WeedLife News Network

The designation of the cannabis business as essential caught some states and some state officials off guard. 

It was a classic watershed moment when 20 of the 33 states across the U.S. that allowed some form of sale and consumption of marijuana had those businesses designated as essential businesses in March during the early days of the coronavirus outbreak. 

And while that designation of what is “essential” was just an advisory from the Department of Homeland Security, and not a federal directive or standard, meaning that it’s open to wide interpretation by various jurisdictions, cannabis advocates jumped on the opportunity in March to remind state governors about the importance of the cannabis industry. 

A letter from the Marijuana Policy Project states that governors and legislative leaders played up the significance of access to medical cannabis in times of a pandemic: “As leaders of states with medical cannabis or cannabidiol (CBD) laws, we write to urge you to ensure patients can safely access their treatment option in a way that is consistent with public health. Cannabis is a crucial part of the treatment regimens of hundreds of thousands of individuals, including many who have vulnerable immune systems because of their advanced age or a serious medical condition.” 

The designation of the cannabis business as essential caught some states and some state officials off guard. 

Vice President Mike Pence took to Lou Dobbs Tonight on Fox News earlier this week to gripe that Democrats were attempting to include legislation related to marijuana and banking in the latest coronavirus relief bill.

"I heard the other day the bill mentions marijuana more than it mentions jobs," Pence said to Dobbs. "The American people don't want some pork-barrel bill coming out of the Congress when we've got real needs for working-class families."

Maybe he's trying to remind everybody that Joe Biden isn't the only vice president who's still resisting marijuana legalization?

There are two ironies here. First, the bill Pence is complaining about makes it possible for cannabis businesses to safely engage in banking in states where cannabis is legal, which helps those "working-class families" who rely on the cannabis industry. Second, the bill he's referring to will actually save taxpayers money, unlike much of the rest of this relief legislation.

The "Secure and Fair Enforcement Act of 2019," a.k.a. the "SAFE Banking Act," would allow legally operating cannabis businesses to have the same legal access to banks, loans, and deposit protections as other legal businesses. Because the sale and possession of marijuana are still forbidden by federal law, banks are reluctant to have any dealings with dispensaries and growers, even when they're legally operating within their home states.

It would appear that changing over the Senate is even more important than who is President on this particular issue.

Many in the cannabis industry have, understandably, backed Joe Biden and Kamala Harris for President and VP, presumably for a variety of reasons which include a belief that they are more likely to support legalizing cannabis at the federal level. Many are not as aware that President Donald Trump has stated that he is, in his words, “100%” in favor of legalizing medical marijuana, and that he believes recreational or adult use should be decided by the states, although early in his 2016 campaign he said he opposed legalizing adult use.

The truth is, as many have discovered, the Biden campaign has almost the same view as Mr. Trump. The former VP will support the legalization of cannabis for medical purposes, leave decisions regarding legalization for recreational use up to the states, and reschedule cannabis as a Schedule II drug. If Trump supports legalization essentially in this manner, then why has it not been enacted since his inauguration? There are primarily three barriers to this, and their names are Republican Sens. Mitch McConnell, Mike Crapo and Lindsey Graham. But let’s step back.

In January 2018, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinded the Obama-era Cole Memo in the Justice Department which deemphasized federal prosecution of state legal cannabis enterprises. In response to this, Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO) told the President he would hold up all his judicial nominees until he addressed the issue. A few months later he was able to talk to Trump, who assured him that if a bill came to his desk legalizing medical marijuana and leaving adult use to the states, he would sign it. Gardner then backed off his resistance to Trump’s judges.

Shortly thereafter, Gardner, along with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), introduced the Strengthening the Tenth Amendment Through Entrusting States (STATES) Act, then reintroduced it a year later. A companion bill was also introduced in the House. The bill would take the steps Trump said he would accept in legalizing medical marijuana and allowing states to legalize adult use.

A study of consumer attitudes released recently found that residents of states with legal cannabis have a positive view of the regulated marketplace. Results of the research, “Consumer perceptions of ‘legal’ and ‘illegal’ cannabis in US states with legal cannabis sales,” were released online last month ahead of the publication of the study in the journal Addictive Behaviors early next year.

To conduct the study, researchers with the University of Waterloo’s School of Public Health in Canada surveyed adult consumers in states with legal cannabis and asked them about their views of the regulated marketplace. Investigators surveyed 5,530 respondents residing in Alaska, California, Colorado, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. 

The study examined consumer perceptions of quality, price, convenience, and safety of use and purchasing cannabis from legal versus illegal sources in U.S. states with legal retail sales. The study also attempted to examine associations between cannabis use, length of time since legal sales began, and perceptions of legal cannabis.

Well over half (59.2%) of the survey participants reported that, compared to an illicit supplier, cannabis was more convenient to obtain from a licensed source and 56.1% said it was a safer way to purchase cannabis. Additionally, 37.6% of consumers said that they believed the quality of the cannabis offered at licensed businesses was superior to what can be purchased from unlicensed sellers, although more than 30% of respondents said that legal cannabis is more expensive. Less than 15% of respondents in any state reported that legal cannabis was less expensive than that purchased from unlicensed sources. The study also found that 40.3% of those surveyed felt that cannabis purchased from legal sources was safer to use than unregulated products.

Better Over Time

Researchers also found that consumer perceptions varied according to the length of time since legal cannabis sales began. Respondents living in more mature legal markets that had legalized marijuana earlier were more likely to perceive legal cannabis as being of higher quality. The survey also found that consumers in mature markets were less likely to say that legal pot was more expensive.

Two separate cannabis initiatives have qualified for the general election ballot in Montana, making it the sixth state in the nation that will be voting on a legalization measure in November. On Thursday, the office of Montana Secretary of State Corey Stapleton revealed that supporters for Initiative 190 and Constitutional Initiative 118 had collected enough signatures to qualify both measures for the ballot.

Initiative 190 would legalize the possession and sale of small amounts of marijuana for adult use and establish a regulatory system to license cannabis businesses. The measure also levies a tax of 20% on recreational marijuana and reduces the existing tax on medical cannabis from 1% to 2%. The initiative also authorizes the home cultivation of up to four mature cannabis plants and four seedlings.

Revenue from the tax on adult-use cannabis would be allocated to land, water, and wildlife conservation programs, veteran services, substance abuse treatment, long-term health care, and local governments. Proponents of the measure have estimated that it would raise $48 million in tax revenue by 2025.

Constitutional Initiative 118 would amend the Montana Constitution to allow the state legislature to set the legal age to make cannabis purchases at 21. Currently, the constitution grants all of the rights of an adult to all persons age 18 or older, except for the purchase of alcohol.

More Than Enough Signatures Collected

Petitions for both initiatives were circulated by New Approach Montana, which collected more than 130,000 signatures to put the measures on the ballot. To qualify, Initiative 190 needed approximately 25,000 verified signatures, while the constitutional initiative required about 50,000 signatures. The group reports that it spent approximately $2 million on its signature-gathering effort and other expenses related to qualifying the two initiatives for the ballot.

Cannabis prohibition is one of the worst public policies in modern times. Prohibition is often used to trample on citizens’ rights around the world, including and especially citizens of color.

Efforts to dismantle global institutional racism must absolutely include ending cannabis prohibition.

Right now there are only two countries that have legalized cannabis for adult use – Uruguay and Canada. Hopefully more countries will follow suit sooner rather than later.

Countless people have had their lives ruined because of cannabis prohibition, and many continue to have their lives ruined well after they have paid their fine and/or served their sentence.

The ‘Cannabis Scarlet Letter’

Cannabis convictions punish offenders well after they have served their debt to society via showing up on background checks.

The American Heart Association says marijuana should be removed from the USA’s Schedule I controlled substance category – but not to encourage wider use.

Not all cannabis is equal in the eyes of the law in the USA. Hemp and marijuana are both cannabis, but are treated very differently.

The 2018 Farm Bill removed hemp’s Drug Enforcement Administration Schedule I controlled substance designation. Hemp is defined as any part or derivative of the Cannabis sativa L. plant containing less than 0.3 percent tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) by weight. Anything above that is considered marijuana at a federal level, and is still a Schedule I controlled substance (listed as “marihuana”).

Schedule I indicates a substance has no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse – so it needs changing just based on the medical use aspect. The American Heart Association suggests it also needs to change to enable further research.

“Our understanding of the safety and efficacy of cannabis has been limited by decades of worldwide illegality and continues to be limited in the United States by the ongoing classification of cannabis as a Schedule 1 controlled substance,” said the AHA in a scientific statement published in the journal Circulation.

One year after the Canadian government created a program to quickly and affordably clear cannabis possession charges from people’s criminal records, just 265 records have been cleared. 

Applicants can have small cannabis possession charges suspended from their criminal record so a background check for a job or housing comes up clean. 

The Liberal Party estimated 10,000 people would be eligible for the program while advocacy group Cannabis Amnesty calculate 500,000 Canadians are eligible.

But as of Aug. 7, 2020, barely a fraction of the anticipated applicants have completed the process.

According to numbers from the Parole Board of Canada, 467 people have applied to the program: 265 were approved; 196 were denied due to ineligibility or incomplete applications; four are being processed; and two were discontinued. 

By the end of 2020, the legal cannabis industry is expected to surpass US$15 billion. But the money that weed generates on the illicit market far exceeds that amount.

Tracking exact figures is tricky because anonymous dealers and criminal networks aren’t exactly sharing sales data with the media. But estimates approximate the illicit market is more than four times the size of its legal market.

More specifically, New Frontier Data values the U.S. illicit