A powerful Senate committee chairman said on Wednesday the he opposes House-passed marijuana banking legislation and laid out potential changes he would like to see to the bill before he takes it up in his panel.
Among other amendments being floated for public feedback is a 2 percent THC potency limit on products in order for cannabis businesses to qualify to access financial services as well as blocking banking services for operators that sell high-potency vaping devices or edibles that could appeal to children.
“I remain firmly opposed to efforts to legalize marijuana on the federal level, and I am opposed to legalization in the State of Idaho,” Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID), who chairs the Senate Banking Committee, said in a press release. “I also do not support the SAFE Banking Act that passed in the House of Representatives. I have significant concerns that the SAFE Banking Act does not address the high level potency of marijuana, marketing tactics to children, lack of research on marijuana’s effects, and the need to prevent bad actors and cartels from using the banks to disguise ill-gotten cash to launder money into the financial system. I welcome input from all interested parties on how to thoughtfully address these concerns.”
The Secure And Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act, which would shield banks from being punished by federal regulators for working with state-legal marijuana businesses, passed the House in September with strong bipartisan support.
Crapo’s committee held a hearing on cannabis businesses’ access to financial services in July, though he had previously said that he did not support taking up the legislation in his panel while marijuana remains federally illegal. He then said he wanted to bring it up by the end of 2019, though later indicated in an interview with Marijuana Moment last month that impeachment could delay things. Now, he is taking the step of floating amendments to the House-passed proposal before moving forward with a vote.
The new document from the chairman largely tracks with comments he made in another Marijuana Moment interview in October in which he said laid out some areas of concern.
“The things we’re looking at are, first of all, to make sure we improve and clarify the interstate banking application of all of this,” Crapo said at the time. “Secondly, money laundering issues with regard to legacy cash to make sure how that is managed properly. [Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues and other related issues. And then finally the health and safety issues about what is going to be banked.”
“Take tobacco for example, every state I think has some kind of regulatory parameters around the utilization of tobacco, even if it’s just an age limit on who can purchase it or what have you and the types of products that are going to be allowed,” he continued. “That gets into a legal issue that I think the states need to be more engaged in, but it also impacts the question on what would be banked. Those kinds of issues—health and safety, interstate commerce and money laundering.”
Crapo is also floating new federal studies on marijuana and its effects, clarifying hemp businesses’ banking access and measures to deal with legacy cash and interstate commerce, among other areas for potential amendments. He also suggested that measures requiring studies on study on diversity and inclusion in the cannabis industry be removed from the legislation.
“I appreciate Chairman Crapo’s concerns and willingness to work on this important issue. However, there is an urgent public safety risk facing the majority of communities and Americans today that needs to be resolved, and I believe our bill, which passed the House with 321 Democratic and Republican votes, responsibly addresses the conflict between state marijuana laws and federal banking laws,” said Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-CO), who is the lead sponsor of the SAFE Banking Act in the House. “This issue requires a pragmatic approach that takes into the account the will of voters across the country. I look forward to working with Chairman Crapo and my colleagues in the Senate as we work to resolve these differences and enact legislation to protect businesses, residents and communities.”
Legalization advocates were not pleased with the proposals.
“These guidelines are essentially gutting the intention of this bill,” National Cannabis Industry Association Director of Government Relations Michael Correia told Marijuana Moment.
“While the chairman may oppose broader cannabis policy reform, he clearly recognizes the problems created by lack of access to banking services,” he said. “The SAFE Banking Act, which has already been passed by an overwhelming bipartisan majority of the House, addresses many of the chairman’s concerns, particularly public safety and transparency. We’re happy to discuss these items with the Senate Banking Committee in a markup, but every day that goes by without addressing this particular issue results in small businesses suffering and unnecessarily puts people’s lives at risk.”
Financial services industry trade associations also reacted to the news.
“We respect Chairman Crapo’s request for additional public input on the SAFE Banking Act, and we look forward to providing the Senate Banking Committee with the information it needs,” James Ballentine, the executive vice president of congressional relations for the American Bankers Association, said in a statement. “ABA, like many other stakeholders, has already provided the committee relevant information on several of the issues identified by the chairman including legacy cash, interstate commerce and ‘Operation Chokepoint.’ We continue to believe that the SAFE Banking Act responsibly addresses the current legal limbo over cannabis banking, and a strong bipartisan majority in the House shares that view. We urge the committee to gather this information in a timely manner so the Senate can follow the House’s lead and pass legislation that will help protect communities across the country from an increasing public safety threat.”
Ryan Donovan, chief advocacy officer for the Credit Union National Association, said that his group “appreciate[s]” Crapo sharing his concerns.
“America’s credit unions are eager to continue engaging with the chairman as he seeks a solution that enhances community safety through access to mainstream financial services,” he said.
Crapo is asking interested parties to send feedback on the new proposals to [email protected], though his office did not list a date by which responses are requested.
Read Crapo’s full statement on marijuana banking below:
Chairman Crapo Outlines Concerns with Cannabis Banking Legislation
Requests feedback on potential changes to address public health and safety
WASHINGTON – Senate Banking Committee Chairman Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) is inviting public feedback on ways to address public health and money laundering concerns with cannabis banking. Input is also requested on “Operation Choke Point,” an Obama-era initiative in which federal agencies devised and relied upon a list of politically disfavored merchant categories (e.g., firearm manufacturers, payday lenders, etc.) with the intent of “choking-off” these merchants’ access to payment systems and banking services.
“I remain firmly opposed to efforts to legalize marijuana on the federal level, and I am opposed to legalization in the State of Idaho,” said Chairman Crapo. “I also do not support the SAFE Banking Act that passed in the House of Representatives. I have significant concerns that the SAFE Banking Act does not address the high level potency of marijuana, marketing tactics to children, lack of research on marijuana’s effects, and the need to prevent bad actors and cartels from using the banks to disguise ill-gotten cash to launder money into the financial system. I welcome input from all interested parties on how to thoughtfully address these concerns.”
Currently, 33 states have some form of legal marijuana for a variety of uses. This has created challenges for businesses in those states and has resulted in increased pressure for depository and financial institutions to provide financial services to both state-sanctioned businesses and ancillary services providers that may provide services to state-sanctioned businesses. The ancillary service providers offer a variety of services to state-sanctioned businesses, such as legal services, plumbing services, fertilizers and other agricultural supplies, real estate, and leasing, among many others. As a result, Senators Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) and Cory Gardner (R-Colorado) introduced S. 1200 on April 11, 2019. While marijuana would still be illegal at the federal level, this proposed legislation seeks to provide legal certainty for banks who wish to serve not only marijuana companies, but also the ancillary service providers, meaning that banks can accept cash from legally-operating state cannabis companies and related service providers without the fear of adverse actions being taken against them by federal financial regulators.
On July 23, 2019, the Senate Banking Committee held a hearing titled, “Challenges for Cannabis and Banking: Outside Perspectives.” At the hearing, Senator Crapo discussed his concerns with the public health and safety issues surrounding marijuana; legacy cash and money laundering; FinCEN guidance and rulemaking; interstate commerce and banking; and initiatives similar to “Operation Choke Point.”
Options for addressing these concerns include, but are not limited to, the following:
- Add public health and safety solutions as a requirement for banks to do business with legally-operating state cannabis companies. Options to consider include THC potency; clear and conspicuous disclosures on products; marketing; effects on minors, unborn children and pregnant women; and age restrictions, among other considerations.
- Prevent bad actors and cartels from using legacy cash and the financial system to disguise ill-gotten cash or launder money.
- Update 2014 FinCEN rulemaking and guidance regarding marijuana-related businesses, and ensure FinCEN has all of the necessary tools it needs to prosecute money launderers and promulgate rulemakings.
- Respect state rights in interstate commerce and banking for institutions who operate in multiple states with different state rules.
- Eliminate “Operation Choke Point” and preventing future “Operation Choke Point” Initiatives. Under fear of retribution, many banks have stopped providing financial services to members of lawful industries for no reason other than political pressure, which takes the guise of regulatory and enforcement scrutiny.
Public feedback is requested on the following issues that include potential options for addressing concerns and questions outlined below. Interested parties may submit proposals to Committee staff at [email protected]
Issue 1: Options for addressing public health and safety concerns.
There is a lack of federal research evaluating marijuana and its effects. The National Institute on Drug Abuse has found that marijuana use significantly impairs a user’s judgment, motor skills and reaction time. Other studies have found a direct relationship between blood THC concentration and impaired driving ability. Additionally, the Surgeon General released an advisory on Marijuana’s Damaging Effects on the Developing Brain, noting that THC binds to receptors in the brain, producing a euphoria and a variety of harmful effects, including intoxication, and memory and motor impairments. The Surgeon General also noted the harmful effects of THC use during pregnancy and on young developing brains. Surgeon General Adams also released an Advisory on e-cigarette use among youth, and the recent surge in the market, which he states is a cause for great concern.
The appropriate federal agencies shall conduct a national study on the effects of marijuana and publicly report on considerations related to public health and safety of cannabis, cannabis products and their delivery mechanisms, including as it pertains to the marketing and varying potency of cannabis and cannabis products, particularly, but not limited to, minors, pregnant women and effects on unborn children. The federal government agencies, within the study, should also make recommendations on the manufacturing and marketing practices of the cannabis industry to minimize their appeal to minors and harm to minors, pregnant women and unborn children.
The studies shall include the following:
a. The types and delivery mechanisms (e.g., smoking, vaping, edibles, drinking, etc.) for all cannabis and cannabis products currently available or under development in the marketplace;
b. The potency of the cannabis and cannabis products, available in their final form, and how the potency has changed over time, including how it impacts addiction;
c. How various potencies and serving sizes may impact individuals’ health and safety, and whether different potencies and serving sizes are harmful to individuals’ health and safety, including how human physiology affects impairment, particularly as it relates to minors and pregnant women;
d. How different types of products and delivery mechanisms have affected minors’ access to cannabis and cannabis products, and how it impacts purchasing decisions over an individual’s lifetime;
e. The degree to which different levels of potency, serving sizes or consumption impair individuals’ judgment or cognitive reasoning, and trends of the prevalence of individuals operating a vehicle or machinery under the influence of cannabis; and
f. The extent to which other jurisdictions with various levels of cannabis legalization have made determinations, as reflected in law or public policy, on the health and safety effects of cannabis or cannabis products, require disclosure of potency or serving sizes, and have restricted or otherwise limited the potency of cannabis cultivated, sold, or purchased in their respective jurisdictions.
Question: Are there any other additional health considerations, other than those explicitly stated in the outline, that should be considered, and which federal agencies are most appropriate to be involved in the aforementioned study?
Considerations for addressing health and safety concerns associated with financial institutions who provide financial services to cannabis-related legitimate businesses:
a. Each state must implement clear and conspicuous disclosure of THC potency of cannabis and cannabis products (on a percentage and milligram basis in final products) through a label on the final packaged products at the point of sale. Among the contents of any state labeling requirements should be proper warnings, contaminants, potency and serving sizes, and ingredients;
b. A potency threshold of 2 percent THC content on a percentage and milligram basis in the final product;
c. The 2 percent threshold will apply until each state legislature affirmatively determines the appropriate level of THC potency for cannabis and cannabis products (on a percentage and milligram basis in final products) that appropriately addresses the health and safety risks to its citizens;
d. Preventing distribution to anyone under the age of 21;
e. Preventing the banking of edibles that are in many kid-friendly forms like candies and gummies; and
f. Preventing the banking of high potency THC vape and e-cigarette products.
Question: Are there any other additional health considerations that should be attached to the safe harbor?
Issues 2, 3: Options for addressing legacy cash and money laundering.
FinCEN Rulemaking and Guidance: Amend the Act to direct FinCEN to promulgate a rulemaking within a specified period of time, after enactment of this Act, to address issues pertaining to the provision of financial services to the marijuana industry and ancillary businesses, including Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) and dealing with legacy cash.
FinCEN will retain meaningful oversight authority of the activities between cannabis-related legitimate businesses (CRLBs) and their financial institutions. FinCEN will be required to promulgate rulemakings and update their guidance pertaining to Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) expectations for marijuana-related businesses to address the following:
a. Requiring thorough customer due diligence standards;
b. Thorough processes and procedures to ensure funds from cannabis-related businesses and service providers are not associated with illicit activities;
c. Clearly delineating the BSA obligations of financial institutions when engaging in business with cannabis-related businesses or individuals who engage with cannabis-related businesses, including for indirect relationships such as ancillary businesses;
d. Requiring the filing of SARs in a manner that preserves FinCEN’s ability to address illicit activity; and
e. Clarifying the treatment of hemp.
Additionally, Section 7 of S. 1200 should be amended to ensure that the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) must consult with FinCEN on its development of uniform guidance and examination procedures for depository institutions as they relate to CRLBs and service providers.
Suspicious Activity Reports: Amend Section 6 of the Act regarding FinCEN’s guidance to ensure the guidance does not impair the ability of FinCEN to deter illicit activity, consistent with the rulemaking described above.
Question: In such a rulemaking, what additional requirements are needed for financial services firms to ensure that bad actors are not accessing the financial system, the sources of cash entering the financial system are fully understood and validated, Suspicious Activity Reports continue to be appropriately filed, and expectations for indirect relationships are clear commensurate with their risk?
Issue 4: Options for addressing interstate commerce and banking.
Interstate Commerce: Amend the Act to clarify that financial institutions must comply with all applicable laws related to cannabis and cannabis products in each respective state in which they operate, and ensure that nothing in the Act would facilitate interstate commerce of cannabis.
Additionally, given the tension between the state legality of cannabis and federal illegality, it should be made clear that the federal banking regulators should consult with state regulators ahead of any implementation, or give some notice.
Question: Does the bill, as drafted, facilitate interstate commerce? Should there be an explicit statement in the bill clarifying that the bill does not permit interstate commerce of marijuana?
Issue 5: Options for addressing hemp provisions and “Operation Choke Point.”
Add the following new provisions:
a. House hemp provision; and
b. The Financial Institution Customer Protection Act language included in the House-passed version of H.R. 1595, but with the following additional amendments: (1) change the term “may” to “shall”; and amend to reflect and add the following:
(1)An appropriate Federal banking agency shall not formally or informally request or order a depository institution to terminate a specific account or group of customer accounts or to otherwise restrict or discourage a depository institution from entering into or maintaining a banking relationship with a specific customer or group of customers unless –
(A) the institution is engaging in unsafe or unsound practices or violating a rule, law, regulation or other condition imposed in writing due to its relationship with the specific customer.
(B) an appropriate Federal banking agency shall not take any action under (A) with respect to a group or category of customers and shall only take action under (A) after it has made a determination in writing with respect to specific customer that the conditions set forth under (A) are satisfied.
(C) for purposes of (A), reputational risk shall constitute neither an unsafe or unsound practice nor a violation of rule, law, regulation or other condition imposed in writing.
Under (b) Notice Requirement, amend (2) to reflect the following: (2) Justification Requirement – A justification described under paragraph 1(A) should only be based on if the institution engaged in an unsafe or unsound practice or violated a rule, law, regulation or other condition imposed in writing.
Under (c) Customer Notice, add the following: (2) In the written notice and determination, the depository institution shall also provide the determination and justification for why the termination is needed, including any specific laws or regulations, or unsafe and unsound practices, the depository institution believes are being violated by the customer or group of customers.
Question: Do the proposed amendments to the Financial Institution Customer Protection Act, as passed in the House, adequately curb potential future choke point scenarios?
Additional amendments for consideration:
Studies: Strike Sections 8, 9 and 10 directing studies. Section 8 of S. 1200 requires the Federal banking regulators to issue an annual report to congress on diversity and inclusion; Section 9 of S. 1200 requires the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct a study on diversity and inclusion; and Section 10 requires the GAO to conduct a study on the effectiveness of reports on suspicious transactions filed.
Preserving Regulatory Actions: Amend the Act to clarify that federal banking regulators can still take certain actions, including enforcement actions, against depository institutions, such as those actions related to poor underwriting and engaging in unsafe or unsound practices.
This story was updated to include reaction from advocates.
Bipartisan Lawmakers Push VA To Allow Medical Marijuana Access For Veterans ‘As Soon As Possible’
The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) must urgently institute a policy change to ensure that military veterans can access cannabis for therapeutic use, a bipartisan coalition of congressional lawmakers said in a new letter.
Writing to VA Secretary Denis McDonough on Wednesday, the co-chairs of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus urged the official to consider “a change in policy to allow access to medical cannabis fro VA patients” and to “act swiftly and implement this change as soon as possible.”
The lawmakers pointed to surveys showing high rates of opioid addiction and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among the veteran community.
“Research has shown that cannabis can be safe and effective in targeted pain-management. Additionally, cannabis has proven benefits in managing PTSD and other health issues, including multiple sclerosis (MS) and seizure disorders,” the letter states. “Despite its efficacy, antiquated bureaucratic red-tape continues to deny veterans these life-altering treatments.”
“Congress and several administrations have enacted various well-intentioned intervention attempts, however, over twenty veterans continue to die by suicide each day—it is past time we stop barring access from these innovative therapies. We therefore respectfully urge you to ensure no veteran can be denied medically prescribed cannabis treatments.”
The letter comes weeks after McDonough participated in a Veterans Day Q&A where he said that VA officials are “looking at” the possibility of an internal policy change and have discussed it with the White House and Department of Justice. The secretary also talked about being personally moved by stories from veterans who’ve found relief using medical marijuana.
“We’re trying to explore what more we can do,” he said at the time. “And I’ve talked to our friends in the rest of the federal government, including the Department of Justice, on what we can do on this, and with the White House.”
The Congressional Cannabis Caucus co-chairs—Reps. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), David Joyce (R-OH), Barbara Lee (D-CA) and Don Young (R-AK)—want McDonough to speed up the policy change process.
“America’s veterans have risked life and limb to preserve our freedoms, so we must not allow the unnecessary politicization of medical cannabis to hinder their lifesaving therapies,” they wrote. “We stand ready to work with you and your administration in advancing these necessary treatments.”
While congressional lawmakers are working to advance legislation to end marijuana prohibition, McDonough’s department has resisted even modest proposals meant to promote veteran access and clinical research into the medical value of cannabis.
One such research bill was approved by the House Veterans Affairs Committee earlier this month, despite testimony from the department opposing the reform. VA’s David Carroll told lawmakers that the legislation was overly prescriptive and argued that the department is already conducting robust research into marijuana.
Some had held out hope that VA would back the reform this session after the sponsor, Rep. Lou Correa (D-CA), said that he’d had a conversation with McDonough about the issue of marijuana and veterans.
On the Senate side, a coalition of lawmakers recently filed an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would federally legalize medical cannabis for military veterans who comply with a state program where they live. VA doctors would also be explicitly allowed to issue marijuana recommendations.
Read the letter to the VA secretary on marijuana access below:
Photo courtesy of Chris Wallis // Side Pocket Images.
Biden Treasury Secretary Says ‘Of Course’ Marijuana Banking Would Make IRS’s Job Easier
The secretary of the U.S. Treasury Department said on Wednesday that freeing up banks to work with state-legal marijuana businesses would “of course” make the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) job of collecting taxes easier.
At a hearing before the House Financial Services Committee, Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-CO) referenced recent comments from an IRS official about the “special type of collection challenge the IRS undertakes regarding tax collection from cannabis-related businesses forced to operate in cash only.”
“Do you agree if these business were simply allowed to access the banking system and didn’t have to transact business only in cash it would make the IRS job easier?” Perlmutter asked Secretary Janet Yellen.
“Yes, of course it would,” she replied matter-of-factly.
HAPPENING NOW: @SecYellen agrees allowing cannabis businesses to access the banking system would help the IRS do their job and enable them to better collect taxes from the industry. #SAFEBanking https://t.co/w23GdFPQFy
— Rep. Ed Perlmutter (@RepPerlmutter) December 1, 2021
The congressman also talked about his bill—the Secure and Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act—which has passed the House in some form five times now and would resolve the issue by protecting financial institutions that service state-legal cannabis businesses.
Numerous financial, labor and insurance associations, as well as key lawmakers, are pushing the Senate to attach the measure to must-pass defense spending legislation, as the House already has. Bipartisan members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, as well as senators representing Colorado, made the same request in recent letters.
While Yellen’s response was quick, it’s yet another example of a federal official recognizing the untenability of the status quo.
Steven Mnuchin, the Treasury secretary under the Trump administration, repeatedly addressed the issue, saying the current policy conflict creates “significant problems” for IRS and financial regulators. It “creates significant risk in the communities for collecting this amount of cash. It’s problematic,” he said last year.
IRS, for its part, said in September that it expects the cannabis market to continue to grow, and it offered some tips to businesses on staying compliant with taxes while the plant remains federally prohibited.
With respect to the SAFE Banking Act, a bipartisan coalition of two dozen governors recently implored congressional leaders to finally enact marijuana banking reform through the large-scale defense legislation.
A group of small marijuana business owners also recently made the case that the incremental banking policy change could actually help support social equity efforts.
Rodney Hood, a board member of the National Credit Union Administration, wrote in a recent Marijuana Moment op-ed that legalization is an inevitability—and it makes the most sense for government agencies to get ahead of the policy change to resolve banking complications now.
Federal data shows that many financial institutions remain hesitant to take on cannabis companies as clients, however, which is likely due to the fact that the plant is a strictly controlled substance under federal law.
Texas Activists Turn In Signatures To Put Marijuana Decriminalization On Austin’s 2022 Ballot
Texas activists on Wednesday turned in signatures to place a marijuana decriminalization initiative on Austin’s 2022 ballot.
Ground Game Texas, a progressive organization that was established earlier this year, submitted more than 30,000 signatures to qualify the local measure to go before voters in the May 7 election next year.
While Austin, as well as other Texas cities like Dallas, have already independently enacted law enforcement policy changes aimed at reducing arrests for cannabis-related offenses by issuing citations and summons, the Austin Freedom Act of 2021 would take the reform a step further.
The initiative seeks to end arrests and citations for misdemeanor marijuana possession within Texas’s capital city. Also, it says police cannot issue citations for residue or paraphernalia in lieu of a possession charge.
The City Clerk will now verify that we submitted at least 20,000 valid signatures.
After that, the City Council will have the opportunity to adopt the new law directly, or place it on the May 7, 2022 “uniform election.”
— GroundGameTX (@GroundGameTX) December 1, 2021
“Thanks to the tireless efforts of on-the-ground organizers from Ground Game Texas and partner organizations, Austin residents will soon have the ability to make lasting change to our antiquated and racist criminal justice laws,” Mike Siegel, political director of Ground Game Texas, said in a press release. “With successful campaigns like these, Ground Game Texas will continue to empower and excite communities around progressive change—and deliver for the marginalized communities that too often get left behind.”
The measure would further prohibit the use of city funds to request or test cannabis to determine whether it meets the state’s definition of a lawful product. Hemp is legal in the state, creating complications for law enforcement, as they are now tasked with determining if seized cannabis products are in compliance with state statute.
Under the initiative, the execution of no-knock warrants would also be prohibited in the city—a policy that generated significant national attention last year after it led to Kentucky officers entering Breonna Taylor’s apartment and fatally shooting her in a botched drug raid.
Activists were joined by Austin City Council members Greg Casar and Vanessa Fuentes for Wednesday’s signature turn in.
Game Ground Texas previously attempted to place the measure on this year’s ballot, but they did not meet the signature turn-in deadline and shifted their attention to 2022.
This is huge news, a significant milestone for us in building long-term progressive organizing infrastructure to last beyond electoral cycles in TX.
Tremendously grateful to the organizers, volunteers, and staff who made this possible.
From the bottom of my heart, thank you! https://t.co/0rAG3ibq1M
— Julie Oliver (@JulieOliverTX) November 30, 2021
While the measure is now set to appear on the May ballot, it’s also possible that the Austin City Council could independently move to adopt the ordinance prior to the election.
“Austinites continue to work towards reducing the decades of negative impacts prohibition has caused by any means available,” Jax Finkel, executive director of Texas NORML, told Marijuana Moment. “During the interim, local actions like this create pressure for more action during the next legislative session. With a majority of Texans supporting the creation of a regulated cannabis market, it is important to continue pushing this conversation forward.”
Elsewhere in the state, activists in San Marcos launched a campaign in September to put marijuana decriminalization on the November ballot next year.
Ground Game Texas told Marijuana Moment on Wednesday that it is also planning to place a cannabis decriminalization measure before voters in Killeen next fall.
There is no statewide, citizen-led initiative process that would enable advocates to put an issue like decriminalization or legalization on the Texas ballot. But at the local level, there are limited cases where activists can leverage home rule laws that allow for policy changes.
A recent poll found that a strong majority of Texans—including most Republicans—support even broader reform to legalize marijuana for adult use.
The survey from the University of Houston and Texas Southern University found that 67 percent of Texas residents back the broad reform. Fifty-one percent of participants who identified as Republican said they back legalization.
In Texas, drug policy reform did advance in the legislature in the latest session, but not necessarily at the pace that advocates had hoped to see.
Advocates remain disappointed, however, that lawmakers were unable to pass more expansive cannabis bills—including a decriminalization proposal that cleared the House but saw no action in the Senate.
The Texas Republican Party adopted a platform plank endorsing decriminalization of marijuana possession in 2018.
Another Texas poll that was released over the summer found that 60 percent of voters in the state support making cannabis legal “for any use.”
Photo courtesy of Brian Shamblen.