February 20, 2020
Kentucky House Approves Medical Marijuana Legalization Bill
The Kentucky House of Representatives approved a bill to legalize medical marijuana in the state on Thursday. Following a successful vote in the Judiciary Committee last week, the full chamber passed the legislation in a 65-30 vote. It now heads to the Senate. If enacted into law, patients suffering from qualifying medical conditions and who have a doctors’ recommendations will be able to obtain cannabis from licensed dispensaries. The bill would establish a regulatory body to develop rules for the program and determine which medical conditions qualify individuals for marijuana. Smoking cannabis would be prohibited under the measure, and it would be up to regulators to decide whether to allow cannabis edibles. At least 25 dispensaries would have to be permitted under the proposal. Rep. Jason Nemes (R), the sponsor of the legislation, said in opening remarks that he’s proud to have drafted the “tightest medical marijuana bill in the country.” However, he expressed disappointment over the smoking ban, stating that “I believe that sometimes it’s appropriate because smoking is the quickest way in” and can beneficial for certain conditions. The bill would also impose a 12 percent tax on the gross receipts of marijuana sales from a cultivator or processor to a dispensary. Revenue would be split between a general state medical cannabis trust fund (80 percent) and a local fund to be distributed to jurisdictions where cannabis businesses are allowed to operate. Lawmakers approved several floor amendments prior to voting to pass the legislation. An amendment was approved stipulating that the list of qualifying conditions must contain, at a minimum, chronic pain, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis and nausea or vomiting. Members also agreed to an amendment requiring the families of medical cannabis patients who die to return their leftover marijuana products to dispensaries for destruction within 10 days. Another amendment allowing law enforcement to access sales data from dispensaries was adopted. The chamber also agreed to prohibit the sale of cannabis vaping products to individuals under 21. It also adopted an amendment stipulating that dentists, podiatrists and optometrists cannot recommend medical marijuana. Members accepted an amendment prohibiting the advertising of medical marijuana businesses. The chamber agreed to another amendment that requires hospitals to report instances when medical cannabis patients are diagnosed with cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome. Additionally, a measure was accepted that prohibits the sale of medical cannabis to minors and makes dispensaries liable if they do so. Members also rejected several proposed amendments aimed at further restricting the program, including one that would have prohibited doctors from recommending cannabis to people taking certain prescription drugs and another that would have increased penalties for those who illegally sell marijuana purchased from a dispensary. “Patients across Kentucky are breathing a collective sigh of relief after this House vote, but they know that HB 136 will face significant challenges in the Senate,” Matt Simon of the Marijuana Policy Project told Marijuana Moment. “Now that 33 states have passed medical cannabis laws, it seems crazy that Kentuckians should have to risk criminal penalties if they use cannabis to treat a serious medical condition.” While the Judiciary panel approved a medical cannabis legalization bill last year, it never received floor action. It’s not clear how the current legislation will fare in the Senate, but a chief opponent of the legislation during the previous session, Senate President Robert Stivers (R), has conceded that 2020 may be different. “I think there is a path, but it is a narrow path,” he said. “There are some real benefits to it, but we need to know what it benefits—what things are there without creating bigger health hazards,” Stivers said recently. “And that’s the same way with any drug. It’s a balancing test of do the goods outweigh the bads.” Gov. Andy Beshear (D) is in favor of medical cannabis legalization. During his campaign, he said the reform move could mitigate the opioid crisis. Simon said that it’s “time for Senate President Robert Stivers and his colleagues to acknowledge the overwhelming, bipartisan support for this bill and send it forward to Gov. Beshear’s desk.” According to a poll released earlier this month, nine out of 10 Kentucky residents support legalizing medical marijuana.
Learn more
February 19, 2020
Legal marijuana use still costs people jobs. A new California bill takes on the issue
California voters legalized pot in 2016. But for many seeking jobs in state government, cannabis use has become an obstacle to getting hired. Now, a spike in the number of job applicants disqualified by state agencies after failing tests for marijuana use has spawned calls for new legislation and debate over whether employment rules should be relaxed given more widespread acceptance of the drug. The number of applicants for state correctional officer jobs who were disqualified after testing positive for cannabis more than doubled from 503 in 2015, the year before legalization, to 1,053 in 2018. Last year, 813 prison guard applicants were disqualified for testing positive. With more California job applicants in the private sector also failing marijuana drug tests and being disqualified, legalization advocates, including a legislator, are calling on the state to change employment laws. “I do not think [a ban on cannabis use] is fair, or necessary to have a safe workplace,” said Ellen Komp of California NORML, which supported Proposition 64, the 2016 legalization initiative. “Our position is that people can legally and responsibly use marijuana off the job, as long as they don’t show up to work impaired or use it on the job.” Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Alameda) is taking a first step at addressing the issue. He introduced legislation Friday that would require employers in both the public and private sectors to accommodate workers and job applicants who use marijuana for medical purposes, which was legalized in California in 1996. “To be discriminated against by your employer because of the type of medicine you use is both inhumane and wrong,” Bonta said. “Medical cannabis, as recommended by a doctor, should be given a similar reasonable accommodation as all prescription drugs.” Bonta’s bill would not apply to “safety-sensitive” workers required by federal law to be drug free, including airline pilots, police officers and truck drivers, nor would it cover employers with federal contractors who are required to maintain drug-free workplaces. He noted that 16 other states, including Arizona, New York and Illinois, have already adopted worker protections similar to the ones he is proposing. But opponents of Proposition 64 say the law shouldn’t be eased, given that an increase in positive drug tests in the workplace was predicted after legalization. “Widespread, regular marijuana use has been essentially promoted by our state government,” said Kevin Sabet, president of the national group Smart Approaches to Marijuana. “We are moving so fast towards complete acceptance of being high without understanding the public safety implications.” Proposition 64 allows public and private employers to continue to mandate their employees to work under drug-free workplace requirements and allows them to terminate employees who do not follow these policies. “Prop. 64 did not provide any protections for the use of marijuana in the context of employment,” said Tamar Todd, a lecturer on marijuana law at UC Berkeley School of Law and vice chair of the California Cannabis Advisory Committee. “People can still be drug tested and disciplined based on a positive result even if they are using in compliance with state law, not at work, and not impaired at work.” The tests are needed in part because marijuana users are more likely to be injured on the job, said Scott Chipman, a California resident who is vice president of Americans Against Legalizing Marijuana. Employees who tested positive for marijuana had 55% more industrial accidents, 85% more injuries and 75% greater absenteeism compared to those who tested negative, according to a study published by the National Institute on Drug Abuse. “There are plenty of workplace and public safety reasons to disqualify applicants who test positive,” Chipman said. “There are no reasons to relax the current rules.” Nationwide, the rate of positive drug tests in the private and public sector workforces hit a fourteen-year high in 2018, the last year for which statistics are available, reaching 4.4% for all drugs, according to an analysis by Quest Diagnostics, based on 10 million tests it processed. The percentage of employees and job applicants not in safety-sensitive jobs who tested positive for marijuana in California rose from 2.3% in the year before Proposition 64 to 3.1% in 2018, which is higher than the national rate of 2.8%, according to the analysis. Positive marijuana tests are also trending upward in other states that have legalized recreational use of marijuana, said Barry Sample, senior director for science and technology at Quest Diagnostics. “Marijuana is not only present in our workforce, but use continues to increase,” Sample said. “As marijuana policy changes, and employers consider strategies to protect their employees, customers and general public, employers should weigh the risks that drug use, including marijuana, poses to their business.” The California Chamber of Commerce is generally opposed to restricting the ability of companies to conduct pre-employment drug tests. “Allowing drug use in the workplace — including requiring an employer to accommodate an employee’s marijuana use — could jeopardize the safety of other workers as well as the public,” the Chamber said in a statement this month. Businesses with federal contracts face mandates to keep workplaces drug-free, said Robert Moutrie, a policy advocate for the Chamber.
Learn more
February 19, 2020
Alabama Lawmakers Approve Medical Marijuana Legalization Bill
An Alabama Senate committee approved a bill on Wednesday that would legalize medical marijuana in the state. The legislation would allow patients with qualifying conditions to purchase cannabis products from licensed dispensaries. It would be a limited system, however, prohibiting patients from smoking or vaping marijuana. The Senate Judiciary Committee cleared the bill in a 8-1 vote, with one abstention. The next stop for the legislation will be the Senate floor. The proposal would establish the Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission, which would be responsible for overseeing a patient registry database, issuing medical cannabis cards and approving licenses for marijuana dispensaries, cultivators, transporters and testing facilities. This vote comes two months after a panel created by the legislature, the Medical Cannabis Study Commission, issued a recommendation that Alabama implement a medical cannabis program. The full Senate approved a medical cannabis legalization bill last year, but it was diluted in the House to only provide for the establishment of the study commission. Sen. Tim Melson (R) sponsored both versions of the legislation and served as chairman of the review panel. The current bill has been revised from the earlier version. For example, this one does not require patients to exhaust traditional treatment options before they can access medical cannabis. The committee also approved a series of amendments by voice vote, including several technical changes to the bill. Another one would shield physicians from liability for recommending medical cannabis. One would clarify that employees are ineligible for workers’ compensation for accidents caused by being intoxicated by medical cannabis, which is the same standard as other drugs. Members also agreed to an amendment creating a restriction on who can be on the cannabis commission. While it’s not clear how the House would approach the bill if it advances to the chamber this year, the speaker said this week that he’s “in a wait and see mode” and commended Melson for his work on the measure. The state’s attorney general, meanwhile, sent a letter to lawmakers expressing opposition to the reform move. Under the measure, patients suffering from 15 conditions would qualify for the program. Those include anxiety, cancer, epilepsy and post-traumatic stress disorder. Patients would be able to purchase up to a 70-day supply at a time, and there would be a cap of 32 dispensaries allowed in the state. Prior to the vote, committee heard from a series of proponents and opponents, including parents who shared anecdotes about the therapeutic benefits of cannabis for their children. Interest in the reform move was so strong that an overflow crowd has to be moved to a separate hearing room. “Sometimes people are not able to empathize with others who have gone through something. I guarantee you if one of relatives, members of the legislature, went through something like the testimonies that we’ve heard today, they would want it,” Sen. Vivian Figures (D) said. “But they would probably have the means to fly somewhere and get it.”
Learn more
February 19, 2020
Top Minnesota Lawmaker Says He’ll File Marijuana Legalization Bill Within Two Weeks
A top Minnesota lawmaker said on Tuesday that he will be introducing a bill to legalize marijuana in the state within two weeks. House Majority Leader Ryan Winkler (DFL), who said earlier this month that his legislation would create the best cannabis system “in the country to date,” discussed the reform move during a rally at the Capitol that was organized by Minnesotans for Responsible Marijuana Regulation (MRMR). State Attorney General Keith Ellison (DFL) also attended the event and said that opponents of legalization “are wrong” and that there’s “no outcry to imprison people for marijuana possession.” “Minnesotans have been clear: our cannabis laws are doing more harm than good,” Winkler said. “We will introduce carefully-considered legislation in the very near future—if any state can do this right, Minnesota can.” Winkler and Sen. Jeff Hayden (DFL) conducted a statewide tour to get public input on the issue in recent weeks, and they said the consensus was that prohibition has done more harm than good. They’ve also discussed the matter within their party and with administration officials. Passing a legalization bill will be no small task, Winkler previously said, acknowledging that leaders of the Republican-controlled Senate stand opposed to the prospect. A Senate committee killed a legalization bill last year, and the panel also rejected a more modest proposal to create a task force responsible for studying cannabis reform. Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka (R) previously said that legalization is “not good for Minnesota” There will likely be logistical challenges in the House as well. While the Democratic–Farmer–Labor party controls the House, there are as many as 23 committees that may have jurisdiction over parts of the legislation. But none of that is deterring the lawmakers and advocates from pursuing the policy change. Benjamin Feist, a member of the MRMR steering committee and the chief program strategy officer at the state’s ACLU chapter, said at the rally that the timing is right. “Minnesota is indeed ready. It’s time for a thoughtful, responsible legalization of adult-use marijuana,” he said. “We know that the history of criminalization has had a staggeringly disproportionate impact on black Minnesotans and other communities of color, and it comes with a tremendous human and financial cost.” Residents in the state also voiced majority support for legalization in separate surveys, which involved nearly 20,000 participants collectively, that were conducted at the State Fair by both the Senate and House last year. While Winkler’s bill is yet to be released, he outlined several policy priorities for legalization during his press conference earlier this month. He said the legislation would make taxes and regulations minimal to stamp out the illicit market, the industry would be small business-focused, home cultivation would be allowed and the reform measure will contain “the best equity proposal related to economic development that any state has brought forward.” Gov. Tim Walz (D) said last year that he wants the state to start getting prepared for a legal cannabis market, and he directed various state agencies to begin laying the foundation for a regulated system in anticipation of reform. The legislative session in Minnesota began on February 11.
Learn more
February 19, 2020
Bill would allow hemp arrests
Lawmakers moved forward with a bill requiring a license to carry hemp — or face drug charges. Georgia House Agriculture and Consumer Affairs committee members approved the legislation Tuesday that would require anyone who is legally carrying leafy green hemp to have a license to prove they are in the hemp business. Violators would face up to a year in jail or a $1,000 fine for possession of less than an ounce — penalty equal to that of misdemeanor marijuana. When Gov. Brian Kemp signed the Georgia Hemp Farming Act, it became legal in the state to grow the crop with up to 3% THC content — the chemical ingredient found in marijuana. Processed hemp is used for CBD oil, a health product commonly used for pain relief. But local law-enforcement officers have no means of testing THC levels of a leafy green substance in the field. Testing the THC levels of leafy green substances requires a $65,000 machine, according to Deneen Kilcrease from the GBI’s crime lab. Each test costs about $80. “If you treat any leafy substance as hemp, you’re decriminalizing marijuana in this state,” said Pete Skandalakis, the executive director for the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia. “I don’t think that’s what the Legislature wants.” But Mazie Lynn Causey, a lobbyist for the Georgia Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, testified the bill would criminalize hemp. “This bill, the criminal aspects of this bill,” Causey said, “are seeking to criminalize a legal substance of hemp as if it was marijuana.” Rep. Scot Turner, R-Holly Springs, who voted against the bill, said under the definition of a hemp product, the bill would leave room to interpret possession of CBD oil as grounds for prosecution as well as the plant. “They’re comparing apples and oranges,” he said. “They’re taking a legal product and making it illegal.” Turner told CNHI that lawmakers hadn’t consulted with lawyers on the issue and therefore didn’t go through a full process. Rep. Matthew Wilson, D-Brookhaven, also voted against the measure and said the logic is not sound for charging someone with a crime because law enforcement has limited ability to test in the field. “To fix that issue you’re going to create a brand-new crime for a substance that the federal government has legalized and does not classify as a controlled substance?” Wilson asked. Rep. Dominic LaRiccia, R-Douglas, said that to say lawmakers are criminalizing hemp is “unfair.” “What we’re criminalizing is not hemp, it’s breaking the rules,” he said. “If they have the proper paper work, they don’t need the test.” The bill moved forward out of committee on a voice vote, with two votes against. “If we were dealing with peppers, squash, blueberries or egg plant, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation,” Rep. John Corbett, R-Lake Park, the bill’s sponsor, said. "But we are dealing with a crop that just by a minute change in the THC content it can go from a legal crop to an illegal crop. So we’ve got to have very strict rules and regulations on who, how, where and when.” But as lawmakers mull possible unintended consequences of the legislation, hemp industry producers said it’s time to get some work done. Robert Lee, chief information officer of Georgia Xtracts, a hemp manufacturing and processing company, said it’s time to get the ball rolling. Xtracts has invested $5 million in a facility in Georgia and has offered testing services to the state. “I understand we need to get this right and we’ve trusted you guys,” he said. “I can’t start the business really running, until we get this thing going. ... Until we start this industry here, consumers in Georgia are going to continue to purchase unsafe products.”
Learn more
February 19, 2020
We’re 1 of the bluest states in the nation. Why can’t we pass a marijuana law? | Opinion
New Jersey has a reputation for being one of the most safely “blue” states in the union. Considered a Democratic stronghold, New Jersey has voted for Democrats in presidential elections since 1992 and for the last several years Democrats have controlled both the state legislature and the governor’s seat. However, even with these clear advantages, New Jersey has consistently fallen behind other blue states -- and even some red states -- in our commitment to reversing the negative impact of the archaic and grossly damaging marijuana laws, despite criminal justice and drug policy reform being a supposed hallmark of the Democratic Party’s initiatives. In 2012, Colorado and Washington became the first two states in the nation to legalize marijuana. Since then, Vermont, Maryland, Missouri, Delaware, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Hawaii have all decriminalized marijuana through their state legislatures. Similarly, Vermont and Illinois -- two other states considered to be Democratic strongholds -- have both managed to completely legalize marijuana via their state legislatures. Not only has petty political squabbling caused New Jersey’s legislature to fail to fully legalize marijuana, it has also resulted in a failure to provide even the short term secondary solution of decriminalizing marijuana as we wait for the initiative to head to the ballot in November. First, let’s be clear, New Jersey: decriminalization is not an optimal policy choice in comparison to legalization. Decriminalization policy alone would still leave the marijuana market untaxed, leaving millions of dollars on the table that could instead be used to rebuild New Jersey’s most impoverished communities. Moreover, policy focused solely on decriminalization will continue to perpetuate a cycle of unnecessary -- and often discriminatory -- interactions between marijuana users and law enforcement since marijuana will still be considered “illegal contraband.” Conversely, legalization is associated with dramatic and sustained declines in marijuana arrests. However, even with decriminalization’s shortcomings, New Jersey’s Democrats could have used the opportunity to pass decriminalization legislation as a temporary measure to prevent more arrests between now and the referendum. The legislatures failure -- and ultimate lack of will -- to pass neither legalization nor decriminalization bills signifies a phenomenon that continues to plague New Jersey politics: an inadequate desire to place the needs of New Jerseyans above political aspirations. If New Jersey Democrats are going to espouse criminal justice reform and drug policy reform as one of their main pillars, it’s essential that we heed the will of the 62% of New Jerseyans in favor of marijuana legalization, and even more important that our state Democrats start to take serious steps toward rebuilding the Black and Brown communities that were devastated as the result of a senseless drug war.
Learn more
February 18, 2020
CT Joins Other New England States In Recreational Marijuana Push
The entire New England region can potentially have some form of legalized recreational marijuana in the very near future as several states, including Connecticut take a strong look at the issue. Gov. Ned Lamont has come out strongly in favor of legalizing marijuana in a manner similar to other neighboring states. Massachusetts, Maine and Vermont have already legalized recreational marijuana and New York, Rhode Island and New Hampshire are considering it this year. Lamont includes $300,000 in his budget proposal for the Department of Consumer Protection to begin laying out the regulatory framework for legalized recreational marijuana sales. His proposal would also erase criminal records for those convicted of misdemeanor possession offenses of marijuana.
Learn more
Less than a month after Cambridge’s attempt to ban a medical marijuana dispensary from selling to all adults for two years was ruled unconstitutional in superior court, the city announced that it has filed an emergency motion to halt the ruling — a decision ripped by the local pot shop. “The City’s actions in pursuing an appeal reflect a contempt for the Court and the rule of law,” Revolutionary Clinics, one of the shops hit by Cambridge’s moratorium, said in a statement. “Rather than working toward solutions and sound policy that can have a tangible impact, the City continues to play politics.” The announcement comes after a Middlesex Superior Court judge ruled on Jan. 24 that the moratorium on Revolutionary Clinics opening a retail pot shop violated the Home Rule Amendment to the Massachusetts Constitution and state cannabis law. Superior Court Associate Justice Kathleen M. McCarthy stated that lifting the ban “promotes the public interest” by “invalidating conflicting local ordinances.” Last fall, the Cambridge City Council approved the two-year moratorium during which only “economic empowerment candidates” as designated by the Cannabis Control Commission could operate retail pot shops in the city. The empowerment program was designed to help businesses in communities disproportionately and negatively affected by the prior criminalization of weed.
Learn more
On March 10, NJ Cannabis Insider will host the state’s premier all-day, multi-track panel event focused on the imminent legalization of adult-use cannabis, the expansion of the state’s medical marijuana program and the exploding hemp/CBD industry at the New Jersey Conference and Expo Center in Edison. The event, which starts at 10:30 a.m., also packs in serious networking opportunities, an exhibitors vendor and lunch. Tickets are currently on sale, including group rates; click here for details. This week, NJ Cannabis Insider Live Event: Road to Legalization conference organizers added two new panels: Cannabis activism: Preparing for the November ballot referendum, featuring Amol Sinha of ACLU-NJ, Jackie Cornell, 1906 edibles, and Elise Grosso, Cannabis Voter Project. And, Women in Leadership with Arlene Quiñones Perez of DeCotiis, FitzPatrick, Cole & Giblin, Colleen Mahr, Fanwood mayor, former president of League of Municipalities, and Tanya Osbourne of Women Grow. The rest of the lineup offers something for people in the cannabis business community at all levels: Update on the Garden State market will feature: Bill Caruso of Archer Law; Arlene Quiñones Perez of DeCotiis, Lynn Nowak of Porzio Governmental Affairs, and Fruqan Mouzon of McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney and Carpenter.
Learn more
According to a survey from Change Research, nearly 3 in 4 New Mexicans support legalizing recreational marijuana. With support from both the public and the governor, why did the bill to legalize recreational marijuana fail? Last week, a state Senate committee tabled the bill that would’ve legalized recreational pot. The vote included two Democrats. "It was a train wreck because we had given them the 180 page substitute for the previous bill a week ago but it hadn't been distributed so none of them had read it. Even their chairman hadn't finished reading it,” said Sen. Gerald Ortiz Y Pino (D-District 12). Gov. Michelle Lujan-Grisham said she plans to bring back the bill during the longer session next year. "I think there's any number of legislative issues they want addressed in the bill that make it an even better regulatory framework for cannabis and I think we'll have a better shot in the 60 day session and we fully intend to bring it back,” she said. Business Leaders’ Concerns with Legalization: Lawmakers plan on bringing the bill back to the table during the 2021 legislative session. The state’s business leaders are expected to weigh in on the issue again. One of their top concerns is enforcing workplace drug policies. “People have the choice of using marijuana and we're not against that but when you take that next step and legalize recreational marijuana you're making a commitment that I don't think our state can pay the bill for,” said Carla Sonntag, president and founder of the New Mexico Business Coalition. Sonntag said any future legislation would have to include safe guards for employers. “They've got to be able to have a drug free workforce. Well if that's the case, the current legislation, there were some amendments made right at the end before it was tabled, but that legislation as it was drafted did not cover the need for employers to have a drug free workforce—and that has to happen,” Sonntag said.
Learn more
