Connect with us

Politics

Congressional Hearing Exposes Marijuana Research Limitations Imposed By Federal Law

Published

on

At a congressional hearing on Wednesday, federal regulators recognized that valuable research into marijuana is being inhibited cannabis’s current legal status and described previously unreported steps they’re taking to resolve the issue.

The Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health held the meeting to discuss six cannabis reform proposals, including two that would federally legalize marijuana. Most of the hearing involved lawmakers pressing witnesses from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) on the obstacles to marijuana studies that those officials claim are needed before pursuing broader policy reform.

Conversation was more limited when it came to legalization bills such as Judiciary Chairman Jerrod Nadler’s (D-NY) Marijuana Opportunity, Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act, which was approved by his panel last year. That said, formerly anti-reform Rep. Joe Kennedy III (D-MA) did lead a powerful discussion about the failures of prohibition and the need to deschedule cannabis.

Kennedy announced that panel leadership has agreed to hold a second hearing featuring the voices of people negatively impacted by marijuana prohibition, which he said “has failed.”

Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone (D-NJ) said in his opening statement that “while state laws and public perception around cannabis and its derivatives have evolved over the years, much of the federal framework that regulates cannabis has stayed the same.”

Watch the hearing, titled “Cannabis Policy For the New Decade,” below:

After being repeatedly asked about the limited supply of research-grade cannabis and the lack of chemical diversity in those plants cultivated at the nation’s only federally authorized manufacturer, DEA Senior Policy Advisor Matthew Strait said the agency is aware of the issue and is actively developing regulations to address the problem by licensing additional growers.

“We actually have a draft regulation in place,” he said, adding that it’s currently being reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and that regulators have a call scheduled for Thursday to discuss the proposed rule.

“We know that we have to probably do notice and comment rulemaking to implement regulations on two matters: one is how we’re going to evaluate all of our pending applications and two what additional types of regulations might need to be in place in order to impose on those that would grow,” he said. “That regulation is in draft form. I can’t talk too much about it, but rest assured, we have submitted to OMB, it’s been drafted and tomorrow some of us will be getting on a call to talk through it.”

DEA, FDA and NIDA witnesses all agreed under questioning that the current supply of cannabis for study purposes is inadequate and that researchers should be able to access a wider range of marijuana products.

Kennedy, who recently became a cosponsor of the MORE Act, followed up on his opening remarks with a brief statement on his personal evolution on the issue and frustration over policies inhibiting research.

“Meanwhile, millions of Americans—mostly black and brown—have been locked up for non-violent drug offenses. Meanwhile, desperate parents are forced to turn to a black market with no concern for patient safety to get their children the relief that they need. Meanwhile our cities and states are trying, and at times stumbling, to put in place thoughtful and thorough regulatory frameworks with zero support from federal partners. And meanwhile, a brand new corporate industry is rising up, rife with predictable economic injustices that spring up whenever government fails to regulate. Prohibition has clearly failed and America isn’t waiting for its government anymore.”

He then asked NIDA Director Nora Volkow and FDA Deputy Director for Regulatory Programs Douglas Throckmorton whether removing cannabis from the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) would make it easier for researchers to obtain and study it. Both said that the policy change would in fact simply research, though Volkow said it “may have unintended negative consequences.”

FDA and NIDA said their agencies would not be impacted if marijuana was descheduled, and DEA’s Strait acknowledged that his agency would because of its responsibility to enforce the CSA.

Subcommittee Chairwoman Anna Eshoo (D-CA) said researchers are “are in a catch-22” under the current regulatory scheme because they “can’t conduct research until they show cannabis has a medical use, but they can’t demonstrate cannabis has a medical use until they can conduct research.”

“It doesn’t make sense—at least to me,” she said.

Rep. Tony Cardenas (D-CA) said that the “United States Congress made a mistake, and every Congress since has not had honest hearings and honest dialogue and has not allowed—truly allowed—the researchers in this great country to do the true research that needs to be done for us to properly categorize cannabis in this country.”

“As a result of that, we have millions of individuals in this country who have been subjected to incarceration and a criminal record that otherwise they would have a much more productive and better life and that as a society, we would be much better off, including the taxpayers, if we were to actually get this right,” he said.

There were several exchanges throughout the hearing—which was requested by four Republican members last month—where lawmakers opposed to comprehensive reform argued that cannabis is a gateway drug and that legalization represents a public health threat.

Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) brought cookies in plastic baggies and distributed them to members. He then pointed to an image of a THC-infused cookie that looks similar that are available in Oregon.

“Each of you, by the way, has a cookie in front of you. I have a pizza stand opening in an hour out in the hallway,” he quipped. “Now don’t worry, I didn’t get that carried away. You can actually eat these. The question is, how do you know if your child stumbled upon it?”

The congressman went on to say that descheduling marijuana “is a step too far and is something I cannot support.”

But there were other members who shared anecdotes about the consequences of prohibition, particularly on patients who stand to benefit from medical cannabis.

Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-VA), for example, recalled that in the 1980s, he knew friends who would smuggle cannabis into a hospital for a man suffering from cancer and who wanted to improve his quality of life to spend time with his son. Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-MI) said her late husband, former Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) experienced “great pain” and was told that cannabis might treat it, but he declined in part because of its status as a federally illicit substance.

Several other lawmakers, including Cannabis Caucus Co-Chair Barbara Lee (D-CA), highlighted the hearing and remarked on its significance.

“Today, my [Energy Commerce] colleagues are holding a hearing on legislation to remove marijuana from the list of Schedule I drugs and allow for more research on the uses, impacts, and health benefits of cannabis,” Rep. Mike Doyle (D-PA) said. “Looking forward to their discussion on these bills!”

“After years of working to advance cannabis reform in Congress, this critical hearing is an important milestone where another major congressional committee focused time and attention on our movement,” Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), who spoke to Marijuana Moment on Tuesday about his expectations for the hearing, said in a press release. “It was important to hear a number of senior members of Congress affirming the change that is taking place at the state level and affirming the contradictions that are created by the federal government being out of step and out of touch.”

Pro-legalization group NORML also submitted written testimony for the hearing, stating that as “evident by the title of this hearing, our federal marijuana policies are stuck in the past.”

“It is time for Congress to amend them in a manner that comports with our current political and cultural reality,” the organization said. “For some 50 years, the cannabis plant has been improperly categorized and criminalized by federal law. It is time to re‐examine and amend this longstanding failed policy.”

Ahead of the hearing, a coalition of cannabis reform groups—including the National Cannabis Industry Association, Cannabis Trade Federation and Minority Cannabis Business Association—sent a letter to subcommittee leadership ahead of the meeting, encouraging members to take action on the various pieces of legislation.

“As organizations that collectively represent thousands of state-legal cannabis businesses around the country, ancillary industries, and our communities, we applaud your decision to hold a hearing on cannabis policy so early in the new legislative session,” the groups wrote. “This is a wonderful opportunity to continue the robust and groundbreaking discussion on this issue that took place in Congress last year and we commend your leadership in carrying it over into 2020.”

“As an industry, we understand that many lawmakers have concerns about the impact of the changing legal status of cannabis. We do not take these concerns lightly. These concerns underscore the need to establish a legal federal cannabis framework, as current federal policies can cause and exacerbate these concerns. We welcome the opportunity to work with lawmakers and regulators to determine the best paths forward as state and federal cannabis policy evolves.”

In their written testimony, DEA, FDA and NIDA representatives generally described the current state of federal marijuana policy, unsurprisingly without advocating for changes to cannabis’s current criminal status. That said, both DEA and NIDA seemed to at least recognize that existing policies are inhibiting research into the plant and signaled that changes are on the horizon.

Volkow wrote that the growing availability of cannabis products, particularly with high concentrations of THC, “raise serious public health concerns.” At the same time, however, “despite the public health urgency, legal and regulatory barriers continue to present challenges to advancing cannabis research.”

“Obtaining or modifying a Schedule I registration [for researchers to study marijuana] involves significant administrative challenges, and researchers report that obtaining a new registration can take more than a year,” she said. “Adding new substances to an existing registration can also be time consuming.”

“It would be useful to clarify aspects of the [Controlled Substances Act] that have been sources of confusion and administrative burden for the research community,” she said.

Additionally, Volkow acknowledged that the current situation, where the government has only authorized one facility to cultivate cannabis for researchers, “limits the diversity of products and formulations available to researchers and slows the development of cannabis-based medications.”

“Although the University of Mississippi supplies cannabis for clinical trials, it does not have the capacity to manufacture a broad array of cannabis-derived formulations for research or to supply these cannabis products for commercial development,” she said.

Strait wrote that his agency remains committed to expanding the number of federally authorized cannabis manufacturers for research purposes, noting that DEA is reviewing the situation but that ” adjustments to DEA’s policies and procedures may be necessary under applicable U.S. law to be consistent with certain treaty functions.”

“In the near future, DEA intends to propose regulations that would govern persons seeking to become registered with DEA to grow marihuana as bulk manufacturers, consistent with applicable law, taking into account recent changes in the Controlled Substances Act,” he said. “At present, a notice of proposed rulemaking is under review by the Office of Management and Budget.”

Volkow raised another issue, which other federal agencies have previously recognized, noting that “researchers supported by NIDA and other federal agencies are unable to access marketed cannabis products through state marijuana dispensaries.”

“There is a significant gap in our understanding of their impact on health,” she said. “The recent outbreaks of e-cigarette or vaping product use associated lung injury (EVALI), which has been linked to informally-sourced THC-containing vape products, underscores the critical importance of facilitating researcher access to different product sources.”

A NIDA staffer told Marijuana Moment in an email last week that “rigorous research is essential for understanding how the changing cannabis landscape will affect public health, for guiding evidence-based policy, and advancing therapeutics.”

“However, there are significant regulatory challenges to conducting research with marijuana and other Schedule I drugs,” the official said. “NIDA [has] been working with the DEA and FDA on ways to ameliorate these challenges, but there is nothing publicly available to share at this time.”

This story has been updated to include details and quotes from the hearing.

Leading Marijuana Reform Advocate In Congress Weighs In On This Week’s Legalization Hearing

Image element courtesy of Tim Evanson

Marijuana Moment is made possible with support from readers. If you rely on our cannabis advocacy journalism to stay informed, please consider a monthly Patreon pledge.

Politics

Biden Transition Team Highlights Top Health Pick’s Medical Marijuana Work

Published

on

President-elect Joe Biden’s new pick for a leading role in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is a strong ally of the medical marijuana community—the latest pro-reform selection to be named in recent weeks.

Rachel Levine, who currently serves as Pennsylvania’s health secretary, is being nominated for assistant secretary of HHS. And the Biden transition team isn’t shying away from her connection to medical cannabis, noting her expertise on the topic in a press release on Tuesday.

“In addition to her recent posts, Dr. Levine is also an accomplished regional and international speaker, and author on the opioid crisis, medical marijuana, adolescent medicine, eating disorders, and LGBTQ+ medicine,” Levine’s official biography states.

Of course, the president-elect is in favor medical cannabis, in addition to a number of other more modest reform proposals such as rescheduling, decriminalizing possession, expunging prior marijuana records and letting states set their own policies. But given his ongoing opposition to adult-use legalization, the cannabis mention on his site is noteworthy.

Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf (D) reacted to Biden’s selection by emphasizing Levine’s cannabis work, noting that during her time in the state’s health department, she “was instrumental in establishing the state’s medical marijuana program, bringing national awareness to opioid use disorder, and highlighting and promoting the need for adequate medical care and access for the LGBTQ community.”

Michael Bronstein, president of the American Trade Association for Cannabis & Hemp, similarly said in a press release that Levine “is a trailblazer who successfully guided the implementation of Pennsylvania’s medical marijuana program.”

“Under Dr. Levine’s leadership, the program expanded qualifying conditions based on science, added flower to help meet patient needs, and stood up a first in the nation marijuana research program,” he said. “Pennsylvania is now one of the quickest growing and most consequential medical marijuana markets in the country in large part due to Dr. Levine’s work.”

In one of the more recent actions in her current role, the health department head oversaw temporary changes to the state’s medical cannabis program in response to the coronavirus pandemic. That included eliminating restrictions on the number of patients a registered caregiver can work with.

“In the midst of COVID-19, we need to ensure medical marijuana patients have access to medication,” she said in March. “We want to be sure cardholders in the medical marijuana program can receive medication for one of 23 serious medical conditions during this difficult time.”

Levine, who would also be the first openly transgender Senate-confirmed federal official, would be serving in an agency that plays a significant role in setting federal marijuana policy. While the Justice Department broadly dictates marijuana’s federal scheduling, a medical and scientific review by HHS is binding on the attorney general’s subsequent classification decision.

Biden’s pick to lead HHS, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D), is also amenable to reform.

The president-elect also recently nominated former South Carolina Democratic Party Chair Jaime Harrison to lead the Democratic National Committee—and he’s a strong backer of full marijuana legalization.

Biden announced earlier this month that he wants Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo (D) to run the Commerce Department. The governor came out in support of legalization in 2019, and she released a budget proposal last year that called for a state-run regulatory model for cannabis.

For attorney general, Biden is nominating Judge Merrick Garland, who has not been especially outspoken about his views on marijuana policy. While advocates expressed concern about his commentary in a 2012 federal appeals case on marijuana scheduling, he doesn’t appear to have been publicly hostile to a policy change.

In other positive news for advocates, the president-elect is also set to nominate former prosecutor and civil rights activist Vanita Gupta as associate attorney general. She favors cannabis legalization and has strongly condemned harsh criminalization policies for non-violent drug offenses.

New York Governor Says Budget Uses Marijuana Revenue For Social Equity, With Details Forthcoming

Marijuana Moment is made possible with support from readers. If you rely on our cannabis advocacy journalism to stay informed, please consider a monthly Patreon pledge.
Continue Reading

Politics

New York Governor Says Budget Uses Marijuana Revenue For Social Equity, With Details Forthcoming

Published

on

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) on Tuesday previewed expected revenue from a legal marijuana program he’s proposing through his annual budget, with more detailed legislative language set to be released later in the day.

The governor has repeatedly argued that taxing and regulating cannabis will help fill a historic, $15 billion budget deficit. And while the projected $350 million in annual revenue from marijuana taxes won’t resolve the problem on its own, it represents one opportunity to boost an economy that has suffered amid the coronavirus pandemic.

“We also propose legalizing adult-use cannabis, which would raise about $350 million,” Cuomo said in his budget speech, adding that “$100 million would go to a social equity fund. That would still give us $250 million towards the budget and our needs.”

A briefing book for the governor’s budget states that legalization should be enacted “for the purposes of fostering and promoting temperance in their consumption, to properly protect the public health, safety, and welfare, and to promote social equality.”

Watch Cuomo discuss his marijuana legalization proposal below:

While it’s not immediately clear what that social equity fund would entail, it’s a notable component that advocates are closely monitoring. An outline of his budget plan similarly said the proposal will “correct past harms by investing in areas that have disproportionally been impacted by the war on drugs.”

In the briefing book, the governor calls for three types of taxes on recreational cannabis products: one based on THC content to be applied at the wholesale level, a 10.25 percent surcharge tax at the point of purchase by consumers and applicable state and local sales taxes.

The THC potency tax is intended to “more accurately capture both the true market value and the potential public health risks associated with the final cannabis product,” the governor’s office said, and it will be applied as follows:

“Cannabis flower/pre-roll/shake products are taxed at a rate of 0.7 cent per milligram of THC content. Cannabis concentrates/oil products are taxed at a rate of 1 cent per milligram of THC content, while cannabis infused/edible products are taxed at a rate of 4 cents per milligram of THC content.”

“Of the THC-based tax, retail surcharge, and any license fees, the first $10 million in FY 2023, $20 million in FY 2024, $30 million in FY 2025, $40 million in FY 2026, and $50 million annually thereafter are directed for social equity purposes, with the remainder directed to the newly established New York State Cannabis Revenue Fund,” it states.

A press release from the governor’s office clarifies that $100 million equity figure Cuomo mentioned in his speech is the aggregate funding over the first four years. “These monies will be used to support individuals and communities that have been the most harmed by decades of cannabis prohibition,” it says.

New York Budget Director Robert Mujica similarly said during a follow-up briefing on Tuesday that the social equity effort will support “communities that have been harmed by the nation’s policies with relation to cannabis.”

“As far as the cannabis and social equity fund, that is in the statute—we would have a permanent funding going program,” he said. “So as the program ramps up, a portion of the funding will go $100 million, and then there’ll be an ongoing fund once it ramps up to continue those investments.”

Further, the governor’s briefing book notes that the existing medical cannabis excise tax will continue, as well as “the current revenue distributions for an additional seven years and directing the currently undistributed 45 percent of tax revenue to the newly established New York State Cannabis Revenue Fund.”

The administration also estimates that the equivalent of 208 full-time jobs will be added to the Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control to support the new Office of Cannabis Management, which will be charged with regulating and issuing licenses for the new recreational marijuana market as well as those for medical cannabis and hemp.

Cuomo has twice pitched legalization through the budget, but reform legislation has stalled in part because of disagreements about how to allocate tax revenue. The governor has generally favored putting the monies in the state’s general fund, while leading legislators and activists have pushed for a more targeted distribution centering communities most impacted by the drug war.

If the outline and this latest speech are any indication, it seems Cuomo may be coming around to the latter proposal. But again, the full details of the plan will come when actual legislative language is released later on Tuesday.

In any case, the legislature will have more influence this year after Senate Democrats secured a supermajority in the November election. If the governor were to veto any bill over details he didn’t like, they could potentially have enough votes to override him.

There’s growing recognition within the legislature about the seeming inevitability of marijuana reform this year, regardless of differing opinions on the specifics.

The top Republican in the New York Assembly said last month that he expects the legislature to legalize cannabis this coming session.

Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins (D) said in November that she also anticipates that the reform will advance next year, though she noted that lawmakers will still have to decide on how tax revenue from marijuana sales is distributed.

Cuomo also said that month that the “pressure will be on” to legalize cannabis in the state and lawmakers will approve it “this year” to boost the economy amid the health crisis.

The push to legalize in New York could also be bolstered by the fact that voters in neighboring New Jersey approved a legalization referendum in November.

Legislators prefiled a bill to legalize cannabis in New York earlier this month. The legislation, introduced in the Senate by Sen. Liz Krueger (D) and 18 other lawmakers, is identical to a version she filed last year that did not advance.

Separately, several other bills that focus on medical marijuana were recently prefiled in New York, and they touch on a wide range of topics—from tenants’ rights for medical cannabis patients to health insurance coverage for marijuana products.

This story has been updated to include comments from the budget director and details about the legalization proposal outlined in the briefing book.

New Virginia Senate Marijuana Committee Holds First Hearing On Legalization Bill

Photo elements courtesy of Metropolitan Transportation Authority and Carlos Gracia.

Marijuana Moment is made possible with support from readers. If you rely on our cannabis advocacy journalism to stay informed, please consider a monthly Patreon pledge.
Continue Reading

Politics

New Virginia Senate Marijuana Committee Holds First Hearing On Legalization Bill

Published

on

A new Virginia Senate subcommittee focused solely on marijuana held its first hearing on Tuesday to discuss a bill to legalize cannabis in the Commonwealth.

Lawmakers did not vote on the proposal but took public testimony and put questions to state officials about certain regulatory components of the legislation. The panel gave informal feedback on key provisions such as which agency should be responsible for regulating the legal market and how advisory board members would be appointed.

The bill, which was unveiled by Gov. Ralph Northam (D) last week and quickly considered by the Senate Rehabilitation and Social Services Committee on Friday, would create a system of regulated and taxed marijuana sales and production, and allow adults 21 and older to purchase and possess up to one ounce of cannabis and cultivate up to four plants for personal use, two of which could be mature.

It’s being carried by top Senate and House leaders and is set for a follow-up hearing in the Senate Rehabilitation Marijuana Subcommittee on Wednesday. At that point, the panel will take up formal revisions to the legislation, Chairman Jeremey McPike (D) said.

Following the subcommittee meetings, the full Rehabilitation committee is expected to vote on Friday to advance the legislation to the Judiciary Committee. After that, it will be referred to the Finance Committee before coming to the full Senate floor.

“We know that the prohibition on cannabis in both our Commonwealth and our country has failed, and over the years hundreds of thousands of Virginians have been branded criminals and disadvantaged,” Sen. Adam Ebbin (D), who is one of the chief sponsors of the bill, said at the beginning of the hearing.

As members moved through the details of the legislation, the chair informally “took the temperature” of the committee on a number of issues by asking lawmakers to raise their hands in support or in opposition to various components.

When it came to the question of which agency should regulate the program, lawmakers seemed largely split, though more members expressed interest in establishing a new independent agency to take on that responsibility, rather than task the state’s existing Alcoholic Beverage Control Authority (ABC) with taking on cannabis, as would be the case under the governor’s legislation as introduced.

The debate centered on which approach would be the most efficient and equitable, and would allow the legal market to come online more quickly.

“ABC has its hand full enough,” Sen. Lionell Spruill (D) said. “This is not a job for ABC.”

But Deputy Secretary of Agriculture and Forestry Brad Copenhaver, who testified on behalf of the Northam administration, argued that ABC can “do it more quickly” than an entirely new agency and would be able to “hit the ground running.”

ABC “has a great relationship with the regulated community that it currently serves” and could replicate that for the cannabis industry, he said.

Members also discussed a component of the bill that concerns the rights of individual jurisdictions to allow or disallow marijuana businesses to operate in their areas. As currently drafted, the legislation would make it so localities would have to proactively opt-in to permit retailers. That could be done through an action of a local city council or via a ballot measure initiated by voters.

Lawmakers debated whether that policy might create pockets throughout the state, which could have economic consequences and allow the illicit market to thrive. At the same time, several members said it was important to give those individual municipalities some level of autonomy over the market.

During the public testimony portion of the hearing, various stakeholders spoke about provisions of the bill that they support or oppose.

Jenn Michelle Pedini, the executive director of Virginia NORML who also serves as the organization’s national development director, testified before the subcommittee and said it’s the group’s “pleasure to support the legislation.”

However, “we would offer that currently legislation does lack employment and parental rights protections for those who are are either participating in the industry, or are consuming or cultivating responsibly,” they said.

Another problematic provision from advocates’ perspective is that the bill would make public consumption a misdemeanor, whereas currently it is a civil offense punishable by a $25 fine. Additionally, it seems to increase the fine for people aged 18-20 who possess cannabis. But those issues were specifically not taken up by the Rehabilitation Committee, as it lacks jurisdiction over matters concerning crimes and penalties.

A representative of the American Automobile Association (AAA) testified in opposition to the bill, arguing that enacting the reform would lead to an increase in impaired driving.

The legislation’s provisions have been informed by two official state studies on legalization that were recently conducted by a legislative commission and a separate working group comprised of four Virginia cabinet secretaries and other officials, both of which looked at how to effectively implement legalization and submitted recommendations to the governor’s office late last year.

Those studies were required under a marijuana decriminalization bill that was approved last year.

Many of those recommendations have been incorporated into the new legislation, including provisions to promote social equity in the cannabis market. Notably, it would also apportion almost half of the tax revenue the state collects from marijuana sales to funding pre-kindergarten education—a policy championed by First Lady Pamela Northam.

A new 21 percent tax would be imposed on cannabis sales, and local jurisdictions that allow marijuana businesses to operate could levy an additional three percent tax. Existing state sales taxes would also apply on purchases, for a total potential 30 percent tax rate.

Revenue from the new state tax would go toward funding pre-k education (40 percent), a Cannabis Equity Reinvestment Fund (30 percent), substance misuse and treatment programs (25 percent) and public health initiatives (five percent).

This introduction of the bill comes one month after the governor included provisions to lay the groundwork for cannabis legalization in a budget proposal that also calls for millions of dollars to support expungements. Northam had campaigned on merely decriminalizing possession, but he publicly backed broader legalization of marijuana for adult use in November.

Northam said during his State of the Commonwealth address last week that cannabis prohibition was deliberately enacted as a means to discriminate against people of color.

Separate legislation to legalize cannabis for adult use was filed by Del. Steve Heretick (D) earlier this month. A companion version of that bill, sponsored by Sen. Joe Morrisey (D), was also up for consideration by the Senate panel on Tuesday, but he asked that it be “rolled in” to the governor’s proposal and that he be added as a chief sponsor. That request was approved by members.

Meanwhile, legislation to stop police from searching people or seizing property based solely on the smell of marijuana in Virginia is set to take effect after lawmakers adopted recommended changes from the governor in October.

Also during the recently concluded special session, Northam signed another bill that will allow people issued summonses for cannabis offenses under the state’s new decriminalization law to prepay their civil penalty rather than having show up in court.

Washington State Marijuana Homegrow Bill Draws Smooth Reception At Initial Hearing

Photo courtesy of Philip Steffan.

Marijuana Moment is made possible with support from readers. If you rely on our cannabis advocacy journalism to stay informed, please consider a monthly Patreon pledge.
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Marijuana News In Your Inbox

Support Marijuana Moment

Marijuana News In Your Inbox

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!