Law The Cannabis Chronicles - Misc Cannabis News

[CarolKing]

New Study Reveals How To Roll Marijuana Joints That Are More Potent Or Last Longer

Researchers might have finally cracked the code on rolling the perfect marijuana joint. As pre-rolled joints take over a larger share of the legal cannabis market, scientists at a Delic Labs, a Vancouver-based marijuana and psilocybin research facility, recently conducted a novel experiment to...

www.marijuanamoment.net

What about using a vaporizer.

 

[Baron23]

Senate GOP Marijuana Banking Sponsor And Key Chairman At Odds Over Next Steps For SAFE Banking Bill​

Two key senators behind the push for a bipartisan marijuana banking bill seem to be at odds over what it’s going to take to get a committee vote to send the legislation to the floor.

In interviews this week, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and lead GOP Secure and Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act sponsor Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) shared conflicting stories about the state of negotiations over the legislation.

Brown told Politico that he’s entrusting Daines to shore up more Republican support and specifically get additional members of his caucus to sign onto the SAFE Banking Act as cosponsors to codify that support.

“We’re not going to take a bill to the floor and have [Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY)] undercut it with 58 or 59 votes,” Brown said. “He’s done that many times. So, we want Daines…to sign on the dotted line on this and really commit to get members to co-sponsor. If they’re serious, they co-sponsor.”

But according to Daines, the issue isn’t a lack of Republican support; it’s the fact that Democratic members are pushing for amendments that would break the agreement that the he and the chairman made over the measure as introduced.

Daines told Punchbowl News that Republicans are “ready to move forward” on the bill, but Democrats “are trying to change it.” He added that he didn’t “see positive yardage” in bipartisan negotiations over the recent Fourth of July recess.

He didn’t specify what type of changes Democrats are seeking, but one of the main contentions over the legislation revolves around Section 10 of the SAFE Banking Act—which includes language that certain Democrats like Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) have flagged as problematic, arguing that it would broadly undermine banking regulations outside of the cannabis sector.

“It’s a concern, and Jack is very much a straight shooter in this as he is everything else,” Brown told Politico. “We’ve got to work it out.”

But conservative members support the section, and eliminating it could jeopardize some of the bipartisanship behind the bill as introduced.

Daines has also cautioned against attempting to expand the measure with social justice reforms that progressives would like to add, though his office previously told Marijuana Moment that the senator is “open” to adding expungements language, as proposed by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY).

In any case, the window to schedule a summer markup in the Senate Banking Committee, where the bill received an initial hearing in May, is gradually closing.

“The Committee is working towards a markup vote on the SAFE Banking Act,” a spokesperson for Brown said in a statement to Marijuana Moment on Wednesday. “Senator Brown remains committed to working with Banking and Housing Committee members on both sides of the aisle to find a path forward for SAFE Banking and other committee priorities.”

Marijuana Moment also reached out to Daines’s office for clarification on the two senators’ differing takes on next steps for the bill, but a representative was not immediately available.

The GOP lawmaker’s office told Politico that “Senator Daines and Chairman Brown had an agreement when he reintroduced the bill and now Democrats are demanding changes.”

“We have enough Republican votes to get it passed but Democrats keep moving the goalposts,” the spokesperson said.

In a Dear Colleague letter that was distributed on Sunday, Schumer said that advancing SAFE Banking remains a legislative priority, but he also acknowledged that getting the job done “will not be easy” and require GOP buy-in.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), meanwhile, said on Monday that the majority leader’s summer agenda is too ambitious, and he expressed serious doubts that marijuana banking—among a list of other legislative items that Schumer identified in the letter—will advance in the summer session.

 

[Baron23]

This is fucked up...almost posted it in Atrocious Cannabis News thread.....maybe it should be moved there. sigh

House And Senate Both Move To Keep Blocking D.C. Marijuana Sales But Protecting State Medical Cannabis Laws​

House and Senate appropriators have approved large-scale annual spending bills that once again include language to protect state medical cannabis programs, as well as a controversial rider to block Washington, D.C. from implementing a system of regulated marijuana sales.

The Senate and House Appropriations Committee both held markups of Fiscal Year 2024 spending legislation for Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) on Thursday. And the Senate panel, as well as a House subcommittee, have also advanced their appropriations measures for Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS).

Aside from the state medical cannabis and D.C. marijuana sales provisions, House lawmakers rejected a GOP-led amendment to the chamber’s FSGG report that would have called on the federal government to take steps to study other state cannabis regulatory models and develop a national legalization framework.
Lawmakers have consistently attempted to use appropriations measures as vehicles for cannabis reform, with mixed results. Even with Democrats in control of both chambers last session, efforts to expand marijuana protections to all legal states and enact limited cannabis banking reform stalled out following bicameral negotiations.

A rider to protect state medical cannabis programs from federal intervention, meanwhile, has been annually renewed each year since 2014—and appropriators in both chambers agreed again this Congress to keep that language intact in their respective base bills as they advance.

“This bill again contains language preventing the Justice Department from interfering with states that have medical marijuana laws, ensuring that the prescribing and dispensing of medical marijuana in those states is both legal and regulated,” a summary from the Senate Appropriations Committee says, inaccurately describing the scope of the provision, which does not change cannabis’s legal status but instead restricts the ability of federal officials to enforce the law (and also does not allow for “prescription” of what remains a Schedule I drug).

“Patients and doctors in states that have approved medical marijuana need to know that they are safe from arrest and prosecution by the federal government,” the Senate panel said.

To the disappointment of reform advocates, both the Democratic-controlled Senate and GOP House also maintained a rider in their respective bills that’s long blocked the District of Columbia from using its local tax dollars to enact a system of regulated adult-use marijuana sales, despite voters in the District approving legalization of possession and home cultivation at the ballot in 2014.

President Joe Biden’s Fiscal Year 2024 budget request that he released in March also maintained the D.C. rider for the third year in a row.
Separately, while the House under Democratic control has twice added language in prior CJS spending bills that sought to expand protections against Justice Department interference in all state and tribal adult-use marijuana programs, the chamber did not include that provision in the base bill that advanced through subcommittee on Friday now that Republicans are in charge. The reform also did not appear in the Democratic Senate’s version that advanced on Thursday, and no members offered amendments on the matter.

Also, neither side attempted to add language to the FSGG bill to protect financial institutions from being penalized by federal regulators simply for working with state-legal marijuana businesses. The House has passed limited appropriations legislation that would have prevented the use of Treasury Department funds to punish banks that service the industry, but it has never been included in the final package. Meanwhile, the much more robust standalone Secure and Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act is currently sitting in legislative limbo as Senate Democrats and Republicans spar over a single section on banking industry regulations.

Both House and Senate appropriators also maintained a longstanding rider in their new CJS base bills that safeguards state hemp programs from federal interference.
And there’s language in the Senate CJS report directing the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to continue working with state and local law enforcement on distributing field-testing kits that can distinguish federally legal hemp from marijuana.

“The Committee is aware that DEA has developed field-testing kits that can distinguish between hemp and marijuana on the spot,” the passage says. “The Committee directs the DEA to continue to work to ensure State and local law enforcement have access to this field test technology so they can more efficiently conduct their drug interdiction efforts at the local level. The Committee further directs the DEA to report to the Committee not later than 180 days after enactment of this act, and not less than every 6 months thereafter, until such time as testing kits are deployed to State and local law enforcement in the field.”

Meanwhile, Congressional Cannabis Caucus co-chair Rep. Dave Joyce (R-OH) filed a novel cannabis amendment to the House CJS report on Thursday, but the committee rejected it in a voice vote, despite receiving supportive comments from fellow Republicans.

The congressman’s amendment to the report would have called on the White House to work with the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau and other relevant agencies to “coordinate an assessment of the adequacy of these states’ cannabis regulatory frameworks, including commonalities and novel approaches to enforcement and oversight.”

That’s essentially what Joyce, alongside House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), is also seeking to achieve through a standalone bill called the Preparing Regulators Effectively for a Post-Prohibition Adult-Use Regulated Environment Act (PREPARE) Act that they filed in April. The legislation would further require the attorney general to create a commission comprised of representatives from numerous agencies to get the federal government ready for eventual legalization.
“We as lawmakers will be better equipped to consider policies that align tax frameworks and improve public health and safety,” Joyce said at Thursday’s markup. “Each state has done this independently. Some states have had better results than others.”

“We should have one similar regulatory framework that we need to develop, and that’s what I’m asking is to at least gather the information from these other states so we have the ability to look at it should cannabis ever become legal nationwide,” he added.

Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) voiced support for the congressman’s amendment, saying that the widely criticized rollout of Oklahoma’s medical cannabis program underscores the need to better understand what types of regulatory models work.

“My friend’s amendment, I think, is really important—having adequate information and adequate understanding of what the regulatory issues are,” Cole said. “This is a very thoughtful, helpful kind of way because this is here whether we like it or not. And understanding the appropriate way to regulate it and how to deal with it and educate the public about it is a very valuable contribution.”

Rep. Mark Amodei (R-NV) also spoke to the amendment, saying that while he considered it “a little skinny” in detail, it also represents “a step in the right direction.” But the measure then failed on a voice vote and did not have enough support to force a roll call.

Here’s the full text of what the amendment would have done:

“The Committee notes that over 20 states and territories now permit the use of adult use cannabis, while over 35 states and territories permit the use of cannabis for medicinal purposes. The Committee urges the Executive Office of the President, in consultation with the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, and other agencies which may have relevant regulatory expertise to coordinate an assessment of the adequacy of these states’ cannabis regulatory frameworks, including commonalities and novel approaches to enforcement and oversight.”

Another cannabis provision included in the House CJS bill would prevent limitations on overtime reimbursements to law enforcement who are participating in a federal program to eradicate illegally grown marijuana in states that have enacted legalization.

 

[Baron23]

Cannabis Legalization sees 61% drop in Cannabis Prisoners ​

The number of people in Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) custody for cannabis is down 61% from 2013 to 2018, according to the latest Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics report.​

While this shows a decline in cannabis incarcerations since the launch of numerous legal cannabis markets, data for 2018 to the present is not included in the report – a time period which has seen multiple other legal cannabis markets launch.


In a statement regarding the report, Dr. Alexis Piquero, Director of BJS, commented: “Although the number of people in federal prison for drug offences decreased over this 5-year span, they still accounted for a large share—almost half—of the people in BOP custody in 2018.


“At the same time, we saw differences by the type of drug involved, with more people incarcerated for heroin and methamphetamines and fewer for marijuana and cocaine.”


Alongside data showing the decrease in cannabis incarcerations, the report data also shows that around 60% of all people in BOP custody for drug offences at fiscal year end 2018 had received mandatory minimum penalties, including 4% for cannabis.


Additionally, The report analysed the federal prison population of people who could have received penalties for their drug offence, showing that those serving time for crack cocaine were more likely to receive penalties (94%) than those held for cannabis (82%).


Piquero stated: “Additionally, and regardless of any penalties they received, six in 10 people in BOP custody in 2018 were serving long drug sentences of 10 years or more. As for those sentenced to at least 20 years, more than half of the males were black and over 40% of the females were white.”

 

[momofthegoons]

Congressional Spending Bill Reports Call For Research On Hemp As Plastic Alternative And Marijuana Impaired Driving Test​

A key House committee is calling on federal officials to take steps to develop hemp-based plastic alternatives, create a device to detect marijuana-impaired driving and combat illegal cannabis grows on public lands.

The provisions are contained in reports attached to annual spending legislation that advanced through the House Appropriations Committee this week.

The report for the Fiscal Year 2024 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies appropriations bill discusses the “potential need for dependable bio-based and U.S.-grown plastic alternatives.”

It directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to “provide a briefing on efforts to explore alternatives, such as United States-based hemp, and how such alternatives may be used as a cost-efficient alternative in government-produced or funded materials” within 180 days of the bill’s enactment.

Another section of the report says that the committee is “aware that trespassers illegally grow marijuana on public lands in California.”

“These unlawful activities harmfully impact the public, water, soil, and wildlife,” it says. “The Committee supports Forest Service efforts to develop tools to detect and eradicate grow sites. The Committee directs the Forest Service and the [Bureau of Land Management] to continue to cooperate with State, local, and Tribal governments on survey, reclamation, and prevention efforts to the maximum extent possible.”

The report for the separate Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies (THUD) bill, meanwhile, also features a marijuana mention focused on impaired driving.

It says that the committee “continues to support the development of an objective standard to measure marijuana impairment and a related field sobriety test to ensure highway safety.”

The Department of Transportation is directed to “provide an updated briefing to the Committee no later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act regarding interim progress in advance of publication of the report.”

Bipartisan lawmakers are also seeking to include drug policy amendments as part of spending legislation covering other federal agencies.

Two identical amendments from Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA) that have been offered as part of different appropriations bills would prevent the use of funds to drug test most applicants for cannabis at the agencies covered by the legislation.

There’s also an amendment to a spending bill from Reps. Jack Bergman (R-MI) and Lou Correa (D-CA) that’s meant to encourage the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to carry out “large-scale studies” into drugs like psilocybin and MDMA that have been designated as “breakthrough therapies” by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Earlier this month, Garcia had also filed an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would have prevented security clearance denials for federal workers over prior cannabis use. But that proposal, in addition to more than a dozen other drug policy reform amendments filed by bipartisan lawmakers, were ultimately blocked by the GOP-controlled House Rules Committee, which will also decide whether these new amendments can receive floor votes.

Other amendments on medical cannabis recommendations for military veterans were also recently filed by bipartisan lawmakers on the VA spending bill. They will need to be made in order by the House Rules Committee if they’re to receive floor consideration. Given what happened with the NDAA drug policy amendments this month, it’s not clear if leadership will allow that.

Meanwhile, Democratic senators are seeking to pass a series of marijuana reform amendments through its version of the NDAA.

One of the proposals, led by Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI), would allow veterans to use medical cannabis in states and territories where its legal, mirroring a standalone bill that the senator introduced in April.

It would additionally protect doctors who discuss and fill out paperwork to recommend medical marijuana for veterans. And it would require the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to support clinical trials investigating the therapeutic effects of cannabis in the treatment of conditions such as pain and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) that commonly afflict veterans.

It’s currently unclear if Senate Democrats and Republicans will reach an agreement on inserting any of the amendments in the final bill—or if the GOP-controlled House would be willing to go along with them if they are ultimately attached on the Senate side.

Separately, the Senate Appropriations Committee recently approved an amendment to allow VA doctors to issue medical cannabis recommendations and released a report for the relevant spending bill that calls on the department to facilitate medical marijuana access for veterans and explore the therapeutic potential of psychedelics.

House and Senate appropriators have also approved large-scale annual spending bills that once again include language to protect state medical cannabis programs, as well as a controversial rider to block Washington, D.C. from implementing a system of regulated marijuana sales.

 

[momofthegoons]

VA And Defense Department Oppose Medical Marijuana For PTSD, But Take Neutral Position On Psychedelics As Research Continues​

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Department of Defense (DOD) are strongly against the use of marijuana for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)—but they’re taking a neutral position on psychedelics like psilocybin and LSD, simply saying that more research should be done.

In an update to their joint clinical practice guidelines, the departments provided recommendations on a variety of therapeutics used to treat PTSD and acute stress disorder that commonly afflict military veterans. And while many veterans use marijuana, often to treat symptoms of the conditions, the VA/DOD Management of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Acute Stress Disorder Work Group said it is fully against the alternative treatment option.

“The Work Group recommends against the use of cannabis or cannabis derivatives in treating patients with PTSD because of the lack of well-designed [randomized control trials] evaluating the efficacy of cannabis derivatives in large samples of individuals with PTSD and the serious side effects associated with their use,” it says.

“Evidence from the 2017 VA/DoD PTSD [clinical practice guidelines] indicates significant harm associated with cannabis use,” it said, arguing that research suggests that marijuana is linked to issues with attention, memory, IQ and driving.

While medical marijuana came with a “strong against” recommendation from the departments, they said that the work group’s confidence in the existing evidence is “very low” due to a “lack of randomized, controlled, methodologically sound clinical trials; small sample sizes, and selection bias.”

“The benefits of cannabis were outweighed by the potential serious adverse effects,” the document, published last month, says. “Patient values and preferences varied largely because some patients seek new, novel treatments although others might be unwilling to use cannabis or cannabis derivatives. Thus, the Work Group made the following recommendation: We recommend against cannabis or cannabis derivatives for the treatment of PTSD.”

Whereas the work group says it “found no new evidence” on cannabis to treat PTSD since the last joint review in 2017 and largely relied on that prior assessment for the current document, the departments actively looked for new data on psychedelics, which weren’t even mentioned at all in the prior review six years ago.

The investigation into the potential therapeutic benefits of psilocybin, ayahuasca, DMT, ibogaine and LSD turned up “no studies meeting the search criteria that assessed the effects of psychedelics” for PTSD, the updated guidelines, first reported by Psychedelic Alpha, say.

“Of note, these agents cannot be legally prescribed in the U.S. outside a research study,” it continues. “Additionally, given the lack of evidence, these agents might have adverse effects, risks, or both that are currently unknown (and adverse events have been anecdotally reported). Therefore, insufficient evidence exists to recommend for or against these specific psychedelic agents as a treatment for PTSD.”

“Patient values and preferences varied because some patients might want to try psychedelics, but others may not,” it added. “Thus, the Work Group made the following recommendation: There is insufficient evidence to recommend for or against psilocybin, ayahuasca, dimethyltryptamine, ibogaine, or lysergic acid diethylamide for the treatment of PTSD.”

VA and DOD addressed MDMA—which has received “breakthrough therapy” designation from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) based on preclinical evidence that it could help treat PTSD—in a separate section.

Despite the early evidence supporting its medical utility, it said that there’s still “insufficient evidence to recommend for or against” the effectiveness of MDMA-assisted therapy for PTSD.

It recognized that at least five randomized control trials have found the psychedelic to “benefit individuals with PTSD,” those studies “have differed notably in the control condition used” and such differences “could have potentially biased outcomes.”

“It would be challenging to implement MDMA-assisted psychotherapy in current VA and DoD health care systems. The treatment protocol requires a high investment of resources,” it continues. “Allocation of staff to conduct MDMA-assisted psychotherapy could have negative impacts on access for other patients. The success of MDMA-assisted psychotherapy might also require discontinuing SSRI use by the patient. Additionally, patients’ willingness to engage in this intervention would likely vary significantly.”

“The benefits of MDMA are balanced with the potential harms, which include worsening symptoms and an increase in suicidal ideation (study not included in the evidence base nor impacting the strength of the recommendation). Patient values and preferences varied mainly because of comfort with psychedelic treatment. Thus, the Work Group made the following recommendation: There is insufficient evidence to recommend for or against 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine assisted psychotherapy for the treatment of PTSD.”

While VA and DOD might not be ready to endorse the use of psychedelics—and they are strongly against the use of marijuana—to treat the mental health condition, bipartisan congressional lawmakers want to see federal agencies do more to explore their potential therapeutic efficacy. And they want to prevent situations where veterans are penalized over cannabis in legal states.

 

[Baron23]

DEA chief grilled on Biden’s plans to deschedule Marijuana ​

Reps Gaetz and Cohen questioned DEA on marijuana's Schedule 1 removal timeline; Administrator Milgram mentioned no specific timeframe.​

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) and Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) demanded further information from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) about its plan to remove marijuana from the list of Schedule 1 drugs during a House Judiciary hearing Thursday.

DEA Administrator Anne Milgram testified before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance during which she informed committee members that the agency has “not been given a specific timeline” to review and reevaluate marijuana’s classification.

President Biden put out a marijuana reform statement in October 2022 that called on the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the attorney general to reevaluate the federal law’s scheduling of marijuana.

The DEA must receive HHS’s review and recommendation to conduct its own evaluation process before coming to a scheduling decision, according to Milgram.
To Gaetz’s dismay, the DEA has yet to receive any such materials from HHS.

“That’s unsettling, isn’t it? When you don’t even know a timeline, it doesn’t really make it seem like something’s front of mind,” Gaetz said to Milgram after she disclosed the status of this procedure.

Cohen supported Gaetz’s stance on the matter, forming a rare bipartisan agreement in the House.

Cohen claimed that the federal discourse around marijuana has always been “governmental gibberish,” and that “the government has messed this up forever.”
Drug scheduling is used by the DEA to create lists of substances ranked by their acceptable medical use and the level of use considered abusive.

Marijuana currently stands on the Schedule 1 list, the classification meant for the world’s most dangerous drugs. Other substances on this list include heroin, LSD and ecstasy.

“What I will say to you, not specific to marijuana, but just overall, is that I am committed on trying to move things as quickly as we can,” Milgram said in response to Cohen’s question whether the department can do anything to speed up the process.

After hearing Milgram’s answer, Cohen told the administrator that he would help her out by calling his former colleague, the HHS secretary, today.
“We’re going to get this moving,” he added.

Gaetz also mentioned that marijuana’s current status provokes opioid dependencies and accidental fentanyl overdoses.

The Florida Republican explained that without medical marijuana, patients with chronic pain are more likely to turn to opioids to manage their symptoms, which is often the gateway to an addiction.

Fentanyl, which Milgram said is one of the deadliest drugs to exist, was not classified as a Schedule 1 substance when Biden put out his marijuana reform statement in 2022.

Fentanyl related substances were moved to the Schedule 1 list in 2018, but fentanyl itself remains under a Schedule 2 classification on account of its medical value.
“I really hope we get this done,” Gaetz told Milgram. “We’re two years into the Biden administration. And I honestly had hoped that by now, we would have already descheduled marijuana from the Schedule 1 list.”

 

[Baron23]

Well, that's fucking big of her, isn't it. This shit has been going on for years and years and she says...now...she will reach out to HHS for a timeline?

"But until now, the HHS has not yet submitted its review and recommendation to the DEA, according to Milgram. This step is necessary for the DEA to conduct its own evaluation process and eventually reach a decision regarding the scheduling of marijuana."​

​

Oh yeah? Why? DEA is in the DOJ, not HHS and they don't need HHS input on whether cannabis has any valid medical uses as the fucking FDA (in HHS) has approved cannabis derived drugs. These assholes are once again talking out of both sides of their mouths.

Yeah...its true....I fucking hate government and the assholes that run it...without regard for political party. I'm a nondenominational politician hater! hahaha

DEA Head pledges to seek Federal Marijuana rescheduling review timeline from HHS ​

The head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, Anne Milgram, has committed to asking the US Department of Health and Human Services for a timeline in order to conduct a review of the federal marijuana rescheduling.​

Pressed by Rep. Matt Gaetz (R- FL) during the oversight hearing of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) on July 27, in which Milgram testified before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance, she informed the committee members that the agency has not been provided with a definite timeline to review marijuana's classification.

However, when Gaetz asked Milgram if she would request the timeline from the HHS, she said, "I will ask."

When U.S. President Joe Biden granted pardons to all individuals convicted of simple marijuana possession under federal law last fall, he also requested the HSS and the Attorney General to review the current scheduling of marijuana under federal law.

But until now, the HHS has not yet submitted its review and recommendation to the DEA, according to Milgram.

This step is necessary for the DEA to conduct its own evaluation process and eventually reach a decision regarding the scheduling of marijuana.

However, MJBizDaily has recently reported that at least five states with medical marijuana programs have shared important data with U.S. health regulators for the Biden administration's review of removing marijuana from the federal list of dangerous drugs.

Passport: Explore the finest destinations and experiences around the world in the Forbes Passport newsletter.

By signing up, you accept and agree to our Terms of Service (including the class action waiver and arbitration provisions), and Privacy Statement.

Despite being legal for adult use in over 23 states and regulated for medical purposes in 38 states, marijuana remains listed as a Schedule I narcotic in the Controlled Substances Act, meaning that it is considered to have no medical value and a high likelihood of being abused. Other substances in the same Schedule I category include heroin and LSD.

Gaetz raised the issue of research connecting state-level cannabis legalization and regulation to reduced rates of opioid prescriptions, asking Milgram if the DEA would consider this information in their final scheduling decision.

Milgram assured Gaetz that she would maintain an open mind and carefully review all the research. She also anticipated receiving further public comments and research, expressing her commitment to examining all relevant information before reaching a conclusion.

After Gaetz highlighted that removing marijuana from Schedule I would facilitate marijuana research, Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) supported Gaetz's view, expressing frustration over the "governmental gibberish about marijuana" he heard from federal officials during his 17 years in Congress.

Cohen emphasized the importance of taking prompt action and humorously suggested reclassifying marijuana from Schedule I to "420" (which refers to the popular association of "420" with marijuana culture) to simplify the process and humorously address the issue at hand.

If marijuana is rescheduled, it would shift from Schedule I to a less restrictive category. Moving it to Schedule III, IV, or V would have the significant benefit of exempting marijuana businesses from the burdensome Internal Revenue Code 280E. This change would lead to a considerably lower effective tax rate for businesses operating within the marijuana industry.

However, rescheduling is not the only approach available to the federal government for modifying the treatment of marijuana under federal law. An alternative option for the Biden administration is to deschedule the plant entirely, removing marijuana from the CSA.

 

[Baron23]

Not about "legalization" per se, but about how legalized cannabis is going these days. I generally stick to actual government legalization issues but I think this is an important article. I note in particular that falling prices are one of the big issues but really its falling prices couples with expensive compliance to government regulations. There is always a price AND a cost side to losing money.

Mom, if these needs to move, please do with my apologies.

58% of Cultivators feel ‘Bad’ or ‘Terrible’ about current state of Cannabis ​

The survey included more than 400 growers across eight US states.​

While states throughout the U.S. continue to embrace the new legal wave of cannabis, it doesn’t eclipse the strife within the industry. Over the past few years, the industry has faced issues around oversupply, falling prices, stringent regulations and distribution problems, among others, which often fall especially heavy on cultivators.


Now, new research findings show exactly how these employees are faring in the current climate. According to the third edition of the U.S. Cannabis Cultivator survey from Wells Fargo, a majority of growers have a grim outlook on the current state of the cannabis market, as reported by Green Market Report.

Majority of Cultivators Feel Negatively About State of Industry​

The survey, including responses from more than 400 growers across eight U.S. states, found that 58% of growers said they feel “bad” or “terrible,” in reference to the current cannabis market. Specifically, 34% answered that “I feel terrible. Things look awful,” while 24% said “I feel bad. Things don’t look good.”


Additionally, 31% of respondents said they feel “okay,” while only 9% of cultivators said they feel “good” and 2% said they feel “great” about the current state of the market.


The survey also looked at responses by state, finding that California (which also has the highest number of growers) felt most negative about the current market, with 66% of cultivators expressing a “bad” or “terrible” outlook on the market. Most of the negativity was because of falling wholesale prices, with 34% of respondents citing this as their main source of stress, followed by restrictive regulations at 29% and lack of distribution avenues at 10%.


As the largest cannabis market in the world, California saw a dip in cannabis sales in 2022, the first since adult-use sales launched in 2018. The loss is likely due to a decreased price per pound of cannabis across the state.

Falling Prices a Main Obstacle for All Cultivators​

California growers weren’t the only group to express concerns about falling prices.


Approximately 87% of cultivators said they are selling wholesale flower for $1,250 per pound or less, up from 83% and 74% at the same level in fall and spring 2022, respectively. Perhaps even more shocking, a majority of cultivators also reported selling flower at $750 per pound or less, below the average breakeven price of $800 per pound. This ultimately makes profitability a challenge for many growers.


This assertion reflects a recent survey from Whitney Economics, which found that only 24.4% of cannabis operators in the U.S. are profitable. The consulting and research firm also signified that there is little relief in sight for operators, forecasting seven quarters of slower-than-normal growth in the future. Also nodding to some of the concerns of cultivators, the survey noted that the success of cannabis businesses is largely dependent upon the regulatory structure of the states in which they are operating, among other factors that may be beyond their control.

In It For the Long Haul​

While the current outlook may seem bleak, cultivators widely indicated that they wouldn’t be leaving the industry anytime soon. The survey found that only 19% of growers planned to partially or completely exit from the industry, a decrease from 22% and 27% in fall and spring 2022, respectively.


This persistence could prove problematic, potentially exasperating oversupply issues and causing continued price drops. The survey found that 42% of cultivators plan to increase cultivation over the next 12 months.


However, the report also shows that growers are investing in nutrients (65%) and soil (45%), essentially looking to optimize production while keeping costs low. To hammer in that point, few cultivators planned to drop cash on high-cost items like lights (32%), irrigation systems (30%) and extraction equipment (16%).

 

[Baron23]

To the Veteran's Administration:

​

Biden’s VA Continues Policy Of Blocking Doctors From Recommending Medical Marijuana To Veterans In Updated Directive​

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has released an updated directive that reaffirms its doctors are prohibited from issuing medical cannabis recommendations to their military veterans patients. The new document also notes the revised federal definition of marijuana that went into effect with the legalization of hemp.

The revised Veterans Health Administration (VHA) guidance is largely consistent with a previous version it released in 2017, which itself was updated to explicitly encourage VA doctors to discuss veterans’ marijuana use. That policy technically expired at the end of 2022, but without an update the 2017 guidance stayed in place until last Friday, when the new version was issued.

Advocates and lawmakers have continually pushed VA to make changes allowing its doctors to fill out forms recommending medical cannabis to veterans who live in legal states, but the department has long resisted that change—and the revised VHA directive makes clear that “VA health care providers are prohibited from recommending, making referrals to, completing forms or registering Veterans for participation in a State-approved marijuana program.”

The House recently approved a bipartisan amendment to a spending bill that would allow VA doctors to recommend medical cannabis to military veterans. The Senate Appropriations Committee also passed the reform as part of its version of the appropriations legislation.

Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL), the lead sponsor the House amendment, told Marijuana Moment on Thursday that VA’s updated directive “is exactly why this provision is needed.”

“The bureaucracy at the VA is not just creating confusion, it’s keeping veterans from being able to access a proven treatment option,” he said. “My bipartisan amendment passed the House with the strong support and the Senate version of the package has a provision that mirrors it, so we’re confident we’ll succeed in finally addressing this outdated rule.”

Mast sponsored the amendment alongside Reps. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), Dave Joyce (R-OH) and Barbara Lee (D-CA)—all four co-chairs of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus.

“Last week, I led a divided Congress to make progress on medical cannabis for our veterans,” Blumenauer told Marijuana Moment on Thursday. “The Biden administration should be able to do the same. Our veterans deserve better.”

The updated directive says VA providers can continue to “discuss relevant clinical information regarding marijuana use with Veterans who request information about marijuana or report marijuana use and document this information in the Veteran’s electronic health record.”

The guidance also says that it’s VA policy that veterans “must not be denied VHA services solely because they are participating in a State-approved marijuana program or because they acknowledge use of marijuana.”

It also highlights that the federal definition of marijuana was revised to distinguish it from hemp, which was legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill. Cannabis containing up to 0.3 percent THC is now exempt from the marijuana definition under the directive.

Other changes to the guidance include updates to the “roles, titles and responsibilities” of top VA officials who are charged with educating patients and providers about the department’s cannabis rules.

While some had hoped VA would modernize its marijuana policy for veterans under the Biden administration, the agency has continued to push back against congressional efforts to allow its doctors to issue medical cannabis recommendations or mandate clinical trials into the efficacy of marijuana for various health conditions that commonly afflict veterans.

The department has also faced criticism over recently updated guidance for clinicians that strongly recommends against the use of marijuana in the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

 

[Baron23]

Related to the above post

Medical Marijuana Improves Military Veterans’ Quality Of Life And Reduces Prescription Drug Use, Study Finds​

Over 90 percent of U.S. military veterans who use medical marijuana say that it improves their quality of life, with many using cannabis as an alternative to over-the-counter and prescription medications, according to a new study.

Researchers at the University of Massachusetts, University of Utah and cannabis research institutes looked at self-reported survey data from 510 veterans who said that they consume marijuana, seeking to better understand the purpose and experiences of their usage.

A majority of the respondents (67 percent) said that they use cannabis daily. And about one-third (30 percent) said that they consume marijuana to reduce the use of other medications, including anti-depressants (25 percent) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (17 percent). Another 21 percent said that cannabis has allowed them to reduce their use of opioid-based medications.

Overall, 91 percent of the veterans said that cannabis improved their quality of life.

“Veterans who were Black, who were female, who served in active combat, and who were living with chronic pain were more likely to report a desire to reduce the number of prescription medications they were taking,” the study says. “Women and individuals who used cannabis daily were more likely to report active use of cannabis to reduce prescription medication use.”

“Medicinal cannabis use was reported to improve quality of life and reduce unwanted medication use by many of the study participants. The present findings indicate that medicinal cannabis can potentially play a harm-reduction role, helping veterans to use fewer pharmaceutical medications and other substances.”

The observational study, which was published last month in the journal Clinical Therapeutics, has several limitations—including the fact that data was self-reported and several cannabis friendly media outlets and companies promoted recruitment or provided funding for the research initiative. But the findings are generally consistent with other studies that have focused on marijuana as a potential alternative to prescription drugs.

There’s particular interest in studying the possibility of cannabis as a treatment option for veterans, as the population disproportionately suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and high rates of suicide.

A 2019 survey from Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA) found that 20 percent of veterans have used marijuana for medicinal purposes, while 66 percent have consumed cannabis for recreational use.

As far as the medical side goes, veterans are able to speak with doctors at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) about their use of cannabis. But the doctors remain prohibited from filling out the forms required to issue a medical cannabis recommendation in a legal state. A bipartisan congressional bill—as well as an amendment attached to VA spending legislation—aim to change that this session.

 

[Baron23]

The Green Revolution: The economic impact of legalizing Cannabis ​

The green revolution brought about by the legalization of cannabis has had far-reaching effects, not just in terms of its vibrant hue, but in its potential to revolutionize economies around the globe.​

From being deep-rooted in an underground economy, cannabis is now being recognized as a legitimate and profitable industry in areas where it has been legalized. In this article, we delve into the economic consequences of cannabis legalization, shedding light on how this contentious plant is transforming sectors, generating employment opportunities, and contributing significant tax revenue.

From Illegal Trade to Regulated Markets​

In the past, cannabis cultivation and distribution thrived in secrecy due to its illegal status.


The black market, being clandestine in nature, posed challenges in terms of monitoring, regulation, and taxation, leading to revenue loss for authorities. Thankfully, as legalization spreads, the illicit market is diminishing as consumers transition towards legal and regulated avenues. This transition effectively integrates cannabis into the legitimate economy.

A Booming Industry: Job Creation and Entrepreneurship​

The booming legal cannabis industry has opened up a plethora of employment opportunities. From cultivation and processing to retail and distribution, there is a high demand for skilled individuals in various sectors of the industry.With the continuous expansion of cannabis legalization in different regions, the job market is growing and bringing forth positive impacts on local communities and economies.


Not only has cannabis legalization created jobs, but it has also fostered an entrepreneurial culture. Small businesses and startups are finding unique ways to be part of the cannabis supply chain, making it easy to buy nepalese hash and other cannabis products in Canada and worldwide. This entrepreneurial drive has resulted in a wide range of products, technologies, and services, driving economic growth and sparking innovation.

Impact on Real Estate and Construction​

With the rapid expansion of the cannabis industry, its impact extends far beyond its own domain. Sectors such as real estate and construction are experiencing a profound ripple effect. The rising demand for cultivation facilities, dispensaries, and distribution centers is driving up the need for commercial real estate. Furthermore, this surge of cannabis-related businesses is generating an increased demand for construction services, thereby fueling local economic development.

Tax Revenue: Funding Public Services and Initiatives​

The financial benefits of cannabis legalization are extraordinary, primarily stemming from the substantial tax revenue it generates. When taxes are imposed on cannabis sales, cultivation, and related enterprises, it provides a significant funding source for state and local budgets. This, in turn, allows for the allocation of funds towards crucial public services, infrastructure developments, education, healthcare, and initiatives focused on public health and drug education.

Tourism and Cannabis-Friendly Destinations​

Since the legalization of cannabis, there has been a notable increase in tourism centered around this plant. People from all over the world are drawn to destinations that have embraced cannabis culture, seeking to explore the thriving industry and indulge in cannabis-related experiences. This surge in tourist activity not only benefits the local community but also provides an economic boost to hotels, restaurants, and other businesses in the tourism sector.

Social Equity and Restorative Justice​

Legalizing cannabis has brought about discussions beyond its monetary advantages. Conversations now focus on social equity and restorative justice. One key aspect involves using tax revenue generated from cannabis to assist communities that have disproportionately suffered due to the War on Drugs. Essential actions include expunging criminal records, directing investments towards disadvantaged neighborhoods, and providing opportunities for individuals affected by past cannabis criminalization. These steps aim to create a more equitable and inclusive industry.

Final thoughts​

The world is experiencing a monumental transformation due to the legalization of cannabis. It has sparked a green revolution, reshaping economies on a global scale. The impact goes beyond just job opportunities, entrepreneurship, tax revenue, and tourism; it is truly profound.


In the midst of this post-legalization era, people shouldn't forget the importance of social equity and restorative justice. It is imperative that they find a delicate equilibrium between economic growth, responsible regulation, and the well-being of individuals and communities. People need to navigate these evolving challenges and opportunities with caution. By doing so, they will unlock the boundless potential of the cannabis revolution.

 

[Baron23]

For those who do not have any experience working with the Federal Government, this process described below is how you get to claim that you took action while actually burying it in a bureaucratic nightmare.

GOP Congressman Pushes DEA Head For Update On Biden’s Marijuana Scheduling Review​

A GOP congressman is pressing the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to expand on her recent remarks about the origin and timeline of President Joe Biden’s marijuana scheduling review directive.

In a letter sent to DEA Administrator Anne Milgram on Thursday, which was shared exclusively with Marijuana Moment, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) followed up on questions he asked the official in person at a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing last month.

Specifically, he’s asking for a copy of a letter that Milgram said the president sent to the attorney general and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary last year directing the review into the scheduling status of cannabis under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

At last month’s hearing, the administrator also told Gaetz that she would ask HHS about the timeline for the department’s review, which needs to be completed before DEA can weigh in—so the congressman is also requesting an update on that discussion in the new letter.

“While it is reassuring that President Biden has formally requested that the process of descheduling marijuana from the list of Schedule I drugs commence, it was concerning to hear you say that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has not provided a timeline for sending you its descheduling recommendation based on its review,” the congressman wrote.

“I believe it is important for the administration to be transparent with Congress regarding where the process of descheduling marijuana stands,” he said, adding that he is asking that Milgram provide responses to the following by September 15:

1. Provide a copy of the letter you referenced that President Biden sent to the Secretary of HHS and the Attorney General asking that the process of descheduling marijuana begin.
2. Have you asked HHS for its timeline for getting you its recommendation on the descheduling of marijuana? If so, what was HHS’ response? In the case that you received a timeline, provide that timeline.

Gaetz wrote that DEA’s answers to the questions are needed in order for the House Judiciary Committee “to continue oversight of this matter.”

As far as the alleged letter from Biden is concerned, an attorney filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with HHS for a copy of the letter earlier this month—and the department said it had “no records” of such a document.

Marijuana Moment separately asked the Justice Department for clarification around the letter, but a spokesperson referred the question to the White House. The White House pointed to the president’s public statement about the directive but did not provide comment on the letter the DEA administrator referenced.

The question of the technical origins and processing of the scheduling review directive remain of significant interest within the cannabis space and broader public. Both DOJ and HHS appeared to have coordinated statements prepared on the day that Biden called for the review, and issued a mass pardon for people who’ve committed federal marijuana possession offenses. That would suggest that the agencies received some kind of advance notice before the president made the public declaration.

As far as the timing of the scheduling review is concerned, HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra did tell Marijuana Moment in June that agencies are aiming to complete their work by the end of the year.

The process starts with a scientific review into marijuana by HHS—and specifically the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under HHS. Once that’s complete, the department will forward its findings and scheduling recommendation to DEA, which will then conduct its own eight-step review before making a final decision. The recommendation from HHS is not binding, as DEA has primary jurisdiction over the CSA and could theoretically dismiss the health agency’s position.

Meanwhile, the White House drug czar said in separate congressional testimony recently that the president’s marijuana pardons and scheduling directive last year are part of an effort to create cohesive cannabis policy within a patchwork of state legalization models.

Congressional Cannabis Caucus co-chair Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) led a letter to Becerra and Attorney General Merrick Garland in March, alongside 15 other bipartisan members of Congress, demanding transparency in the cannabis scheduling review.

 

[Baron23]

Schedule III and the "election cycle". GTFO

Former Top FDA Official Predicts Agency Will Make Schedule III Marijuana Recommendation With ‘Election Cycle’ In Mind​

A former top Food and Drug Administration (FDA) official believes it’s most likely that marijuana will be put in Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) following an ongoing administrative review ordered by President Biden last year. FDA is mindful of political factors such as the 2024 election, the official said, so a policy change may come sooner rather than later.

Howard Sklamberg, who previously served as chair of FDA’s Marijuana Working Group from 2014 to 2017, spoke about the possible outcomes of the review, the impact of rescheduling and the agency’s timeline on a Mindset Capital podcast released on Thursday.

There are two things that “certainly won’t happen” with FDA’s scheduling review, Sklamberg predicted: a recommendation to keep cannabis in Schedule I or guidance to deschedule it altogether.
The agency has more flexibility since it last looked into marijuana scheduling, in 2016, so maintaining the status quo is unlikely, he said. On the other hand, descheduling “would be extremely difficult for FDA” given regulatory restraints.

“As far as the Goldilocks position, if I were a betting man, I think the most likely outcome will be Schedule III,” said Sklamberg, now an attorney at the firm Arnold & Porter. He added that while Schedule II is still a possibility, it wouldn’t have the same practical impact on issues such as allowing cannabis businesses to take federal tax deductions. FDA isn’t supposed to be “results-oriented,” he said, but the context does matter.

The former official also discussed the government’s rescheduling timeline, pushing back against the notion that the review process will take years as it has in the past.
“This is not on the normal timetable. They are aware of the importance of the issue, the interest of the issue, the White House’s interest in the issue—and they’re frankly aware of the election cycle and the administration’s term coming to an end at the end of 2024,” he said. “I think all those things come together.”
The administration hasn’t set a deadline for the review to be completed, but U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra, who oversees FDA, told Marijuana Moment in June that agencies were aiming to finish their work by the end of the year.

FDA’s role is just one half of the review process. Once it completes its scientific review into marijuana, it will share its findings and recommendations with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), which then carries out its own eight-step review before making a final call.

Sklamberg stressed in his podcast comments that while a scheduling change would be a “gigantic” step, regulations would likely continue to evolve over a period of years—and as younger voters more supportive of legalization gain representation in politics, new policies will likely reflect that.
“I think this will be an important step in a longer process,” he said.

Sklamberg also strongly dismissed concerns that placing marijuana in Schedule III would lead to a crackdown on state markets. Acknowledging that many industry stakeholders and advocates would rather see complete descheduling, he pointed out that FDA and the Justice Department have taken a hands-off approach to the legalization movement while cannabis is considered a Schedule I drug. It “defies logic” to think the agencies would suddenly enforce criminalization if it’s moved to a less restrictive category, he argued.

Sklamberg contributed to a report on scheduling considerations that was released by the recently formed Coalition for Cannabis Scheduling Reform in June. And in February, he discussed the issue in a memorandum he authored on behalf of the cannabis company Columbia Care.

In all likelihood, he said, FDA will not change its approach to marijuana if it’s rescheduled, in part because increasing enforcement would strain the agency’s resources, potentially forcing them to compromise other food safety responsibilities such as preventing E. coli and monitoring interstate dairy commerce.

If FDA attempted to single out certain marijuana or hemp companies for violating its rules related to introducing unapproved additives into the food supply or as dietary supplements, he continued, it would be breaking with a mandate against “arbitrary” action and could find itself in legal trouble under administrative law.

The conversation closed on a separate federal marijuana topic: the possibility of the U.S. attorney general reissuing a memo to federal prosecutors with explicit guidance on cannabis enforcement priorities. An Obama-era memo on that issue, known as the Cole memo, was rescinded under the Trump administration, and some advocates have pushed for an updated version to provide some clarity and assurance to the industry and consumers.

Sklamberg minimized the practical impact of such a memo, noting that the Justice Department has not meaningfully changed its approach to marijuana policy in the more than two years since the last version was rescinded under the Trump administration in 2018.

“I think its effect would be more reassuring and psychological than real,” he said. “I don’t think a Garland memo is necessary for the administration to maintain the posture it has now. As far as any change, we’d have to see what’s in the memo—but it hasn’t gone after cannabis in a big way and don’t think it will.”

 

[Bcbud]

Biden health agency recommends classifying marijuana as lower-risk in major change

President Biden ordered agency to conduct scientific review law year

www.the-independent.com

 

[Baron23]

Biden health agency recommends classifying marijuana as lower-risk in major change

President Biden ordered agency to conduct scientific review law year

www.the-independent.com

And here again....Schedule 3? Like...eh, like Ketamine, Anabolic steroids, Codeine and hydrocodone products mixed with aspirin or acetaminophen.

? Fucking BS'ing cowards. They know that MJ is far less addictive or life impacting than...well, nicotine and...well, do you think these assholes ever heard of Alcoholics Anonymous?

And fucking "evidence based"....horse shit. There are 26 states/territories that have full rec so what fucking evidence are they evaluating. KJP's nose is growing like Pinocchio as she slings this crap.

HHS sends recommendation to DEA on rescheduling marijuana ​

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has sent its findings on marijuana to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) as part of the Biden administration’s efforts to possibly alter marijuana’s status in the U.S.
In October 2022, President Biden requested that the HHS secretary and the attorney general conduct a review of how marijuana is currently scheduled under federal law. Marijuana is currently classified as a Schedule I controlled substance, meaning the DEA considers it a drug “with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.”

HHS on Tuesday confirmed it sent its findings to the DEA this week.

“Following the data and science, HHS has expeditiously responded to President Biden’s directive to HHS Secretary [Xavier Becerra] and provided its scheduling recommendation for marijuana to the DEA on August 29, 2023,” an HHS spokesperson said.

The spokesperson did not specify what the department’s exact recommendation was. According to an HHS letter obtained by Bloomberg, the agency recommended reclassifying marijuana as a Schedule III drug, or a substance considered to have “moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence”
There are five schedules the DEA categorizes drugs into. Examples of Schedule III drugs include products with up to 90 mg of codeine per dose, anabolic steroids and ketamine.

Currently, 23 states and D.C. have enacted laws regulating the nonmedical use of marijuana for adults. Several others have medical marijuana programs in place, but federal law still prohibits the possession of any amount of marijuana.

“We can confirm DEA received a letter from the Department of Health and Human Services providing its findings and recommendation on marijuana scheduling, pursuant to President Biden’s request for a review,” a DEA spokesperson told The Hill.

“As part of this process, HHS conducted a scientific and medical evaluation for consideration by DEA. DEA has the final authority to schedule or reschedule a drug under the Controlled Substances Act. DEA will now initiate its review.”

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre declined to comment on the process when asked about possibly rescheduling marijuana Wednesday, noting it is “independent” and led by HHS and the Department of Justice (DOJ).

“[Biden’s] asking HHS and DOJ to take a look at it, to do an initial administrative kind of process or review if you will,” Jean-Pierre said. “It’s going to be an independent process. They’re going to certainly use the evidence. It’s going to be guided by evidence and so I’m going to leave it to HHS and DOJ to move that process.”

 

[Marlon Rando]

 

[Baron23]

Would you call this rescheduling to III a half measure? Or is that being far, far too generous. Maybe a 1/3 measure. IMO, this is typical risk avoidance by asshole politicians and their bureaucratic lap dogs.

​

Congressional Researchers Say DEA ‘Likely’ To Reschedule Marijuana, With ‘Broad Implications’ For Taxes, Housing, Immigration And More​

Congressional researchers say it’s “likely” the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) will follow the top federal health agency’s recent recommendation to reschedule marijuana, which would have “broad implications for federal policy” in areas such as taxes, housing, immigration, military eligibility, gun rights and more.


In a report published on Wednesday, analysts with the Congressional Research Service (CRS) gave an overview of the cannabis scheduling review directed by President Joe Biden last year and assessed the potential impact of moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), as recommended by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).


While DEA has affirmed that it’s bound by the health agency’s scientific and medical findings, it can still make a conflicting scheduling decision. But “if past is prologue it could be likely that DEA will reschedule marijuana according to HHS’s recommendation,” CRS said.


It pointed to an example of DEA following HHS’s scheduling advice when it came to the synthetic cannabinoid product Marinol, which was placed in Schedule III in 1999.


“If marijuana is rescheduled to Schedule III, it would have broad implications for federal policy,” CRS said. “Also, this move would have significant implications for state medical marijuana programs and users of medical marijuana, but fewer implications for state recreational marijuana programs and those who use marijuana recreationally.”


There’s some disagreement among experts about the extent to which rescheduling cannabis would affect state-level medical marijuana programs. CRS said such an action would make it legal to “manufacture, distribute, dispense, and possess medical marijuana.” But others say that, without Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval and manufacturers obtaining DEA licenses, that would not be the case.


CRS also said that a Schedule III reclassification would mean that state medical marijuana programs “may now be able to comply with the CSA, and will still be subject to CSA/DEA criminal and regulatory control, federal public health laws such as the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and agricultural laws such as the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946.”


“The scope of and demand for FDA oversight for medical marijuana and related products may grow considerably. In the short term, FDA may need to generate or update a substantial amount of technical information to clarify its regulatory approach to marijuana for relevant stakeholders. Given that marijuana is a complex substance containing various pharmaceutical components and is available to consumers in numerous formats, FDA may also need to consider long-term resource allocation to ensure that marijuana products consistently meet applicable regulatory standards.”


Schedule III would also make it so medical cannabis patients would be eligible for immigrant and non-immigrant visas, and they could “purchase and possess firearms,” CRS said. It added that the same rights would not apply to adult-use cannabis consumers.


Again, it’s not exactly clear what steps would be needed for state medical cannabis laws—and people acting under those laws—to come fully into compliance with rules for Schedule III drugs. Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D), for example, recently sent a letter to Biden calling for “FDA enforcement guidance to minimize economic disruption, promote state-federal collaboration, and protect the public’s health” while respecting current state laws.


The new CRS report says that under Schedule III, “marijuana producers and retailers would be able to deduct the costs of selling their product (e.g., payroll, rent, advertising) for the purposes of federal income tax filings,” adding that the reclassification would also free up research into cannabis.


“DEA would no longer set production quota limitations for marijuana,” it said. “Those who use medical marijuana lawfully may contend with fewer barriers to federal employment and eligibility to serve in the military.”


The report concludes by noting that Congress could separately “choose to address any number of issues related to the potential rescheduling of marijuana,” including by independently rescheduling or descheduling cannabis, or placing it in an entirely new schedule.


“If the administrative scheduling process moves forward, Congress may consider whether to devote additional resources to FDA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to ensure the safety and quality of the many different products already available in many state markets,” CRS said.

 

[Baron23]

well, on the continuing subject of fucking asshole politicians thinking they know better for us than we do (and yes, read the polls if you want to know what the American electorate thinks/wants on this subject).

The good news is that this is only 14 self-righteous drug warriors out of 535 total House and Senate "representatives" (who seem to now actually fucking represent but would rather impose).

Their logic...well, actually lack of logic...about how there is no valid med use of MJ despite their acknowledging that there are four cannabis derived FDA approved drugs requires so much twisted body english that I'm suprised they don't all have whiplash.

Yes, Dorothy....the idiocy in DC carries on without pause.

Republican Legislators call on DEA to reject recommendation about Cannabis ​

A group of 14 congress members wrote a letter stating that recommending cannabis to be rescheduled is “irresponsible.”​

A group of Republican legislators recently sent a letter to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) asking for the agency to reject the recent recommendation to reschedule cannabis, which was suggested by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on Aug. 29.

The list included lead authors Sen. James Lankford (Oklahoma) and Rep. Pete Sessions (Texas), along with signatures from Sen. M. Michael Rounds (South Dakota), Sen. James E. Risch (Idaho), Sen. Marsha Blackburn (Tennessee), Sen. Mike Crapo (Idaho), Sen. Ted Budd (North Carolina), Sen. Markwayne Mullin (Oklahoma), Sen. Tom Cotton (Arkansas), Rep. Chuck Edwards (North Carolina), Rep. Robert B. Aderholt (Alabama), Rep. Hal Rogers (Kentucky), Rep. Earl L. Carter (Georgia), and Rep. Andy Biggs (Arizona).

“The recommendation to remove marijuana from the DEA’s list of dangerous Schedule I drugs is not based on science—it’s based on an irresponsible pro-pot agenda,” Lankford wrote on social media and sharing the letter.

“We write to urge the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to reject any petition or request to remove marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Any effort to reschedule marijuana should be based on proven facts and science—not popular opinion, changes in state laws, or the preferred policy of an Administration,” the letter states.

One of the letter’s arguments against rescheduling cannabis cites the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), stating that “30% of marijuana users have marijuana use disorder, who are severely addicted to the drug.” The authors mention the rise in THC in products today compared to 25 years ago. “These facts indicate that marijuana has a high potential for abuse and that the risk is only increasing,” they added. Last month, NIDA reportedly signed off on the HHS recommendation.

The letter authors also make claims that cannabis “does not have a currently accepted medical use.” While it mentions the single Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved cannabis-derived drug (Epidiolex), and three synthetic cannabis drugs (Marinol, Syndros, and Cesamet), the letter states that substances only have medical value if they are approved by the FDA. The authors also added that previously in 2016, the DEA rejected two petitions for cannabis rescheduling, and the HHS agreed. “The rejection letter stated, ‘At this time, the known risks of marijuana use have not been shown to be outweighed by specific benefits in well-controlled clinical trials that scientifically evaluate safety and efficacy,’” the letter stated. “We believe this analysis is still true today. In fact, HHS recommended at the time that DEA reject these petitions and that marijuana remain in Schedule I.”

The signatories state that nothing has changed over the past seven years, and believe that “the situation has gotten worse,” citing an increase in child hospitalizations due to accidental cannabis consumption, and the negative effects of cannabis on youth teenagers.

“It is irresponsible for HHS to recommend that marijuana be removed from Schedule I,” they concluded. “It would also be irresponsible for DEA to act on this recommendation. Our country relies on DEA to enforce our nation’s drug laws. We ask you to uphold your mission by rejecting any effort to remove marijuana from Schedule I.”

The letter fails to mention the evidence of cannabis’ medical benefits for countless conditions, or its part in the War on Drugs and countless people affected by its Schedule I status.

Now that the HHS has provided the details of its recommendation to move cannabis from a Schedule I to Schedule III substance, the DEA will also conduct a scientific review.

These Republican legislators believe that cannabis should remain a Schedule I substance, which labels it as having no medical value, high potential for abuse, and places it among other substances including heroin, LSD, ecstasy, and more. Legislators who have continued to support cannabis in congress, such as Rep. Earl Blumenauer, believe that this is just the beginning. “This is a step in the right direction but it is not sufficient. I hope it is followed by more significant reforms. This is long overdue,” he said in a statement.

NORML Deputy Director Paul Armentano published an article explaining why rescheduling cannabis isn’t enough. “While some entities, particularly those involved in the commercial cannabis industry, have lauded the proposed change as a ‘giant’ step forward, others—like myself—have been far more restrained,” Armentano stated. “First, reclassifying cannabis to a lower schedule within the CSA continues to misrepresent the plant’s safety relative to other controlled substances such as anabolic steroids and ketamine (Schedule III), benzodiazepines (Schedule IV), or even alcohol, which is unscheduled.”

NORML has previously called for cannabis to be completely descheduled, and Armentano wrote that this is still the case. After the HHS recommendation news was published, Armentano discussed the topic with outlets such as The Associated Press, The Washington Post, and more. “Tobacco and alcohol are not in the Controlled Substances Act,” he told CNN. “Those substances are well recognized to pose far greater hazards to health than cannabis. We should treat marijuana [under the federal scheduling system] equally.”

 

[Baron23]

Well, I have...as always (LOL)...a few observations:

1. Mr. Weiss understands that a paragraph and a single sentence are not the same thing...unlike a lot of so called journalist and professional content writers. I applaud you for understanding this, Mr. Weiss

2. I don't personally think Schedule 3 listing is any sort of boon. Alcohol and nicotine aren't on any sort of schedule and yet are highly addictive (in the case of alcohol apparently only some people become alcoholics) and highly destructive. So, why should I be grateful that the assholes in DC decided recommend it be moved from Schedule 1 to 3? Fuck that....it shouldn't be on any schedule, IMO. But this slow as frozen molasses incrementalism is how politicians cover their ass...that being their principal occupation.

Opinion: HHS Rescheduling Recommendation is 'About Damn Time'​

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recognition that cannabis should no longer be classified in the same category as heroin is an event to be celebrated. But the trajectory of U.S. policy deserves to be mourned.

Darren Weiss | September 20, 2023

Imagine some intrepid explorer discovered deep in the jungles of a far-off clime a plant which, when applied to the skin, ingested or inhaled, had the ability to bring quality of life to cancer patients facing lethal diagnoses, prevented children and adults from experiencing debilitating and often life-threatening epileptic seizures, and substantially reduced neuropathic and other intractable pain. Imagine that this plant, when made available, greatly reduced opiate drug use, the number of drug overdose deaths, and even decreased the cost of health insurance for users and non-users alike. And imagine further, that the active ingredient in that plant had a safety profile such that it was impossible to ingest a lethal amount and was less addictive than alcohol, tobacco and opiates, and even caffeine. Were such a plant to be introduced in today’s world, it would generate a frenzy, putting the kale and acai “superfood” fads to shame: researchers would flock to discover its full potential, pharmaceutical companies would commit resources to drug development, entrepreneurs would create businesses seeking to capitalize on the plant’s potential, and investors would willingly throw substantial capital into exploiting the plant’s properties.

This thought experiment is hypothetical only in its chronology. The attributes described above belong to cannabis, a plant cultivated and used throughout the world for thousands of years. Despite its wide use as a pharmaceutical throughout history—even in the United States—beginning in 1937 the federal government launched a political campaign against cannabis, culminating in the enactment of the Controlled Substances Act, or CSA, in 1970. The CSA, which classifies substances in a series of “schedules,” identified cannabis as a Schedule I substance. The most restrictive schedule is a pronouncement that cannabis has no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.

The war on cannabis was, according to reporting from Harper’s magazine and interviews with former policy advisers, a documented and coordinated effort to marginalize counterculture and minority communities which, in the tumultuous days of the ’60s and ’70s, were undermining Richard Nixon’s efforts in the U.S. and Vietnam. The result of cannabis’s inclusion in Schedule I of the CSA was the mass incarceration of hundreds of thousands of individuals, most of them minorities, and the near complete cessation of research into a plant that had brought relief to millions for millennia. In a modern world driven by advances in technology and the relentless pursuit of scientific breakthroughs, cannabis was suddenly a dead end: its users were jailed, its proponents were ostracized, and those best positioned to further the science were abruptly and indefinitely barred from any such pursuits.

But in a nod to American ingenuity and a freedom-loving ethos, citizens began taking matters into their own hands. Beginning in earnest in the mid-1990s, through a series of ballot initiatives, slow and hard-fought legislative victories and grassroots efforts, states began enacting medical cannabis programs. In the spirit of what Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once called states’ ability to serve as laboratories of democracy, a state-centered movement developed into a patchwork of legal and regulatory frameworks permitting the cultivation, distribution, and sale of cannabis and cannabis-infused products for both medical and “adult use.”


Will Crystallization Technology Disrupt Traditional Extract Refinement?The Controlled Crash Method is a new method of cannabis extract refinement that uses lower temperatures to separate and purify compounds, resulting in pure, crystalline THC-A and high terpene extract. It requires less equipment and labor, and is more efficient than traditional distillation methods. It can also preserve the natural essence of the plant by not exposing the terpenes to high temperatures.

Despite the fact that today’s legal cannabis industry employs nearly half a million individuals, generates billions in state tax revenue, and delivers billions of dollars in economic impact across the country, the federal government has, until recently, failed and refused to substantively engage on the topic of cannabis. Refusing to permit widespread research on the plant or acknowledge scientific studies from beyond our borders, the federal government’s failure to act has created a dizzying array of contradictions stemming from cannabis’s status as both legal and illegal, permissible and verboten. Its users are faced with a near Hobbesian choice of whether to support their own health while risking a host of draconian penalties, including federal prosecution.

Recently, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services did something almost unimaginable: for the first time in history, Xavier Becerra directed his department to recommend to the Drug Enforcement Administration that the insanity surrounding federal cannabis policy come to an end. Based on its own research and analysis, HHS recommended that cannabis be re-scheduled to Schedule III of the CSA, a category defined as having a low abuse potential, accepted medical use, and a low potential for psychological dependence. This recommendation is nothing short of groundbreaking, particularly given the storied nature of cannabis in the United States.


But the sudden shift in policy is also deeply troubling—not for its substance, but for the time in which it took bureaucrats and politicians to make this move. Without any real changes in the science or scientific breakthroughs in cannabis medicine (THC, the most famous active ingredient in cannabis, was synthesized and received FDA approval in the form of dronabinol in 1985), the sudden acknowledgment of what those of us in the cannabis industry have understood from the outset is both welcome and maddening. What about the hundreds of thousands who have been imprisoned under misguided policies and the generational damage resulting from those policies? What about the untold tens of thousands who have faced life-threatening illnesses who did not have access to a plant known to increase quality of life? What about the children debilitated by epilepsy, the patients left to suffer with chronic pain, the opioid addicts and former opioid addicts? HHS’s recognition is an event to be celebrated, but the trajectory of U.S. policy deserves to be mourned.

As a business leader in legalized cannabis, its illegality under federal law has required Verano to operate our business with both hands tied behind our proverbial back. Despite the fact that we employ more than 3,700 people across 13 U.S. states and generate nearly $1 billion of revenue annually, we are still treated like criminals. We don’t have access to traditional banking services; we are subject to onerous tax rules applicable to heroin dealers, resulting in our owing more than $100 million in excess tax to the IRS in the last year alone; we are unable to access U.S. equity markets or traditional debt financing; we can’t cross state lines, can’t advertise in traditional channels, can’t use credit cards, can’t access traditional insurance markets, can’t fund or conduct peer-reviewed research in the U.S. The list goes on. Though these business impediments pale in comparison to the pain, disruption, and death caused or facilitated by outdated cannabis policy in this country, this great American industry—our country’s fastest growing—has been unable to reach its full potential.

This insanity must end. HHS’s recommendation is a long-overdue first step. The DEA must now indicate its agreement or disagreement on the recommendation (note: it has never disagreed) and promulgate rules. If those rules follow the science, permit further research and development, and allow the vibrant legal cannabis industry to remove its handcuffs, the positive impacts on our society and health will be vast.
The tide is finally turning at long last. And it’s about damn time.

Darren Weiss is President of Verano, a Chicago-based multi-state cannabis company that operates 14 cultivation facilities and 132 Zen Leaf and MÜV cannabis dispensaries in 13 U.S. states.