A key U.S. Senate committee says that marijuana’s current federal classification blocks scientific research on its effects—something that legalization advocates have long argued.
“The Committee is concerned that restrictions associated with Schedule 1 of the Controlled Substance Act effectively limit the amount and type of research that can be conducted on certain Schedule 1 drugs, especially marijuana or its component chemicals and certain synthetic drugs,” the Senate Appropriations Committee wrote in a new report under the headline, “Barriers to Research.”
“At a time when we need as much information as possible about these drugs, we should be lowering regulatory and other barriers to conducting this research.”
Schedule I is the most restrictive category under federal law, and is supposed to be reserved for drugs with a high potential for abuse and no medical value. Researchers wishing to study substances classified there must overcome procedural hurdles that don’t exist for other drugs.
The Senate panel is directing the National Institute on Drug Abuse to “provide a short report on the barriers to research that result from the classification of drugs and compounds as Schedule 1 substances.”
The directive is part of a report attached to a bill to fund the Departments of Labor and Health and Human Services for Fiscal Year 2019, approved by the committee last week.
This isn’t the first time the panel highlighted the problems federal law poses for cannabis researchers. The senators included similar language in last year’s version of the annual report for the health agency funding bill.
Curiously, the language slamming Schedule I’s research roadblocks has been consistently requested by a group whose membership list contains some of the nation’s leading anti-legalization advocates.
But while the Senate committee has approved a number of marijuana reform amendments over time — including measures last month to protect state medical cannabis laws from Justice Department interference and to increase military veterans’ access to medical marijuana — it also recently blocked a proposal to protect banks that work with marijuana businesses from advancing.
And, it also included questionable comments about cannabis and driving, the involvement of Indian tribes in the marijuana industry and cultivation of cannabis on public lands in recent reports attached to other funding bills.
In the new report attached to the health agency bill, the committee also seemed to express concerns about the growing number of states that are legalizing marijuana and the increasing availability of higher potency cannabis products.
“The Committee is concerned with the rapidly changing landscape regarding the recreational use of marijuana–the effects that the drug can have on brain development; addiction; the long-term health effects in both youth and older individuals,” the senators wrote. “The Committee directs NIH to coordinate a multi-Institute approach to increase research related to the effect of increasing delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol levels on the human body as well as the effect of various delta-tetrahydrocannabinol levels on cognitive abilities that are required to, for example, operate motor vehicles.”
And, they want federal researchers to resume tests on cannabis seized by law enforcement.
“Without dedicated funding for this activity, the number of analyzed seized samples has plummeted, meaning that available data is no longer current or robust,” the report says. “The Committee believes that such research, along with analysis of marijuana and marijuana-derived products sold commercially in dispensaries or online, is essential for informing substance misuse and addiction prevention efforts, public health policy, and law enforcement tactics across the Federal Government.”
“The Committee continues to direct NIDA to coordinate efforts with the DEA and other law enforcement agencies to monitor Schedule I marijuana and marijuana-derived products.”
But despite the seeming concern about the effect of state legalization, the panel’s criticism of Schedule I’s roadblocks to marijuana research provides more momentum to the effort to reclassify cannabis under federal law.
Leading Congressional Marijuana Opponent In Danger Of Losing Seat, Polls Find
U.S. Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) is facing his first major congressional reelection challenge in over a decade, and his opponent, Democratic candidate Colin Allred, is hot on his trail, according to recent polling.
For marijuana reform advocates, it’s a race to follow.
Sessions, as chairman of the House Rules Committee, has systematically blocked votes on cannabis-related legislation by his colleagues on Capitol Hill. Measures on everything from expanding access to medical marijuana for veterans to protecting legal cannabis states from federal interference have been dead upon arrival. Even hemp is a no-go with Sessions at the helm of the powerful committee.
Not a single cannabis-related vote has been allowed on the House floor during the current Congress, thanks to Sessions.
The closest the GOP congressman has come to compromise on the issue in recent months seems to be his pledge to continue talks with a medical marijuana advocacy group. Members of the organization told Marijuana Moment earlier this month that the congressman was “very receptive” to their mission when they met—but Sessions has yet to commit to backing any specific legislation.
But in November, voters in Texas’s 32nd Congressional District will have an opportunity to elect a representative with starkly different attitude toward drug policy: Allred, a civil rights attorney and former NFL player, supports medical cannabis and decriminalizing simple possession of marijuana.
A new poll from The New York Times poll shows a surprisingly tight race.
The Times called more than 43,000 voters across District 32 over the past week to get a sense of voter sentiment heading into November, talking to 500 of them. The results of those calls showed 48 percent of respondents supporting Sessions to Allred’s 47 percent.
Of course, 500 isn’t an especially large sample size and the margin of error is about five percentage points.
But another recent survey conducted by Public Policy Polling for a healthcare advocacy group showed Allred ahead of the anti-cannabis incumbent by five points (47-42 percent).
.@ppppolls for @ProtectOurCare, Sept. 17-18:
– #TX07 (562 RVs, MOE +/-4.1%): @Lizzie4Congress 47%, @johnculberson 45% (Trump net approval: -3)
– #TX32 (555 RVs, MOE +/-4.2%): @ColinAllredTX 47%, @PeteSessions 42% (Trump net approval: -10)
— Patrick Svitek (@PatrickSvitek) September 24, 2018
Accordingly, the race has been graded as a “toss-up” by the Cook Political Report.
The apparent closeness of the contest is noteworthy. Fewer voters seem to have formed strong opinions about Allred, with almost 50 percent of respondents telling the Times they couldn’t say whether they had a favorable or unfavorable opinion of the candidate. Sessions, a known quantity as a sitting elected official, had a higher favorable rating (42 percent) than Allred, but also a significantly higher unfavorable rating (44 percent).
Respondents in the Times survey were also asked to weigh in on the U.S. Senate race between Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-TX). Forty-nine percent of voters in Sessions’s district said they’d vote O’Rourke if the election was “being held today,” while 47 percent said they’d vote Cruz.
It’s hard to say how much each candidate’s position on cannabis will tilt the scales in November, but what is known is that a bipartisan majority of Texans side with Allred when it comes to marijuana reform. A 2017 survey found “83 percent of Texans support legalizing marijuana for some use,” for example.
More on Allred’s stance on marijuana policy.
Asked about his plans for veterans transitioning back to civilian life, who might be struggling with mental health issues, Allred said “[p]art of that care should be the legalization of medical marijuana and cannabis as a non-addictive alternative to opioids and to treat PTSD and other battlefield injuries.”
It is unfortunate that Pete Sessions refuses to acknowledge that medical marijuana can help our veterans coming back from war who are struggling with PTSD and chronic pain. https://t.co/NxpfE55Xzr
— Colin Allred (@ColinAllredTX) June 7, 2018
The candidate has also criticized Sessions for holding up cannabis legislation, writing it’s “unfortunate that Pete Sessions refuses to acknowledge that medical marijuana can help our veterans coming back from war who are struggling with PTSD and chronic pain.”
Canadians Involved In Marijuana Industry Not Welcome In US, Feds Confirm
As Canada inches closer to opening its retail marijuana market next month, U.S. border officials are officially laying out their policy of weeding out the country’s cannabis consumers as well as those who work or invest in the industry.
In a Friday press release, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) confirmed previous news reports and affirmed that border officials will continue to enforce U.S. federal law, which for decades has defined marijuana as having a high potential for abuse and no medical benefit.
“Canada’s legalization of marijuana will not change CBP’s enforcement of United States laws regarding controlled substances,” the statement reads.
But more than just stopping marijuana from crossing the border, the federal agency will also actively deny entry into the country by people who work in the legal cannabis industry.
“As marijuana continues to be a controlled substance under United States law, working in or facilitating the proliferation of the legal marijuana industry in U.S. states where it is deemed legal or Canada may affect admissibility to the U.S.,” reads the CBP statement.
Canada became the second nation in the world to legalize marijuana in June. Starting on October 17, Canadian adults will be able to purchase and consume cannabis legally.
Although 31 U.S. states and Washington, D.C. have legalized cannabis for medical use and nine states and D.C. allow recreational use—including Washington, Vermont and Maine, which sit along the Canadian border—CBP officials say that entering the country with marijuana, even into a legalized state, “may result in seizure, fines, and/or arrest and impact admissibility.”
CBP officials spoken about the anti-marijuana policy before, but with Friday’s press release it’s now officially in black and white.
In the eyes of the U.S. federal government, “we don’t recognize that as a legal business,” Todd Owen, executive assistant commissioner for CBP’s Office of Field Operations told Politico earlier this month.
The senior official also cautioned that travelers risk a “lifetime ban” if they lie about their past drug use. “Our officers are not going to be asking everyone whether they have used marijuana, but if other questions lead there—or if there is a smell coming from the car, they might ask,” he said.
Any traveler who admits to past use of illegal drugs, including marijuana, will not be allowed into the U.S. CBP will then keep a record of the traveler and prohibit them from returning, whether or not the individual has previously entered the country. If they wish to return, the traveler must apply for a waiver to lift the lifetime ban at a cost of $585, as reported by Politico.
In response, Rep. Lou Correa (D-CA) demanded that Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen clarify her department’s policy and how it would go about enforcing it.
In a draft letter obtained by Marijuana Moment this month, the congressman posed a list of questions including how, exactly, the Department of Homeland Security will “evaluate and determine that an authorized foreign national is associated with the cannabis industry.”
Photo courtesy of Gerald L. Nino, U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Idaho Gubernatorial Candidates Disagree On Marijuana Legalization
Marijuana is an increasingly prominent issue in many political races this year.
Even in campaigns where cannabis is not a central concern, the candidates are often taking strong positions on legalization when asked about it.
Here’s a look at where the major party contenders in Idaho’s gubernatorial contest stand on ending marijuana prohibition and related reforms.
Democrat: Paulette Jordan
While Jordan, a former state legislator and tribal council member, has focused more on decriminalization and medical cannabis during her campaign, she does support full marijuana legalization.
I believe that we need to move toward full legalization in Idaho as well. It will generate much-needed revenue for our state and it will make our criminal justice system more ethical. (3/4)
— Paulette Jordan (@PauletteEJordan) April 19, 2018
Jordan has touted her work on a decriminalization bill in the legislature, saying “I realize it’s baby steps in this state. But the fact of the matter remains that 70 percent of our borders are surrounded by states that have legalized marijuana.”
She tweeted, but later deleted, “I look forward to decriminalizing Cannabis and leading the way for medicinal cannabis as an alternative medicine that is taxed and well regulated.”
During a Democratic primary debate, she said there’s “nothing wrong” with legalization.
In a Facebook Live interview with the Idaho Statesman (roughly 10 minutes into the video below), she spoke about children who benefit from cannabidiol (CBD) oil, saying that marijuana is “a natural medicine that mother earth has created” and that has “been here for thousands of years, as long as my ancestors have been here.”
Addressing broader recreational legalization, she said, “the numbers that have been very beneficial to other states when it comes down to resources for education.”
Republican: Brad Little
Currently the state’s lieutenant governor and a former state lawmaker, Little opposes legalization but does support limited CBD medical cannabis access.
“I support existing Idaho law and oppose the legalization of marijuana,” he said during a Republican primary debate, criticizing a legislative proposal to expand on the existing CBD pilot program established by current Gov. Butch Otter (R).
“We are expanding the current quality controlled CBD oil treatment study taking place where CBD oil is being administered to children with epilepsy or seizure disorders, and the results seem to be proving very successful. I support this pilot, and I want to ensure that we get all the data and know that this treatment works,” he said. “As for this session’s CBD legislation, I think it was far too broad and had too many unintended consequences.”
The Idaho Republican Party tweeted about Little’s opposition (and Jordan’s support for) “fully legalizing all marijuana.”
We’re sure it was just an oversight they forgot to include:
Little NO, Jordan YES
Little NO, Jordan YES
Mandatory gun licensing & registration:
Little NO, Jordan YES
— Idaho GOP (@IdahoGOP) September 22, 2018