Law The Cannabis Chronicles - Misc Cannabis News

[Baron23]

What a refreshingly wonderful idea.


Amendment to Cut Funding of DEA’s Cannabis Eradication Program
Representative Ted Lieu (D-CA) has reintroduced an amendment to cut funds from the Drug Enforcement Agency’s (DEA) cannabis eradication program through their Salaries and Expenses Account. In 2016, the budget for the eradication program was $18 million and the amendment would cut that in half. The funds would be redirected to domestic abuse prevention and juvenile justice programs. This CJS appropriations amendment that was also proposed last year.

In a 2015 statement, Rep. Lieu explained that this cannabis eradication program “is a ridiculous waste of precious federal resources, especially when multiple states and jurisdictions have already legalized marijuana…it is time for the federal government to stop making marijuana use or possession a federal crime.”

 

[Baron23]

There ain't no chance in hell of Sessions getting this jinni back in the bottle.

Another Major Victory for Weed in the Workplace

As significant an accomplishment as it is, the country’s widening experiment with marijuana legalization is also significantly limited in scope: Your right to possess and consume cannabis stops at the workplace.

Under broad state and federal “Drug-Free Workplace” laws—passed in the 1980s at the nadir of the “Just Say No!” hype—employers have the ability and the right to fire workers for off-the-clock drug use. (For any business on the receiving end of a federal contract, the ante is upped: They are required to screen for drugs.)

Several court decisions have upheld employers’ decisions to drug-test workers, and then terminate them if the tests reveal cannabis metabolites—the fat-soluble molecules that reveal past marijuana use, often days or weeks in the past.

For the most part, drug testing has been a handy excuse for employers to part ways with anyone they might not want to employ but have no legitimate reason to do so. That’s right—minorities.

Considering the impossibility of life in America or anywhere else (but especially everyone-for-himself America) without economic power, this is a significant roadblock, indeed.

But! It’s one that is also slowly eroding.

In July, the Massachusetts State Supreme Court ruled that a woman fired by her employer for using medical marijuana could sue for handicap discrimination. Cristina Barbuto was fired following her first day of work at Advantage Sales for using cannabis, which a doctor had recommended she use for her Crohn’s Disease. It remains to be seen if the decision will be appealed or if she’ll sue, but the decision should have a chilling effect on employers in that state acting similarly.

Comes now another, similar result out of New York State, where a taxi driver, fired for lawfully using medical marijuana, must be reinstated.

As the National Law Review reported, an anonymous driver, known only as W.R., had his taxi-driver license revoked by New York City’s Taxi & Limousine Commission—solely for testing positive for cannabis. In an administrative hearing, the TLC was ordered to return his license on the following basis:

Under the New York Compassionate Care Act, certified patients may not be subject to penalty or denied any right or privilege solely for the certified use of medical marijuana. Because the patient certification is analogous to a prescription, the certified use of marijuana could not constitute an illegal drug use that would serve as the basis to revoke a license.

Further, certified patients are deemed to have a disability under the New York State Human Rights Law. Because the New York State Human Rights Law prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, as does the New York City Human Rights Law, the driver had additional protections against revocation of his license.

There are a few nuances here that should be addressed.

This is only one state and is not necessarily a binding, precedent-forming decision for cannabis users in other states. It addresses a licensed contractor, not an employee—and most importantly, at a time when 65 million Americans live in states where recreational cannabis is legal, the decision pertains to medical marijuana only.

Still! The Law Review believes this is another milestone case, writing, “there is little doubt that this rationale would be followed in employment discrimination cases.”

This particular interpretation of the law still needs to be tested in other states, including California, where a landmark Supreme Court case upheld an employer’s right to fire legal cannabis users.

At the same time, with a few more milestones like these, we’re on a path towards real cannabis freedom—that is, the right to exercise a legal privilege without fear of losing your job.

 

[Baron23]

Nice little summary of the relatively short term outlook.

New Jersey, Vermont, and Rhode Island state legislatures could pass marijuana laws in 2018

The push for recreational marijuana is running strong, while medical marijuana reform has become comparatively stagnant.

Although state legislatures all over the country have been apprehensive to pass measures pertaining to the legalization of marijuana, that could all change in 2018, according to a report from Marijuana Business Daily.

A number of states are set to give serious consideration to recreational marijuana bills next year. Although there have been a couple of close calls over the past couple of years, every solid attempt at state government approved pot legalization has been snuffed out in the eleventh hour.

But industry insiders, like Marijuana Policy Project executive director Rob Kampia, and Drug Policy Alliance senior director of national affairs Bill Piper, say they encouraged by the possibility of legal weed going the distance in the next legislative session.

As far as predictions go, Kampia’s money is on New Jersey, Rhode Island and Vermont.

“New Jersey, I think, is the most likely,” Kampia told MBD. “With a very liberal Democratic legislature, we think (New Jersey) would be ranked No. 1 or be tied with Vermont.”

New Jersey is the top pick since Governor Chris Christie, who has refused to further the marijuana issue while in office, is officially finished come January. All of the gubernatorial candidates in the running to take his place are in support of some level of marijuana legalization, which means 2018 could be a completely different beast in the realm of the pot reform.

But Vermont and Rhode Island could likely get over the prohibitionary hump, as well.

“Vermont – for sure there’s a play there. That might be ranked No. 1,” Kampia said. “Rhode Island – serious play there, but it might be a two-year plan.”

There are also a few opportunities for the issue of medical marijuana to spread into more jurisdictions in the United States. Piper says the DPA is primary “interested in” bringing Louisiana’s medicinal cannabis law up to a respectable standard. The organization also plans to step in to do the same with respect to the CBD-only law in the state of Iowa.

But when handicapping the race for therapeutic pot in 2018, experts feel all of the targets are long shots, at best. Although there has been a lot of talk recently about potential medical marijuana reform in states like Tennessee, Kentucky, and Indiana, none of these are being pegged for success in the coming year.

Nevertheless, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Utah are all pushing to put marijuana legalization on the ballot in 2018. So it is distinctly possible that we could, once again, see positive outcomes at the hands of voters where many state governments continue to fail.

 

[Baron23]

Slightly different view


Residents in these 3 states are the likeliest to vote on legalizing recreational marijuana in 2018


Few industries, if any, are growing as quickly as legal marijuana. According to cannabis research firm ArcView, the North American legal-weed industry generated $6.9 billion in sales in 2016, which still pales in comparison with the $46.4 billion in sales estimated on the black market. However, by 2021 it's believed that the legal North American pot market will have vaulted in value to $21.6 billion, representing a compound annual growth rate of 26%.

If there's a single factor that can be pinpointed for this growth, it'd be the rapid shift in consumer opinion toward marijuana. Gallup, which has taken periodic polls on cannabis' favorability for nearly 50 years, found in 1995 that only a quarter of those surveyed wanted it to be legal across the United States. Of course, this poll was also conducted during the War on Drugs. As of 2016, Gallup's same poll found that an all-time record 60% of respondents want to see it legal nationally. The belief is that as this figure rises, pressure will mount on lawmakers in Congress to adjust their scheduling of the drug.

Paramount to the success of the U.S. legal-weed industry, aside from organic growth in already legal states, is the ability to expand into new states. The 2016 elections saw a nearly "green" sweep, with marijuana initiatives and amendments being passed in eight out of nine states (sorry, Arizonans). The chances are decent that the 2018 elections will bring another serious opportunity for adult-use marijuana to be legalized in a handful of states.

Which states are the likeliest to vote on recreational marijuana in 2018?
Of course, we have to remember that not all states have the same voting process. Whereas some states have a referendum and initiative process, whereby residents can gather signatures to introduce and vote on propositions, bills in other states have to be introduced and passed entirely at the legislative level. For instance, both houses of Vermont's legislature voted in favor of legalizing recreational cannabis earlier this year, however Gov. Phil Scott (R-Vt.) vetoed the measure. Despite presumed strong support for recreational cannabis in Vermont, its residents have no official say in the process, save for voting Scott out of office, should they choose to do so in a future election. Two dozen states in the U.S. lack this referendum and initiative process.

So which states are the likeliest to have their residents heading to the polls in 2018 to vote on a recreational marijuana bill? Once we exclude the aforementioned states without a referendum and initiative process, the following three rise clearly to the top of the list.

Image source: Getty Images.

Arizona
One of the more interesting quirks of voting on marijuana bills is that the first time isn't always the charm -- but the second time seems to be. In the November 2016 elections, Arizona wound up voting down Prop 205 (52% opposed to 48% in favor), which would have legalized recreational marijuana in the state. However, the margin of loss was close enough that pro-legalization groups are expected to focus their efforts on the state for the 2018 election.

History would suggest that Arizona has a decent shot of approval in 2018. Oregon, which is one of the most pro-legalization states in the country, initially failed to legalize an adult-use measure itself when voters went to the polls in 2012. Oregon wound up officially legalizing through a 2014 vote by state residents.

The same can be said for Florida, which voted down a medical-marijuana amendment by just 2% in 2014. With a new medical-cannabis amendment on the ballot in 2016, and pro-legalization groups putting a lot of effort into Florida between 2015 and 2016, the measure passed with ease last November. The second time could very well be the charm for Arizonans.

Image source: Getty Images.


Michigan
Residents in Michigan have been here before. It appeared that the Wolverine State would have no issues getting a recreational-weed initiative on the 2016 ballots, but they were thwarted by a number of invalid signatures. The upcoming election in 2018 could be redemption for pro-legalization groups.

According to MLive.com, as of mid-July the Coalition to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol (CRMLA) had collected more than 100,000 signatures, which is well on its way to the 252,523 valid signatures needed to get an initiative on the ballot come the 2018 elections. CRMLA spokesman Josh Hovey has suggested that the current momentum could see the pro-legalization group hitting its signature target in four months instead of the six months given to collect valid signatures. If approved, there would be a 10% excise tax and 6% sales tax on legal weed.

Polling data also suggests that Michigan presents a compelling case to legalize. A statewide poll of 600 Michigan voters from Marketing Resource Group this past May found that 58% support legalizing adult-use weed, compared to just 36% who opposed it. This is a stark reversal from the 55% who opposed it and 41% who supported the idea of recreational legalization in 2013.

Image source: Getty Images.

Ohio
Lastly, Ohioans could head to the polls for a second time in three years in 2018 to vote on recreational marijuana. The last time they went to the polls in November 2015, they voted down Issue 3 with authority (35% to 65%).

However, we have to keep in mind that the reason Ohioans voted down Issue 3 was that it had two inherent flaws. To begin with, Issue 3 called for just 10 predetermined sites to grow and manufacture recreational weed. It would have created an oligopoly for some well-to-do backers and ensured that competition stayed out of their way for years. It would have been terrible for Ohio's consumers. The second problem with Issue 3 was that it was a dual medical and recreational marijuana legalization measure. That's never been done before, and it's exceptionally difficult to pull off without the medical infrastructure already in place.

The reason 2018 looks so promising is that Ohio's legislature wound up passing a medical-marijuana law in 2016, not too long after Issue 3 was defeated. By 2018, the state will have about two years of planning under its belt, and presumably around a year of experience with medical cannabis sales and patients. This, along with a focus from pro-legalization groups, could make Ohio a state likely to vote on recreational cannabis next year.

 

[Baron23]

Cheaper is mo' bedda'

How legalization caused the price of marijuana to collapse

By Keith Humphreys September 5 at 8:42 AM

Rows of cannabis plants grow in the 20,000 square foot greenhouse at Vireo Health's medical marijuana cultivation facility, Aug. 19, 2016, in Johnstown, N.Y. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

All the diverse effects of legalizing recreational marijuana may not be clear for a number of years, but one consequence has become evident almost immediately: Pot has never been so cheap.

Steven Davenport of the Pardee Rand Graduate School has analyzed marijuana retail prices in Washington state since legal recreational markets opened in July 2014. Remarkably, prices have fallen every single quarter since.

When Davenport spoke to me 18 months ago (Wonkblog coverage here), retail marijuana prices had already fallen a stunning 58.5 percent. Yet he predicted correctly that the price collapse was not complete. The current retail price of $7.38 per gram (including tax) represents a 67 percent decrease in just three years of the legalization, with more decline likely in the future.


Davenport expects the marijuana industry to continue to find ways to lower prices for the simple reason that it’s a profitable business model. “Some consumers will prefer higher priced brands, but there will always be a market for the brand that can produce adequate quality cannabis at the cheapest cost,” he notes.

The ongoing decline in marijuana’s price after legalization has an important implication for drug policy more generally. The experience of Washington and other marijuana legalization states demonstrates how enormously effective prohibition of production and sale is at raising drug prices. For example heroin’s price took a decade to fall by 16 percent, which the legalization of marijuana accomplished in just eight months. Notably, even high taxes on legal marijuana don’t keep the legal price anywhere near what it was when the drug was more broadly illegal.

Prohibition imposes huge costs on drug producing industries that are passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices. These higher prices are one of the principal reasons (the others being stigma and fear of punishment) that illegal drugs are used so much less frequently than legal drugs such as alcohol and tobacco. Marijuana is a rare example where we can see the impact of legalizing a drug in real time, which shows that were the production and sale of heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine also legalized, those drugs would also become dramatically cheaper to consume.

 

[Baron23]

I like this guy.

My fellow conservatives should protect medical marijuana from the government

by Dana Rohrabacher September 5 at 9:16 AM
Dana Rohrabacher, a Republican, represents California’s 48th District in the U.S. House.

Not long ago, a supporter of mine, visiting from California, dropped by my Capitol office. A retired military officer and staunch conservative, he and I spent much of our conversation discussing the Republican agenda.

Finally, I drew a breath and asked him about an issue I feared might divide us: the liberalization of our marijuana laws, specifically medical marijuana reform, on which for years I had been leading the charge. What did he think about that controversial position?

“Dana,” he replied, “there are some things about me you don’t know.” He told me about his three sons, all of whom enlisted after 9/11.

Two of his sons returned from the battlefield whole and healthy. The third, however, came home suffering multiple seizures each day. His prospects were bleak.

His medical care fell under the total guidance of the Department of Veterans Affairs, whose doctors came under federal restraints regarding the treatments they could prescribe. (Among the treatments allowed were opioids.) Nothing worked.

Finally, a sympathetic doctor advised our young hero to see him in his private office, where he could prescribe medication derived from cannabis. The prescription worked. The seizures, for the most part, ceased.

“Dana,” said my friend, “I could hug you right now for what you’ve been doing, unknowingly, for my son.”

What had I been doing? With my Democrat friend Sam Farr, the now-retired California congressman, I wrote an amendment to spending bills that prohibits the federal government from prosecuting medical marijuana cases in states where voters have legalized such treatment. The amendment passed two consecutive years, the second time with a wider margin than the first, and has been extended through continuing resolutions and an omnibus spending bill.

Surprisingly, given the Obama administration’s generally liberal approach to marijuana, its Justice Department tried to interpret the amendment in such a convoluted way as to allow counterproductive raids on marijuana dispensaries. The courts — most recently the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit — repeatedly ruled that our amendment meant exactly what it said.

Unfortunately, my longtime friend Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, has urged Congress to drop the amendment, now co-sponsored by Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.). This, despite President Trump’s belief, made clear in his campaign and as president, that states alone should decide medical marijuana policies.

I should not need to remind our chief law enforcement officer nor my fellow Republicans that our system of federalism, also known as states’ rights, was designed to resolve just such a fractious issue. Our party still bears a blemish for wielding the “states’ rights” cudgel against civil rights. If we bury state autonomy in order to deny patients an alternative to opioids, and ominously federalize our police, our hypocrisy will deserve the American people’s contempt.

More than half the states have liberalized medical marijuana laws, some even decriminalizing recreational use. Some eighty percent of Americans favor legalization of medical marijuana. Only a benighted or mean-spirited mind-set would want to block such progress.

Despite federal efforts to restrict supply, studies continue to yield promising results. And mounting anecdotal evidence shows again and again that medical marijuana can dramatically improve the lives of people with epilepsy, post-traumatic stress disorder, arthritis and many other ailments.

Most Americans know this. The political class, not surprisingly, lags behind them.

Part of the reason is the failure of too many conservatives to apply “public choice economics” to the war on marijuana. Common sense, as well as public choice theory, holds that the government’s interest is to grow, just as private-sector players seek profit and build market share.

The drug-war apparatus will not give ground without a fight, even if it deprives Americans of medical alternatives and inadvertently creates more dependency on opioids. When its existence depends on asset seizures and other affronts to our Constitution, why should anti-medical-marijuana forces care if they’ve contributed inadvertently to a vast market, both legal and illegal, for opioids?

I invite my colleagues to visit a medical marijuana research facility and see for themselves why their cultural distaste might be misplaced. One exists near my district office at the University of California at Irvine, another at the University of California at San Diego.

Better yet, they might travel to Israel — that political guiding light for religious conservatives — and learn how our closest ally in the Middle East has positioned itself on the cutting edge of cannabis research. The Israeli government recently decriminalized first use, so unworried it is about what marijuana might do to its conscript military.

My colleagues should then return to Washington and keep my amendment intact, declaring themselves firmly on the side of medical progress. Failing that, the government will keep trying to eradicate the burgeoning marijuana business, thereby fueling and enriching drug cartels. Trust me: Hugs from grateful supporters are infinitely better.

 

[Baron23]

Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) gave an impassioned 35-minute-long floor speech pledging to organize an effort to reject the rule for a government-wide spending bill if leadership blocks his amendment to continue protections for state medical cannabis laws. The House Rules Committee is expected to decide whether to allow a vote on the rider as soon as Wednesday, with floor action on the overall bill also expected this week.

• "I ask the public to pay attention to how we vote… If the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer amendment is not permitted, then a vote for the rule is a vote for giving money to the drug cartels, it's a vote for eliminating the law as it is today -- which is leaving it up to the states -- and bringing the federal government back to our local and state areas in an enforcement mode. We don't need that."

https://www.c-span.org/video/?433499-102/house-session-part-3&start=4240

 

[Baron23]

Ryan ain't seen a shit storm like he will if he goes forward with preventing the extension of this amendment and they authorized ole' Jeffy to go after MMJ states. Assholes, every one of them.

House GOP blocks vote protecting medical marijuana states
Several lawmakers said Wednesday that GOP leaders won’t allow the full House to vote on an amendment that bars the Justice Department from pursuing states that have legalized medical marijuana.

Without legislation, states would lose protection they have enjoyed for the past four years, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions could begin his long-sought crackdown on the rapid expansion of legalized pot.

At a Wednesday morning closed-door briefing of House Republicans, California Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R) implored his GOP colleagues to press House leaders to allow a vote on his amendment.
Fellow Californian Rep. Duncan Hunter told The Hill that after Rohrabacher “talked about it this morning in conference,” GOP leaders said “it splits the conference too much so we’re not going to have a vote on it.”

Rohrabacher had pled with his colleagues in a Tuesday night floor speech to allow the vote.

“The status quo for four years has been the federal government will not interfere because the Department of Justice is not permitted to use its resources to supercede a state that has legalized the medical use of marijuana,” Rohrabacher said.

He said that without his amendment, “we’re changing the status quo in a way that undermines the rights of the states and the people … to make their policy.”

Rohrabacher’s amendment, co-sponsored with Democratic Rep. Earl Blumenauer (Ore.), was included in the previous four Commerce-Justice-Science funding measures, when President Obama was in the White House. It was also included in an omnibus funding bill signed by President Trump earlier this year that expires at the end of the month.

House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s (R-Calif.) offices did not respond to requests for comment.

 

[Baron23]

So, Ryan and the Rep Rules Committee are playing a game. They don't want to add any additional complexities to the already foreseen large battle over appropriations and debt limits. The Senate already included similar language to their appropriations bill. So, in reconciliation is where the House/Senate have a chance to put this into the final appropriations bill.

God knows I hate politicians and our professional political class. sigh

GOP-led House Rules Committee blocks voting on bipartisan marijuana amendments
Existing protections to state medical marijuana laws among amendments rejected from must-pass appropriations bill


The U.S. House Committee on Rules has blocked a number of marijuana-related amendments from a federal appropriations bill, including the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer amendment.

The GOP-led committee’s moves late Wednesday mean multiple amendments protecting existing and future state marijuana laws won’t be getting a vote on the House floor. Earlier Wednesday, Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-California, told The Hill that GOP leaders viewed the amendments as potentially divisive and planned to not have them to go to a vote.

The most notable measure cast out of the must-pass appropriations bill was the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer amendment, which would bar the Justice Department from using funds to interfere with existing state-enacted medical marijuana regulations. The amendment formerly known as Rohrabacher-Farr (Rep. Sam Farr has retired) has been in place since late 2014, when it received a 219-189 vote in the House, and was approved again in 2015, by a 242-186 vote. It has been extended through omnibus spending legislation set to expire at the end of this month.

Related stories

• House Rules Committee hears key marijuana amendments
• Rohrabacher calls on fellow Republicans to protect medical marijuana from the feds
• Medical marijuana states cautiously optimistic Congress will resist Sessions
• The feds seized guns, gold and 320 pot plants. So why did a judge rule they can’t pursue marijuana charges?
• Senate committee, rejecting request from Sessions, keeps protection for medical marijuana states

The committee’s removal of the medical marijuana protections from the House bill does not kill the amendment, and it still has a chance of making it into the legislation that lays out annual funding for the federal government. In late July, the Senate Appropriations Committee authorized the amendment for inclusion in the larger spending bill. Once the House version is passed, it faces reconciliation with that Senate version by a joint committee.

In a joint statement released Wednesday night, amendment sponsors Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-California, and Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Oregon, condemned the committee’s decision, saying the move “goes against the will of the American people” and “is putting at risk the millions of patients who rely on medical marijuana.”

“Our fight to protect medical marijuana patients is far from over,” the statement continued. “The marijuana reform movement is large and growing. This bad decision by the House Rules Committee is an affront to the 46 states and the District of Columbia that have legalized use and distribution of some form of medical marijuana. These programs serve millions of Americans.

“This setback, however, is not the final word. As House and Senate leadership negotiate a long-term funding bill, we will fight to maintain current protections.”

As The Cannabist’s Alicia Wallace previously reported, the potential short-term funding deal revealed Wednesday likely would include the existing Rohrabacher-Farr language, extending those protections through year’s end if it is approved.

Earlier Wednesday, Rohrabacher, and co-sponsors Blumenauer, and Jared Polis, D-Colorado, all testified before the committee that the medical marijuana protections are existing law and that public opinion is in favor of the existing medical cannabis regulations in 46 states.

“To deny (members of Congress) the right to have a vote, I think, is unconscionable,” Rohrabacher told the committee.

Said Blumenauer: “It would be a tragic mistake to lose the progress that we made.”

Three amendments on banking were offered, sponsored by Dennis “Denny” Heck, D-Washington. They would have allowed for marijuana businesses to have access to banking by prohibiting the punishment of financial institutions that serve licensed marijuana businesses and preventing the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network from rescinding its guidance for banks that work with marijuana firms.

The measures were rejected on an 8-5 vote, with the four Democrats on the committee joined by Republican Rep. Dan Newhouse of Washington in favor of the banking amendments.

Other amendments blocked by the committee included additional protection for medical marijuana research, sponsored by Florida GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz, and another allowing the District of Columbia to use local funding to regulate and tax recreational marijuana, which D.C. legalized in 2014.

 

[CarolKing]

Lagunitas Debuts Ale Brewed with Cannabis Terpenes

The famed North Bay brewery takes its love of weed one step further.

• Zack Ruskin
• Thu Sep 7th, 2017 9:39

When word came out in mid-August that a beer brewed with terpenes extracted from cannabis was about to be released, everyone knew which brewery was responsible.

Since its inception in 1993, Lagunitas Brewing Company has had a long, winking relationship with marijuana. Now, with the limited-release of SuperCritical Ale, the beloved brewer has taken its affinity for cannabis to the next level.

“It’s been a lot of fun,” says Karen Hamilton, director of communications for Lagunitas and sister of founder Tony Magee. “Normally, when we come out with some cool new beer, the people who write about beer may decide to write about it — but with this particular beer, it’s expanded the realm of people who are interested.”

While SuperCritical does not include any trace of THC — and thus will not get you high — the beer is flavored with a number of terpenes extracted by the folks at CannaCraft, who run the cannabis oil company AbsoluteXtracts. Lagunitas master brewer Jeremy Marshall selected terpenes from two strains: Blue Dream and Girl Scout Cookie. The result is an ale that clocks in at 6.6 percent ABV and has a robust flavor that does indeed share much in common with the fragrance of potent buds.

Hamilton is thrilled with the reaction to SuperCritical thus far.

“People used the word ‘dank’ in describing what they expected it to taste like,” she says. “They expected a weed flavor or aroma in the beer. There is definitely a little bit of that in there, due to the fact that we used marijuana terpenes, but it’s also an easy-drinking ale that has lots of interesting flavors that people are really enjoying.”

Longtime fans of Lagunitas will know that SuperCritical is but the latest beer from the brewery to pay homage to beer’s green, formerly illicit cousin.

First there was The Kronik, a hoppy amber brew that became Censored Ale after Lagunitas was denied the use of the original name due to its association with cannabis. Not ones to let any type of press go to waste, they slapped a black “Censored” bar across the label. Later, there was Undercover Investigation Shut-Down Ale, a beer brewed in honor of a 20-day suspension Lagunitas received in 2005 after Alcohol Beverage Control agents raided its Petaluma facility because some employees toked up at a company party.

Several years ago, Lagunitas gathered together The Waldos — the group of Marin County kids who inadvertently made “420” a global codeword for cannabis with their high school smoking sessions in 1971 — to help the company brew Waldos’ Special Ale.

Asked about the history of Lagunitas and marijuana — and how it led to SuperCritical’s release — Hamilton says the brewery is simply embracing the local culture as it always has.

“We’re in Northern California,” she says. “It’s part of the culture and it’s part of our culture. It’s a natural thing.”

She also pushes back against any notion that SuperCritical is merely a novelty beer.

“We’re not creating it to ‘do a thing,’ ” she says. “This is just part of who we are. It’s not a part of every person at Lagunitas, but it is a part of an acceptance of our culture.”

While SuperCritical may indeed be a beer brewed with pride, many interested parties will not have the chance to drink it: Lagunitas brewed only 120 kegs of the ale, which were sent to locations throughout California, but mainly in the Bay Area. The latest in their series of “One Hitters” — a line of beers intended to be made available on an extremely limited basis — SuperCritical is all but gone at the pubs and taprooms lucky enough to have snagged a keg.

However, Hamilton confirms to SF Weekly that another 120 kegs will be brewed in the near future.

Beer world buzzing over new cannabis IPA

 

[Baron23]

Alright, I'm throwing the bullshit flag on this article for bias reporting to the point of misstating the situation. I hate that term "fake news" as being as meaningless as every other crappy, trendy, catch phrase and prefer to look at the bias in the reporting. In this case, the bias is one I favor.....but NOT in the news that I consume. I HATE being spun up by anybody....it insults my intelligence that they think I will buy this crap.

In this case, the House didn't do a fucking thing. The rules committee of the House voted to not allow this amendment to be added to the appropriations bill before going to the House floor. Leadership did this on purpose in order to get this critical bill moving without lumping in the entire MJ legalization issue and were willing to do this because the amendment is already in the bill that they Senate passed. During reconciliation, differences between the two bills will be ironed out without having to have the entire House (including the Freedom Caucus idiots) having to vote on it.

This article's title is misleading.

The House Just Stripped Medical Marijuana States Of Protection From The DEA

States that have legalized medical marijuana could soon get an unwanted visit from the DEA. Congress stunned the cannabis industry by rejecting the only legal protection preventing Attorney General Jeff "good people don't smoke marijuana" Sessions from cracking down on those 30 states for violating federal cannabis prohibition.

Back in 2014, lawmakers passed an amendment to the federal budget to protect state-legalized medical marijuana industries and the patients they serve. The amendment prevented the DEA from spending a single penny on enforcing cannabis prohibition in those states. It didn't overturn federal cannabis prohibition or legalize medical marijuana, but it did tie the Department of Justice's hands by freezing their finances.

At the time, medical marijuana was legal in 21 states, a number that has grown to 30 since then. But they could all be shuttered soon because that amendment — which has to be renewed with every budget — was rejected yesterday by the House Rules Committee. That means the House can't include the rider in their final version of the federal budget.

If the budget passes without that rider, budtenders, dispensary owners, doctors recommending cannabis and even medical marijuana patients could face prosecution for their involvement in the industry. And not just for what they're doing right now. They could be charged with offences dating back to when they got involved in the state's cannabis industry.

And Attorney General Sessions might do just that since he's been itching to crackdown on those states. Since taking office, Sessions has ramped up anti-marijuana rhetoric in America. And last May, he asked Congress to drop the amendment so that he could unleash the DEA on medical marijuana states if he saw fit. His request was denied in July by the Senate Appropriations Committee, but it seems like his message resonated in the House.

The fight for the marijuana amendment isn't over yet though. The budget has yet to reach the Senate, where the rider could be re-inserted with support from Senators Cory Booker (D - NJ), Mike Lee (R - UT), Lisa Murkowski (R - AK), Rand Paul (R - KY), Bernie Sanders (D - VT) and others.

But even if it does get reinserted and passed, the amendment only buys patients, doctors and businesses a small window of relief before they have to start looking over their shoulders for DEA helicopters again. The reality is that the industry won't be safe until Congress listens to the 94 percent of Americans who support medical marijuana and changes the country's criminally outdated cannabis laws.

 

[momofthegoons]

This article's title is misleading.

Glad you put that cause my blood pressure would have spiked lol.... Unbelievable that we are going backwards in this fight. Hopefully Congress will come to their senses and remember who they are representing...

If the budget passes without that rider, budtenders, dispensary owners, doctors recommending cannabis and even medical marijuana patients could face prosecution for their involvement in the industry. And not just for what they're doing right now. They could be charged with offences dating back to when they got involved in the state's cannabis industry.

Now this is some scary shit. How they can go after people who were legal when they purchased is beyond me. But this may have been a good arguing point for those who 'didn't want to get on the list.' I was one of those for years until I got my MMMP. No wonder none of the doctors want to be involved or prescribed.

I just cannot wrap my head around them going against the will of the majority like this. It flies against everything the Constitution stands for.

 

[Baron23]

Glad you put that cause my blood pressure would have spiked lol.... Unbelievable that we are going backwards in this fight. Hopefully Congress will come to their senses and remember who they are representing...


Now this is some scary shit. How they can go after people who were legal when they purchased is beyond me. But this may have been a good arguing point for those who 'didn't want to get on the list.' I was one of those for years until I got my MMMP. No wonder none of the doctors want to be involved or prescribed.

I just cannot wrap my head around them going against the will of the majority like this. It flies against everything the Constitution stands for.

Well, like I said,

Ryan ain't seen a shit storm like he will if he goes forward with preventing the extension of this amendment and they authorized ole' Jeffy to go after MMJ states. Assholes, every one of them.

 

[mitchgo]

In this case, the House didn't do a fucking thing. The rules committee of the House voted to not allow this amendment to be added to the appropriations bill before going to the House floor. Leadership did this on purpose in order to get this critical bill moving without lumping in the entire MJ legalization issue and were willing to do this because the amendment is already in the bill that they Senate passed. During reconciliation, differences between the two bills will be ironed out without having to have the entire House (including the Freedom Caucus idiots) having to vote on it..

So I guess I'm confused.

Are you saying that this was merely a procedural issue, not a policy one, and it's likely that the Senate will just reinsert the amendment and pass it? (I did read that the Senate has submitted this amendment but I wasn't sure if it passed.) So it's just a matter of Senate passing, pro forma, and some kind of committee recon with the House bill and it's back? If so, is there any reason to believe the House will strip it again?

Seems like a very non-partisan issue so the whole thing is baffling. Given that 90% of America supports MMJ I'd be shocked if they did anything. (I take that back...nothing shocks me with this gov't anymore.)

In any case you seem somewhat sanguine, so feel free to rub some of that zen off on me. I'll gladly accept it.

 

[Baron23]

So I guess I'm confused.

Are you saying that this was merely a procedural issue, not a policy one, and it's likely that the Senate will just reinsert the amendment and pass it? (I did read that the Senate has submitted this amendment but I wasn't sure if it passed.) So it's just a matter of Senate passing, pro forma, and some kind of committee recon with the House bill and it's back? If so, is there any reason to believe the House will strip it again?

Seems like a very non-partisan issue so the whole thing is baffling. Given that 90% of America supports MMJ I'd be shocked if they did anything. (I take that back...nothing shocks me with this gov't anymore.)

In any case you seem somewhat sanguine, so feel free to rub some of that zen off on me. I'll gladly accept it.

No, I'm not saying that the Senate will reinsert the amendment, what I'm saying is the Senate version of the appropriations bill already has similar wording in it.

Then, House and Senate negotiators....which is a much smaller group that is more aligned with party leadership (that is, they ain't the tomato chucking Freedom Caucus back benchers).....will get together and they must negotiate a reconciled final version that will go to both houses for a full and final vote. If the amendment gets stripped out of the final bill during reconciliation, despite the overwhelming majorities in both houses on this amendment in the past, then we have a real problem.

If that happens, and Jeff Sessions is turned loose and goes after medical states MMJ programs, there will be a shit storm of epic proportions that will end up in courts for many years. States do have significant ability to stiff the Justice Department if they want. Additionally, the Republicans (who are most likely to object to this amendment) are keenly aware of mid-term elections coming up next year and going after state authorized MMJ programs will, IMO, kill them.

Ryan says....and who can tell if its true as he is a politician and his lip are indeed moving so.....that the reason that they didn't put it in the House version now was to, in fact, avoid unrelated confrontations while trying to get an appropriations bill through. Its also true that this was purely the act of the Rules Committee and its chairman who is opposed to MMJ. McCain keeps saying he wants a return to 'regular order'....well, this is a prime example of 'regular order' where committee chairman have super outsized control of what even gets to be debated and voted on. Regular order just ensure the smoke filled back room deals continue. Fuck regular order, I want to see an open roll call vote on this amendment with names taken for ayes and nays. After all, 2018 mid-terms are coming up.

ISIS is still higher on my scale of contempt than USA politicians....but not really by much.

 

[Baron23]

How Donald Trump (Accidentally) Helped Save Marijuana From Jeff Sessions (For Now)
Late this week, both houses of Congress passed a debt and disaster relief bill that will allow the federal government to pay its people, provide disaster relief to areas of Texas (and, soon, Florida) wrecked by historic hurricanes, and otherwise function until December.

Tucked into the Senate’s version of the spending bill—and approved by a nearly 3-to-1 margin in the House on Friday, with all the opposition coming from firebrand conservative Republicans—is a temporary extension of crucial protections for the country’s legal marijuana industry, as MarijuanaPolitics.com noted.

A budget provision known as the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer Amendment, which has effectively blocked the U.S. Justice Department from taking action against state law-abiding medical marijuana operations since 2014, is now effective until at least Dec. 8 of this year.

These are the same protections that were jeopardized—and, along with them, legal weed in America—when House GOP leadership successfully blocked this amendment from even coming to a vote on Wednesday… shortly before President Donald Trump cucked House Speaker Paul Ryan and cut a separate deal with Democratic leadership on a spending bill.

Which, in turn, means Donald Trump—quite probably unwittingly and accidentally—just helped hand the marijuana industry a massive reprieve, albeit a temporary one.

Ryan and his GOP friends, you see, wanted an 18-month extension on the contentious spending bill, in order to avoid that key government function to become a campaign issue during the 2018 midterms. Democrats, of course, want such basic politics to be part of the political campaign they hope will see them reclaim at least some measure of power in Washington.

Trump, possibly because he’s sick of the GOP Congress making him look bad, went ahead and accepted Democrats’ offer of a three-month extension. This means that the ugliest and most contentious debate Congress has—other than, say, polite conversation about sentencing Americans to death by yanking away their healthcare—will now happen in December.

At the same time, Congress will have to take up the matter of whether to defend the medical marijuana movement from a crackdown led by Attorney General Jeff Sessions yet again.

In May, Sessions directly asked Congress to end those protections. They rebuffed him, but as this week’s episode shows, a tiny minority of lawmakers have the ability to override the majority via parliamentarian tricks.

“The industry and the patients who rely on it for access to medicine just got some relief, even if it’s only temporary,” said Tom Angell, chairman of the Marijuana Majority legalization advocacy group, in a statement provided to HIGH TIMES. “But the uncertainty about whether the continued protections for next year that are included in the Senate’s FY2018 bill will be adopted or if the House’s blocking tactics will instead prove successful is creating anxiety that seriously ill people who need medical cannabis just don’t deserve. It would be a disaster if Congress gave Jeff Sessions a green light to go after patients and providers in December.”

Despite wide support from the American public and die-hard Trump Republicans representing states where cannabis is legal, House GOP leadership displayed stunning and outright troubling hostility towards cannabis reform this week.

In addition to the medical marijuana protections, Republicans on the House Rules committee also blocked legislation that would have allowed cannabis businesses to use bank accounts and set up legal recreational marijuana sales in Washington, D.C., where cannabis has been legal for adults for some time. Some of these same Republicans were among the 90 wraiths who also voted against spending money on disaster relief. So we know they’re stone-hearted monsters.

But enough about them. Let’s talk about Trump.

Trump’s sudden friendly turn towards Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Nancy Pelosi has left Republicans slackjawed and punch-drunk. Everyone in Washington is trying to figure out what game Trump is playing.

That’s a waste of time: Trump’s playing the same game he always has, a Monopoly of Me-First. Cutting a bipartisan deal is exactly what Trump promised he would do during his campaign, and lo—the press is praising him for it!

Trump gets to bask in the warm glow of adulation, his favorite thing in the world, and by accident, cannabis gets what it needs.

Did Trump know what he was doing? Yes—he knew he was tired of nine months of getting nothing done in Congress. If that means stumbling into a weed-friendly move, so be it.

 

[Baron23]

Ole Jeffe', Take those fake new arguments and statistic about "oh, but the children" and stuff them. You were wrong again.

Teen marijuana use falls to 20-year low, defying legalization opponents’ predictions

By Christopher Ingraham September 7

In 2016, rates of marijuana use among the nation's 12- to 17-year-olds dropped to their lowest level in more than two decades, according to federal survey data released this week.

Last year, 6.5 percent of adolescents used marijuana on a monthly basis, according to the latest National Survey on Drug Use and Health. That represents a statistically significant drop from 2014, when the nation's first recreational marijuana shops opened in Washington state and Colorado.

The last time monthly teen marijuana use was this low was 1994, according to the survey.

Public health experts tend to worry more about adolescent than adult drug use because adolescent brains are still developing. Teen drug use is linked to a host of health problems later in life, including addiction, criminal behavior and cognitive deficits.

The marijuana trend defies the warnings of those who oppose its legalization, who have long predicted that loosening restrictions on marijuana would “send the wrong message” to teens and increase teen drug use.

The federal data show that adult marijuana use, on the other hand, is rising. Last year 20.8 percent of Americans between the ages of 18 and 25 used marijuana at least monthly, the highest number since 1985. Among adults ages 26 to 34, 14.5 percent used marijuana monthly in 2016, also the most since 1985.

Those numbers have been rising for several decades, well before the advent of legal recreational and medical marijuana. The survey didn't provide trend data for older age groups, but other studies have shown that marijuana use is growing the fastest among middle-aged and older adults.

While marijuana use increased among adults, past-month alcohol use fell, according to the survey. Last year 55 percent of adults ages 18 and older drank alcohol at least monthly, compared with 56 percent in 2015. While small, that drop was statistically significant, lending some credence to the notion that some adults may be substituting marijuana for alcohol.

Public health research has generally shown that alcohol use is more harmful to individuals and society than marijuana use, although marijuana still poses a number of risks to its users.

Nationwide, over 60 percent of American adults say marijuana use should be legal, according to an August 2017 Quinnipiac poll.

 

[Baron23]

Editorial
Trump and Sessions are ignoring voters' overwhelming support for medical marijuana. Will Congress listen?

Never mind what President Trump said on the campaign trail. His administration and GOP leaders appear determined to eliminate protections for medical marijuana growers, sellers and users.

Every year since 2014, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Costa Mesa) has inserted an amendment into a federal spending bill to prevent the Justice Department from prosecuting medical marijuana businesses that comply with their state’s laws. It’s been a temporary but necessary fix to address a fundamental contradiction: that even though 26 states have legalized medical marijuana, the drug is still prohibited under federal law.

The amendment, most recently co-sponsored by Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), has provided some measure of security and stability to responsible medical marijuana suppliers by assuring that they won’t be raided, arrested or prosecuted by federal authorities.

But last week, the House Rules Committee killed the amendment at the urging of Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions, a hard-line marijuana prohibitionist.

Decades of experience have shown that the U.S. can’t win a war on marijuana.
Sessions sent a letter to members of Congress in May citing “an historic drug epidemic and potentially long-term uptick in violent crime” and urging them to reject the amendment. He wrote that the Justice Department needs to have free rein to use “all laws available” to enforce the Controlled Substances Act, a woefully out-of-date law that says marijuana is as addictive as heroin and has no medical value.

Of course, that’s baloney. In fact, 46 states have authorized the use of cannabis or cannabis compounds for medical use, including controlling seizures in children. Even Trump, prior to his election, recognized the value of medical marijuana, telling a rally in Nevada, “I know people that are very, very sick and for whatever reason the marijuana really helps them.” Nevertheless, the federal government continues to insist that marijuana products should be illegal even for medicinal use, putting its producers and users at risk of criminal enforcement.

Frankly, the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer amendment should be noncontroversial given the overwhelming public support — in excess of 80%, according to several polls — for medical use.

The Senate approved a comparable amendment in July. But if the two houses can’t agree and the language doesn’t make it into the final bill, the protections for medical marijuana will expire in early December.


This would be a huge step backwards in the movement to liberalize marijuana laws. For years states have taken the lead. Many now allow medical marijuana for patients and some even permit recreational marijuana for adults. One argument is that since marijuana is already so widely used, it would be better for public health and public safety to create a legal, regulated and controlled market. That is why the Times supported Proposition 64 last November, which legalized adult recreational use in California. But even as marijuana laws have changed at the state level, the drug has always remained illegal under federal law, sending a mixed message and causing uncertainty.

Rohrabacher, a conservative Republican who is among the most outspoken advocates for liberalizing drug laws, wants to eliminate at least some of that uncertainty. In addition to his annual amendment, he also introduced the Respect State Marijuana Laws Act of 2017, which would protect individuals from federal prosecution if they are adhering to state cannabis laws, whether for medicinal or recreational use. The bill has a couple of dozen co-sponsors, mostly from the newly formed Cannabis Caucus, a bipartisan group that wants to work on legalization and regulation issues. But the bill still faces a steep climb in Congress.

Congressional leaders cannot continue to bury their heads in the sand. Decades of experience have shown that the U.S. can’t win a war on marijuana. Moreover, waging such a war now would hurt the millions of people who rely on medical cannabis for relief and would overrule the many, many voters who have supported medical and recreational use of marijuana.

It seems inevitable that the federal government will follow the states’ lead sooner or later. Despite Trump’s campaign comments, his administration shows no sign of adopting a more pragmatic approach to marijuana policy. It’s up to Congress to show leadership.

 

[Baron23]

wrt to the headline of the below article:

US marijuana sales are predicted to hit $30 billion by 2021, according to a new report

The marijuana industry is growing by leaps and bounds and has not surprisingly been a favorite among investors. Over the past year, more marijuana stocks with a market cap north of $200 million than not have at least doubled in value.

Changing perceptions toward cannabis have played a very big role in pot's ascendance of the past couple of years. National pollster Gallup, which has periodically surveyed the American public over a nearly five-decade period, has witnessed favorability toward the idea of legalizing the drug nationally for adult use rise from 25% in 1995 to 60% in 2016, an all-time high. The pro-legalization thesis assumes that if favorability toward weed keeps rising, politicians will have no choice but to alter marijuana's scheduling at the federal level or risk being voted out of office.

A new report suggests the weed industry can grow by 36% annually through 2021
But just how quickly the marijuana industry can grow has often been a question of great contention. Investment firm Cowen & Co. has arguably had the most aggressive growth forecast, calling for $50 billion in legal sales in the U.S. by 2026. However, a new report issued by GreenWave Advisors on the state of the emerging cannabis industry might just top Cowen & Co.'s bullishness.

The headline figure in GreenWave's report sticks out like a "green" thumb: $30.3 billion in legal U.S. sales expected by 2021. Mind you, legal U.S. sales grew by approximately 35% in 2016 to $6.5 billion, with $1.8 billion in reported recreational-weed sales and an estimated $4.7 billion derived from medical-marijuana sales. Forecasting $30.3 billion in sales by 2021 implies a compound annual growth rate of 36.1% over the next five years. That's a blistering pace that tops any projection I can find over that same span.

Where's this growth coming from? Amazingly, from every single U.S. state, according to GreenWave. By 2021, GreenWave anticipates that every U.S. state will have legalized cannabis either medically or recreationally. All told, 21 states are expected to have moved forward with medical cannabis only by then, and 29 will have legalized adult-use and medical weed. The report assumes $17.9 billion in medical cannabis sales if all states approved, implying 281% aggregate growth over five years, while recreational weed is expected to make up the remaining $13.4 billion, representing 644% growth over half a decade.

Image source: Getty Images.

Data as of 2016 shows there to be approximately 26.3 million medical-cannabis patients spending an average of $3,200 a year. Also, around 30 million adults in the recreational market are expected to spend $1,500 this year.

How the marijuana industry can overcome two big obstacles
Of course, the marijuana industry is also fighting an uphill battle involving the drug's Schedule I status at the federal level. A Schedule I drug has no recognized medical benefits and is completely illegal. This categorization for pot means few financial institutions are willing to do business with weed-based companies, leaving many to deal solely in cash. It also means that companies involved in the marijuana industry are usually unable to take corporate income-tax deductions because of U.S. tax code 280E, as they're selling a federally illegal substance. Even clinical researchers are dealing with a mountain of red tape when trying to run risk-versus-benefit studies involving cannabis because of its scheduling.

However, GreenWave sees some relief to these issues in the years to come. A vital part of its growth thesis involves two shifts at the federal level. First, the report suggests the likelihood of a friendlier banking environment under the Trump administration. President Trump's previously iterated desire to deregulate the banking industry, and remove the compliance burdens associated with Sarbanes-Oxley, could open the door for banks to lend to cannabis businesses. Having access to credit should mean more rapid expansion and hiring, as well as the ability to buy supplies in bulk, thereby saving money and improving margins in the process.

Image source: Getty Images.

In addition, GreenWave expects other states to follow Washington state's efforts with regard to consolidating their medical and recreational industries. According to the report, "Washington state has moved toward consolidating its recreational and medical markets with a 'medical friendly' designation, that requires an in-house certified medical marijuana consultant to issue a 'recognition card.'" GreenWave believes the related expenses of the medical and recreational industry should help qualify them for some deductions under U.S. tax code 280E.


These major issues remain
Even if GreenWave is right that the industry will overcome two of its biggest obstacles between now and 2021, a number of major issues remain.

Perhaps the biggest issue is going to be apathy on Capitol Hill toward marijuana. Gallup has found that two groups of people still have a negative view on cannabis: senior citizens and Republicans. With Republicans in charge of Congress until at least 2018, and Donald Trump in the White House through 2020, there doesn't seem to be much of a margin for error in changing things at the federal level, or even the state level in some instances. It also doesn't help that healthcare, tax reform, and the annual federal budget are taking up all of the available time for lawmakers in Congress.

President Trump signing paperwork, flanked by Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his wife. Image source: President Donald J. Trump's official Facebook page. Photo by Benjamin D. Applebaum.

There's also no love lost between the pot industry and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who just might be the most ardent opponent of cannabis in the administration. Sessions sent congressional leaders a letter in May requesting that they repeal the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment, which is what protects legally operating weed businesses from federal prosecution. If Sessions had his way, he'd promptly trample states' rights. It's tough to see every state legalizing to some degree with Sessions still in office.

But the biggest issue might be that two dozen states lack the initiative and referendum (I&R) process, which is what allows residents in a state the opportunity to gather signatures and vote on propositions. States that don't have the I&R process rely on their legislatures to pass laws. Vermont, which is arguably a very progressive and pot-friendly state, doesn't have the I&R process, and Gov. Phil Scott (R-Vt.) vetoed a bill three months ago that would have legalized recreational weed in the state. I foresee scenarios like this continuing to play out over the next five years.

Hitting $30 billion in legal sales by 2021 in the U.S. may prove to be a pipe dream.

 

[Baron23]

Study: National Medical Marijuana Could Save Thousands of Lives Annually

A new study published by the University of Indiana (IU) indicates that medical marijuana, if legalized nationally, could be a true lifesaver.

Per the Indiana study, approximately 47,500 American lives could be saved annually if medical marijuana were legalized nationally.

Authored by Dr. Thomas M. Clark, the IU research scrutinized studies published since 2000 and evaluated the impact of legalized medical marijuana on potentially fatal diseases and American “mortality.”

Research methodology:

“The effects of Cannabis use on mortality from effects on organ systems and disease states considered most likely to be influenced by Cannabis were investigated. These were cancer, appetite and metabolism, cardiovascular disease, liver disease, lung disease, and brain injury. Then, data on changes in mortality rates or harmful behaviors following legalization of medical marijuana were sought and analyzed.”

For the study researchers examined the effects of:

• Cannabis on obesity
• Cannabis on cancer
• Cannabis on diabetes mellitus
• Cannabis on cardiovascular disease
• Cannabis on lung disease
• Cannabis on liver disease
• Cannabis on traumatic brain injury
• Cannabis on neurodegenerative/neuroinflammatory diseases
• Cannabis on opioid overdoses
• Cannabis on alcohol consumption
• Cannabis on driving

Thought to be responsible for an estimated 6,100 to 9,000 deaths annually, the study concluded prohibition is as deadly to the American public as drunk driving, homicide, or a fatal addiction to opioids. Conversely, the study noted, “cannabis use appears to prevent approximately 17,400 to 38,500 premature deaths annually.”