On Wednesday, rapper B-Real of Cypress Hill and Prophets of Rage will celebrate the grand opening of his new “Dr. Greenthumb” recreational marijuana dispensary in southern California.
It’s the latest stage in what’s been a significant evolution for the prominent cannabis-friendly musician, who less than two years ago declared himself opposed to the state’s marijuana legalization ballot measure that is making his new venture possible.
In a press release issued Friday advertising “an all day blowout” at Dr. Greenthumb in Sylmar, California, B-Real is described as “a prominent figure at the forefront of cannabis legalization for over two decades.”
“We have a lot of history behind us as it relates to music and the pro-legalization movement,” B-Real said, according to the statement.
That history includes opposing Proposition 64, which legalized marijuana for adults 21 and over and also paved the way for regulated commercial storefronts like the one B-Real is opening.
In the run-up to the November 2016 election, where Prop. 64—also known as the Adult Use of Marijuana Act—passed with more than 57 percent of the vote, the rapper used social media to agitate against its passage.
These are the lines in between the lines. Read up Cali! People from out of our state have no clue but people in Washington can relate pic.twitter.com/v4rWHLsLLb
— B Real ™ (@B_Real) October 11, 2016
On October 10, 2016, less than a month before Election Day, the rapper shared an image on social media that claimed Prop. 64 “helps keep the drug cartels in business,” “sets up HUGE growing operations for rich white people, destroying small businesses” and “turns rights into priviledges” [sic].
“Read up Cali!” B-Real wrote on Twitter, where he posted the image that claimed “This is NOT Legalization. VOTE NO.”
B-Real’s opposition was similar to anti-legalization messaging coming from other marijuana advocates, many of whom claimed that the measure was a corporate giveaway that would harm small-and-medium producers. At least some of that has come to pass as the cannabis economy adapts in response to the new reality of broader legalization.
But B-Real seems to have adjusted to the new reality almost immediately.
On Election Night, after cannabis ballot measures won in California, Maine, Massachusetts and Nevada, he posted a message of congratulations.
“Although I’m someone that was and is concerned about prop 64, California made history tonight and to that I tip my hat,” he wrote.
In an e-mail sent via a spokeswoman in response to Marijuana Moment’s questions about B-Real’s evolution on California legalization, the rapper took a free-market approach. He opposed Prop. 64 because of legalization’s regulations and taxes, he explained.
“I was opposed to it at the time because some of the new regulations and penalties along with overwhelming taxation which seemed to be unfair to smaller businesses,” he wrote. “Additionally, a number of other complicated issues that are just now being addressed with new and changing policies. I still think there are things that need further due diligence to give the small business owner a chance at succeeding before the big businesses start to come into play.”
A week after the election, B-Real released a record that, according to a press release, “passionately advocates for marijuana legalization across all 50 states.”
In promotional material for “Prohibition Part 3,” B-Real appeared in a photoshopped image smoking marijuana in public—an act that, were he to do it in real life, is punishable only by a $100 citation thanks to Prop. 64.
And earlier this year, B-Real gave an interview to a New Zealand-based website in which he declared that legalization has “been great.”
“For most of us that have been in the culture for a long time, we’re just seeing and waiting for more of the regulations to happen to know how it’s going to operate officially,” he told Under the Radar. “Right now all the rules and regulation aren’t implemented and in place so we’re just taking it as each day comes and try to be informed and being a step ahead. But it’s been great, a lot of people are happier.”
Regulated and taxed commercial sales of marijuana began in California on January 1.
B-Real, whose musical repertoire with Cypress Hill includes “Hits from the Bong,” “Dr. Greenthumb” has been trying to enter the marijuana-dispensary business since 2015.
In February of that year, he won a lottery drawing to open one of the first medical-cannabis dispensaries in Santa Ana, in Orange County, California.
But by September 2016, shortly before B-Real’s public disavowal of marijuana legalization, the dispensary had still yet to open.
Now, thanks to the passage of Amendment 64 over his own objections, B-Real will be able to sell cannabis to adults over 21 years of age regardless of whether they have a doctor’s recommendation.
“I never changed that stance, but I do have a brand that myself and my partners have been building for a number years in the cannabis industry aside from my over 20 years of advocacy,” B-Real said in his statement to Marijuana Moment about his concerns with the measure. “My intention was always open a shop when the right opportunity presented itself and that we could be fully compilant [sic]. This would ultimately allow me to have a landing place for our brands in the cannabis community for recreation and medicinal consumers.”
The rapper also said that he plans to use some of the proceeds from the new retail operation to “give back to the community and create programs for the youth and show the positive impact from the cannabis community and break some of the still existing opposition.”
“Good can come from this community and we plan to educate through our example,” he said.
Photo courtesy of Festivalsommer // Biha.
Google Execs Told Marijuana Jokes To Lighten The Mood After Trump’s Election, Leaked Video Shows
Shortly after the 2016 presidential election, Google executives spoke at an all-hands meeting about the political ramifications of Donald Trump’s victory and fielded questions from employees about the path moving forward.
And to lighten the mood, they also cracked a few jokes about marijuana, which had just been fully legalized in California, the home of Google’s headquarters.
“Let’s face it, most people here are pretty upset and pretty sad because of the election,” Google co-founder Sergey Brin said at the beginning of the meeting. “But there’s another group—a small group—that we should also think about who are very excited about the legalization of pot.”
Employees are heard applauding and laughing in the video, which was leaked to Breitbart by an anonymous source. (The video cannot currently be embedded, but it appears at the top of the page linked above).
“I was asking if we could serve joints outside on the patio, but apparently these things take a little while to take effect,” Brin continued. “It was a huge, huge disappointment.”
“I’ve been bemoaning that all week, I’ll be honest with you.”
Of course, the meeting took on a more serious tone as executives discussed the policy implications of the incoming Trump administration and the role of Google in the modern political landscape. But the meeting didn’t wrap without one final nod to the passage of Proposition 64 in California.
Asked to weigh in on speculation that economist Jefferey Eisenach would be named as the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Google’s chief legal officer Kent Walker brushed it off with his own marijuana joke.
“Anybody who thinks they know of the likely members of the Trump administration is taking premature advantage of Sergey’s favorite California proposition,” Walker said. “Nobody knows.”
Just as a matter of housekeeping, California’s adult-use marijuana law went into effect immediately after the proposition’s passage. So technically speaking, anyone 21 or older who would have consumed cannabis after the election wouldn’t be taking “premature advantage” of the law.
Perhaps to that end, Brin closed the post-election event by telling Googlers that “there’s food and drink on the patio,” but warned them to “be careful of the cookies.”
Workers In These Industries Are Most Likely To Consume Marijuana
It’s become increasingly clear that there’s no single “type” of marijuana consumer. But research has identified certain cultural trends, including a new study that examines the prevalence of cannabis consumption among workers in different industries.
The study, published this month in the International Review of Psychiatry, demonstrates that cannabis use is represented in a wide range of employment backgrounds—and some of the industries where using cannabis is most common might come as a surprise.
Let’s start with the numbers. Here’s a list of industries where workers use the most and least cannabis, which the researchers compiled based on 2013 and 2014 National Survey on Drug Use and Health data. The survey asks respondents whether they’ve used marijuana at least once in the past year.
|Industry||% marijuana use|
Note: Not all industries are represented in this list, which is limited by the data submitted by NSDUH respondents. Also, the study does distinguish different “job categories,” but not within each specific industry.
The point of the study wasn’t simply to show what kind of workers are using marijuana, but also for what purposes. If a survey respondent reported using cannabis in the past year, their use was then categorized as either medical, recreational or mixed (i.e. some of their cannabis consumption was recommended by a doctor, but not all of it).
You can see that breakdown in the table below, but in general, the study reveals a diversity of use types among different industries. People in construction tend to be mixed-use consumers, for instance, and people in food services tend to skew recreational. It’s difficult to explain these sub-trends without more data, however.
That said, the researchers were especially interested in cannabis use among construction and mining employees.
“One key difference between the user groups is the higher percentage of medical cannabis users in the construction and mining industries,” they wrote. “This is likely due to the higher injury rates in these industries: construction and mining work require physical stamina, often involve irregular schedules, and expose workers to weather, dangerous tools, and equipment.”
The study notes that there’s conflicting research about marijuana use in these industries, with some arguing that frequent use can result in increased workplace injuries and others contending that the therapeutic use of cannabis “addresses pain and other health problems… that often result from work-related injuries.”
That latter point is also consistent with a study released last month showing “evidence that legalizing medical marijuana improved workplace safety.”
Federal Court Rules In Favor Of Worker Rejected For Medical Marijuana Use
A Connecticut woman’s rights under that state’s medical marijuana law were violated when a company refused to hire her on the basis of her legal cannabis use, and a lawsuit seeking damages against her would-be employer may proceed, a federal judge ruled.
In 2016, Katelin Noffsinger filed suit against Bride Brook Health and Rehabilitation Center, a federal contractor, after a job offer was rescinded following a positive test for cannabis on a pre-employment drug test.
Noffsinger had accepted a management-level position with the firm, which then scheduled a drug test. Prior to the test, Noffsinger informed Bride Brook that she was a qualified cannabis patient under Connecticut’s Palliative Use of Marijuana Act, and used the drug—namely, synthetic marijuana pills, consumed in the evening—to treat post-traumatic stress disorder following a 2012 car crash.
After learning of Noffsinger’s patient status, Bride Brook officials debated over email the best way to inform her that she could not be hired because of her marijuana use.
After the positive drug test and the subsequent rejection, Noffsinger filed an employment-discrimination lawsuit in state court. The case was elevated to federal court after Bride Brook used federal drug laws—including federal cannabis prohibition—to justify their actions.
Unlike some other states including California, Connecticut’s medical-marijuana law, passed in 2012, offers specific employment protections for cannabis patients.
Employers don’t have to accommodate cannabis use during work hours or employees who are intoxicated in the workplace, but any off-hours marijuana use by a certified patient following state law is protected.
In court filings, Bride Brook argued that the federal Drug-Free Workplace Act preempted such protections.
Because Bride Brook was a federal contractor, it was required to perform such drug tests—and had the firm still hired Noffsinger after the positive drug test, it would have been “defrauding” the federal government, the firm argued.
In a ruling issued last week, U.S. District Court Judge Jeffrey Alker Meyer disagreed.
While Meyer rejected Noffsinger’s requests for summary judgment and attorney’s fees, his ruling means that Noffsinger can now seek monetary damages in a jury trial.
The federal Drug Free Workplace Act requires only that employers make a “good faith effort” to maintain a drug-free workplace, Meyer ruled.
Such efforts include posting warnings about drug use and setting an office policy.
A “zero-tolerance” policy that includes actively testing and then rejecting protected applicants on the basis of a test go above and beyond that threshold, Meyer wrote.
A previous ruling in Noffsinger’s case, also by Meyer, was the first instance in which a federal judge ruled that the federal Controlled Substances Act does not preempt state medical-marijuana laws that provide employment protections.
Other classes of workers, including workers in “safety-sensitive” positions and employees of the federal government, may have to wait for similar protections.