscal 2020 today before the market opens. Meanwhile, Canopy Growth (NYSE:CGC)(TSE:WEED) will report its results for the third quarter of fiscal 2020 tomorrow before the market opens.
 
"planned to move there once their son finished high school. "​

If he is smart he will stay in CO and NEVER go back to Kansas again......this kind of stuff is just too awful, probably should go in the Atrocious Cannabis News thread...cause it is atrocious.
 
Let's Face It, Marijuana Equity Investments Have Flopped
Brand-name companies are finding little early-stage success in the high-growth cannabis industry.​


The marijuana industry is expected to be one of the fastest-growing industries in the world this decade. Although estimates vary on Wall Street, legal weed sales are forecast to hit between $50 billion and $200 billion per year by 2030. For context, this would represent an approximate 400% to 1,800% increase in annual revenue from what the industry generated in worldwide sales in 2018.
This growth projection is a big reason cannabis stocks rapidly expanded their production capacity and product offerings, and is also why a handful of brand-name companies dipped their toes into the water over the past two years. Unfortunately for two brand-name businesses, their equity investments into cannabis stocks have not gone as planned.
A clear jar packed with dried cannabis that's seated atop a fanned pile of cash.

Image source: Getty Images.
Constellation's investment in Canopy Growth fizzles out


The most prominent equity investment in the entire pot industry is Corona and Modelo beer maker Constellation Brands' (NYSE:STZ) stake in Canopy Growth (NYSE:CGC), the largest marijuana stock in the world by market cap.
Though Constellation is best known for completing a $4 billion equity investment into Canopy in November 2018, which upped its stake in the company to 37%, this actually marked the third time it had directly or indirectly invested in Canopy. Back in October 2017, Constellation made the first equity investment into the pot industry by taking a 9.9% stake in Canopy for approximately $190 million. In June 2018, Constellation also gobbled up a third of Canopy's 600 million Canadian dollar convertible debt offering, which, if executed, would allow the company to up its ownership in Canopy Growth.
When Constellation made its massive $4 billion investment, the thinking was twofold. First, and most obvious, it was expected that Constellation would work with Canopy to develop a line of nonalcoholic cannabis-infused beverages. And second, it was believed that Constellation's investment would allow Canopy Growth to rapidly expand its domestic and international operations, thereby providing Constellation Brands another means of growing its business beyond beverages.

The problem is that supply issues throughout Canada and a delay in Canopy's infused beverage launch have stymied this partnership's near-term prospects. Canopy announced last month that, despite receiving its license from Health Canada in November, its scaling process for infused beverages isn't yet complete. This is somewhat embarrassing considering that Constellation's expertise lies with beverage production and marketing.
A cannabis leaf laid atop carbonation in a glass, with cannabis leaves set to the right of the glass.

Image source: Getty Images.
On the supply front, Ontario takes a good portion of the blame. Canada's most-populous province had only 24 dispensaries open at the one-year anniversary of recreational sales commencing, which is creating supply bottlenecks for traditional cannabis products, as well as newly launched derivatives.
While it's possible that Constellation Brands' equity investment turns around, it has completely fizzled out in the early going and even cost Constellation in its quarterly operating reports.
Altria's investment in Cronos Group goes up in smoke
Investors have witnessed similar struggles with Altria Group's (NYSE:MO) equity investment into Cronos Group (NASDAQ:CRON).

For those who may recall, Cronos closed its $1.8 billion equity investment from Altria in March 2019, giving the tobacco giant a 45% equity stake in the company. Altria, like Constellation, also received warrants as part of the deal that may allow it to up its ownership at a later date.
Given Altria's production and marketing knowledge when it comes to smokable products, this partnership appeared to make a lot of sense. With Cronos desiring to be a leader in vape products, Altria was expected to aid the company with developing and launching vapes in Canada. As a reminder, derivatives are a considerably higher-margin product than traditional dried cannabis, and vapes are believed to be the most popular of all alternative cannabis products.
What's more, the $1.8 billion Altria provided Cronos Group in return for a 45% stake in the company was expected to allow Cronos to develop its product portfolio and expand into overseas markets. Considering that U.S. cigarette shipment volumes have been declining in the U.S. as the adult smoking rate falls, Altria's investment ultimately gives it an opportunity to diversify away from an industry that's becoming ever-more challenging.
A vape pen next to a small vial of liquid and neatly arranged dried cannabis flower.

Image source: Getty Images.
However, supply issues in Canada and vape-related health concerns have sacked investor hopes in the meantime.

As noted earlier, Ontario's lack of an adequate number of retail locations has created supply issues for close to 40% of Canada's population. Even with Ontario shelving its lottery system for retail store licenses in favor of a more traditional review-and-approve system, it'll be a while before derivative supply becomes widely available to consumers.
The other issue here is the health concerns raised from a number of mystery lung illnesses in the U.S. that were directly tied to e-cigarettes and vaping. Since last summer, 64 people have died and 2,758 people have been hospitalized with lung injuries associated with e-cigarettes or vaping, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Even with the CDC identifying the likely culprit of these lung illnesses, there's still a lot of concern regarding the long-term health risks associated with vaping -- especially when it comes to vaping tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-containing products. In fact, Alberta has temporarily banned the sale of vape products until it's completed a safety review. Until more is known about these health effects, vape products could see weaker-than-expected sales.
Considering what we've seen happen to Constellation Brands' and Altria's equity investments in the early going, it's possible that other brand-name companies will remain gun-shy of the pot industry for the foreseeable future.
 
So, like it took some level of professional expertise to determine this conclusion? hahahaha...too funny.


Border Patrol Union Head Admits Legalizing Marijuana Forces Cartels Out Of The Market


The head of the labor union that represents U.S. Border Patrol agents acknowledged on Friday that states that legalize marijuana are disrupting cartel activity.


While National Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd was attempting to downplay the impact of legalization, he seemed to inadvertently make a case for the regulation all illicit drugs by arguing that cartels move away from smuggling cannabis and on to other substances when states legalize.


Judd made the remarks during an appearance on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal, where a caller said that “the states that have legalized marijuana have done more damage to the cartels than the [Drug Enforcement Administration] could ever think about doing.”


“As far as drugs go, all we do is we enforce the laws. We don’t determine what those laws are,” Judd, who is scheduled to meet with President Trump on Friday, replied. “If Congress determines that marijuana is going to be legal, then we’re not going to seize marijuana.”


“But what I will tell you is when he points out that certain states have legalized marijuana, all the cartels do is they just transition to another drug that creates more profit,” he said. “Even if you legalize marijuana, it doesn’t mean that drugs are going to stop. They’re just going to go and start smuggling the opioids, the fentanyl.”




One potential solution that Judd didn’t raise would be to legalize those other drugs to continue to remove the profit motive for cartels. Former presidential candidate Andrew Yang made a similar argument in December.


Federal data on Border Patrol drug seizures seems to substantiate the idea that cannabis legalization at the state level has reduced demand for the product from the illicit market. According to a 2018 report from the Cato Institute, these substantial declines are attributable to state-level cannabis reform efforts, which “has significantly undercut marijuana smuggling.”


Additionally, legalization seems to be helping to reduce federal marijuana trafficking prosecutions, with reports showing decreases of such cases year over year since states regulated markets have come online.


In his annual report last year, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts also noted reduced federal marijuana prosecutions—another indication that the market for illegally sourced marijuana is drying up as more adults consumers are able to buy the product in legal stores.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Sponsored by
VGoodiez 420EDC
Back
Top