The House of Representatives rejected an amendment on Thursday that would have removed an existing rider that scientists say inhibits research into the therapeutic potential of Schedule I controlled substances such as psilocybin, MDMA and marijuana.
The amendment, introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) last week, would have eliminated a section of a large-scale appropriations bill stipulating that no federal dollars can be spent on “any activity that promotes the legalization of any drug or other substance in Schedule I.”
The presiding officer ruled that the measure was approved in a voice vote after the debate early Thursday morning, but that was reversed during a later roll call vote of 91 to 331.
“Academics and scientists report that provisions like this create [stigma] and insurmountable logistical hurdles to researching schedule I drugs like psilocybin and MDMA which have shown promise in end of life therapy and treating PTSD,” a summary of the amendment states.
The House Rules Committee cleared the proposal for floor consideration before the full chamber on Monday. However, during the same meeting it blocked a separate amendment that would have barred the Department of Education from denying or limiting funds to universities that allow the use or possession of medical cannabis on campus in a legal state.
Ocasio-Cortez’s measure was cosponsored by Reps. Lou Correa (D-NY), Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Matt Gaetz (R-FL).
“I’m a strong believer in evidence-based policymaking,” Ocasio-Cortez said during the floor debate. “And wherever there is evidence of good, we have a moral obligation to pursue and explore the parameters of that good. Even if it means challenging our past assumptions or admitting past wrongs.”
Yesterday I offered an amendment to allow Fed researchers to study Schedule I Drugs, incl:
– MDMA & PTSD
– Psilocybin & severe depression
– Ibogaine & opioid withdrawal
🚨 House votes TODAY.
If you’re supportive, CALL YOUR REP. Don’t assume they’ll vote for it – let them know. https://t.co/NrVoxKQa2X
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) June 13, 2019
Describing the current situation researchers face as a “catch-22,” she said that the problem with the current policy is that it is “so vague and broadly interrupted that it prevents scientists from researching, examining and exploring avenues of treatment that could alleviate an enormous amount of suffering from medical conditions.”
Correa also spoke in support.
“We need legitimate, reliable research by universities and other institutions into the health benefits of cannabis and other substances,” he said. “This amendment will allow credible research institutions to conduct research by removing layers of paperwork that serve as hurdles meant to block such research. As more Americans, including veterans, use cannabis and so-called ‘magic mushrooms’ to manage or treat their pain or other health conditions, it’s important that doctors have the necessary information on the possible benefits, or not, of these substances.”
Correa called the amendment “both timely and very necessary” in light of recent local moves to reform criminal policies dealing with psychedelics.
Voters in Denver approved a local measure to decriminalize the substance last month, and the Oakland City Council unanimously passed a similar measure last week that also applies to other psychedelics including ayahuasca, mescaline and ibogaine.
Both Correa and Ocasio-Cortez spoke about the suicide rate among military veterans and the potential of psychedelics to help them with conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder.
This bill has bipartisan support, but it also has bipartisan opposition.
Many Dem & GOP alike, are uncomfortable w/ letting federal researchers merely *study* the clinical promise of certain drugs – even in veteran PTSD.
Your call can help them see a shift in public sentiment.
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) June 13, 2019
“Thirty percent of all military veterans have considered suicide. If a substance shows promise in treating PTSD, we have an obligation to study it,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “One of the leading causes of death in America today is suicide. So if a Schedule I drug shows clinical promise in treating and in treatment resistant depression, perhaps it is not the drug we should say morally wrong, but perhaps it is the law, the schedule, the statute.”
But Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD) rose to oppose the amendment, saying that it wouldn’t actually help to foster research, a goal he said he shares.
“The bottom line is, this is not the place and this won’t do what the authors in support of the amendment say it’s going to do. The fact of the matter is that the DEA is the one that enforces the classification of Schedule I. This bill does nothing to do with the DEA,” he argued. “The problem lies in the fact that it is a Schedule I drug and the appropriate way to deal with this is through an authorizing committee.”
A longtime opponent of legalization, Harris suggested that cannabis “induces psychosis in young people,” adding that it is “a gateway drug.”
The amendment, he said, “sends a bad signal” and isn’t just about marijuana. “It’s about every Schedule I drug. And there are very dangerous schedule 1 drugs.”
Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA) also spoke against the proposal.
“Do we want the federal government telling our families and our children, take this, it’s good for you?” he asked. “Maybe it is. I sure don’t think it is. I certainly don’t want my kids taking it and I don’t want the government promoting it.”
Citing the growing political support for marijuana reform at a time when tobacco use rates are at historic lows, Perry said, “now we’re going to tell the rest of the country, ‘let’s all start smoking marijuana instead.”
“I don’t think this is what the government should be promoting,” he said.
But Ocasio-Cortez argued that her amendment has bipartisan appeal.
“My colleagues on the other side of the aisle often bemoan the role of government and promote ideas of choice. And here I am happy in that spirit to agree,” she said. “We should get government and political opinion out of scientific research when we have seen and shown promise in a way that can help people and their medical needs.”
“I understand that the politics of this bill may make it difficult for some to support right now,” she said. “But I propose this amendment and urge my colleagues to support it because politics isn’t always about winning today, but it is about fighting for what is right in the future and for future generations.”
If Ocasio-Cortez’s amendment had passed through the House, and deleted from that chamber’s bill the longstanding prohibition on advocating legalization that was first enacted in 1996, that wouldn’t have necessarily meant that the rider would have ultimately been removed from federal law. The Senate Appropriations Committee has not yet introduced its version of the funding legislation.
The last few weeks has seen a significant uptick in cannabis reform being pursued through the congressional appropriations process, with multiple committee reports urging the adoption on marijuana legislation. Committees have called for provisions on regulating CBD, implementing hemp policies, lifting barriers to cannabis research, preventing impaired driving, protecting veteran benefits and requesting that the federal government reconsider its employment policies as it relates to federal workers who use cannabis in compliance with state laws.
On Tuesday, the House Appropriations Committee approved a spending bill that includes a section providing protections for banks that service state-legal marijuana business and also remove a longstanding rider that has blocked Washington, D.C. from using its own local tax dollars to legalize and regulate cannabis sales.
Update: This story has been updated to include information about the roll call vote on the amendment.
Photo courtesy of Rick Proctor.
California Governor Says Marijuana Legalization Is A ‘Civil Rights’ Matter Amid Mass Protests Over Racial Injustice
The governor of California discussed systemic racism and injustice that is inspiring mass protests across the country in a Friday speech, and he touted the state’s legalization of marijuana as an example of how it has addressed racial disparities in the criminal justice system.
Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) said at a press conference that he’s “very proud of this state” for going beyond issues such as implicit bias in policing and the “deadly use of force.” California’s leadership helped advance “a conversation about broader criminal justice reform to address the issues of the war on drugs” and “race-based sentencing,” he said.
“That’s why the state was one of the early adopters of a new approach as it relates to cannabis reform. Legalization around adult-use of marijuana,” he said. “It was a civil rights call from our perspective.”
“I was proud to be out in front in those efforts,” he added. “It was about addressing the disparities. It was about addressing incarceration. It was about addressing the ills of this war on drugs.”
Newsom also discussed the racially discriminatory sentencing of crack versus powder cocaine and other mandatory minimum sentencing policies. While the federal disparity was reduced over time since Congress passed the sentencing provision—a policy presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden helped enacted during his time in the Senate and later sought to undo—California eliminated the distinction in terms of state sentencing in 2014.
Even so, the governor recognized that the reforms the state has enacted to date are “not enough” and more work needs to be done. He’s also not alone in drawing a connection between drug policy reform and racial justice.
Earlier this week, the governor of Virginia said that the passage of marijuana decriminalization legislation this year represents an example of how his state has addressed racial inequities that are inspiring mass protests over recent police killings of black Americans such as George Floyd and Breonna Taylor.
Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) also recently said racial disparities in marijuana criminalization is an example of a systemic injustice that underlies the frustration of minority communities.
Last week, 12 House members introduced a resolution condemning police brutality and specifically noting the racial injustices of the war on drugs. It now has 160 cosponsors.
The measure came one week after 44 members of the House sent a letter to the Justice Department, calling for an independent investigation into a fatal police shooting of Taylor in a botched drug raid.
In New York, there’s a renewed push to pass a package of criminal justice reform legislation that includes a bill to legalize marijuana. Sen. Julia Salazar (D) told Marijuana Moment that “in this particular moment, I think what’s the important factor here is that [criminalization] disproportionately impacts black and brown New Yorkers.”
“Because of the criminalization of the use of marijuana, more black and brown New Yorkers have interactions with police than they need to,” she said. “More people end up in the criminal justice system in the first place than is necessary at all.”
Image element courtesy of Gage Skidmore.
American Bar Association Says Firms Working ‘Indirectly’ With Marijuana Industry Should Get COVID Relief
The American Bar Association (ABA) sent a letter to the heads of the Treasury Department and Small Business Administration (SBA) on Friday, urging them to end a current policy preventing law firms that service state-legal marijuana businesses from receiving federal coronavirus relief.
SBA has made clear that cannabis companies are ineligible for its Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans—but its policy also bars those that work with marijuana businesses indirectly from getting the aid. ABA, which has nearly 200,000 dues-paying members, said it wants clarification or a formal policy change to make it so indirect businesses are not impacted.
“The ABA supports amending federal law to ensure that lawyers do not face the threat of criminal charges when they represent clients in states that have legalized marijuana,” the organization said. “Even before those changes are made to federal law, lawyers should also not be penalized for providing legal services to cannabis-related businesses that comply with state laws.”
ABA also argued that the policy is excessively broad in that it stipulates that companies that derive any revenue from servicing a cannabis business cannot receive relief during the pandemic. “Thus, a law firm where a single lawyer provided advice to a single marijuana business client on legal issues for a nominal fee would arguably be ineligible under this language for the SBA PPP loan program,” the organization wrote.
ABA’s letter further notes that 78 percent of firms are located in states where marijuana is legal in some form.
“We urge SBA to provide further guidance that it will not treat otherwise eligible businesses, including law firms, as disqualified from the PPP program based solely on having provided legal, financial/accounting, policy, or regulatory advice to a Direct Marijuana Business,” Judy Perry Martinez, ABA’s president, wrote.
Steve Fox, strategic advisor at the Cannabis Trade Federation, told Marijuana Moment that it’s “wonderful to see an organization with the reputation and stature of the ABA engage on this issue.”
“As they note, the SBA guidance is overly broad and unjustly punishes companies and firms all across the country. In fact, in some states, the cannabis industry is so ingrained in the economy, you have many hundreds of companies providing goods or services to cannabis businesses,” he said. “According to the plain language of the SBA guidance, they are all, with very minor exceptions, ineligible for PPP loans.”
“We stand with the ABA in urging the Treasury and Small Business Administration to issue further guidance, clarifying that ‘indirect marijuana businesses’ are eligible for PPP loans. If they fail to do so, Congress should remedy this situation at the earliest possible opportunity,” he added.
In February, ABA’s House of Delegates voted in favor of proposals endorsing pending federal legislation to protect banks that service cannabis businesses and calling for a clarification of rules to ensure that lawyers will not be penalized for representing clients in cases concerning state-legal marijuana activity.
Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) introduced a bill last month that would fix the COVID-19 relief access problem, calling for SBA eligibility for cannabis businesses and ancillary companies. That came after he led a letter with 34 bipartisan members of the House urging leadership to include the policy change in future coronavirus-related bills.
Sens. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) made a similar request to Senate leaders in a separate letter.
Separately, the ABA-supported Secure and Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act was included in a House-passed COVID-19 relief package last month.
A bipartisan coalition of 34 state and territory attorneys general asked Congress to pass the bill with that language, which would protect banks that service marijuana businesses from being penalized by federal regulators.
The head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation said this week that marijuana business banking represents one of the most “challenging issues that I have encountered” at the agency.
Read ABA’s letter to the Treasury and SBA below:
Bermuda Government Releases Marijuana Legalization Bill For Public Feedback
The government of Bermuda released a draft bill on Wednesday to establish a legal marijuana market in the self-governing British overseas territory.
“Surprising for some, public attitudes have evolved apace with global legislative reforms and in recognition that opening up pathways for new economic opportunities and activity is needed,” Attorney General Kathy Simmons said in a video on the proposal.
Under the proposed legislation, adults 21 and older would be able to possess and purchase up to seven grams of cannabis from licensed retailers.
A regulatory body called the Cannabis Advisory Authority would be responsible for issuing licenses and regulating the market. There would be seven types of licenses available: cultivation, retail, research, import, export, transportation and manufacturing.
Individuals with prior marijuana convictions would not be barred from participating in the industry.
Fees for the licenses would be set in a way designed to both stimulate the territory’s economy while also ensuring that they are not prohibitively expensive for “underserved and marginalized communities,” a summary of the bill states.
People with convictions for possessing seven grams or less would be eligible for expungement.
The Attorney-General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Senator the Hon. Kathy Lynn Simmons, JP has announced new regulations by the Government of #Bermuda to reform Cannabis laws.
— Bermuda Government (@BdaGovernment) June 4, 2020
Last year, Bermudan lawmakers unveiled draft legislation to create a medical cannabis program. Public feedback signaled that people felt the bill imposed excessive regulations and that the territory should more broadly legalize marijuana altogether for adult use.
Now that this new draft legislation has been released, the government is again asking for public input up until July 3. On its site, individuals are prompted with seven specific questions that feedback is being sought on. That includes queries about licensing requirements and penalties.
Premier David Burt, who pledged last year to introduce marijuana legalization legislation, also encouraged individuals to weigh in on the proposed regulations.
We want to hear from you! Share your thoughts by July 3rd.https://t.co/kkGtsuQ1ES
— Premier David Burt (@BermudaPremier) June 5, 2020
“The Government has made a commitment to progressively liberalize cannabis laws in Bermuda and to create economic opportunities for citizens wishing to participate in a regulated cannabis scheme,” the site states. “The Government again wishes to ‘take it to the people’ by commencing a one month public consultation exercise on the proposed scheme.”
The attorney general said in her video that the government plans to “move ahead with a more simplified, regulated cannabis scheme, which builds on the strength of the original medicinal cannabis policy and which embraces the public feedback.”
“The revised proposal with provide for a regulated cannabis program which has been hybridized to meet Bermuda’s requirements while modeling the best available legal provisions in Canada, both provincial and federal, and to a lesser degree, examples from the Caribbean,” she said.
Several Caribbean nations have started exploring marijuana reform in recent years. Importantly, in 2018, the heads of 19 Caribbean nations agreed to “review marijuana’s current status with a view to reclassification,” emphasizing “human and religious rights” issues stemming from criminalization as well as “the economic benefits to be derived” from legalization.
Since then, lawmakers in the dual-island nation of St. Kitts and Nevis said they would be introducing legalization legislation. The government of Trinidad and Tobago brought two cannabis reform bills before Parliament last year—one to decriminalize low-level possession and another to legalize cannabis for medical and religious purposes.
Meanwhile, the governor of the U.S. Virgin Islands has been stressing the need to legalize marijuana in order to generate tax revenue for the U.S. territory’s fiscal recovery from the coronavirus pandemic.
The Jamaican government also recently announced that it will be allowing medical cannabis patients to make marijuana purchases online for pickup at “herb houses” as a means to combat the coronavirus pandemic.
Read the draft bill to legalize marijuana in Bermuda below: