Grow Life 420

Less than two weeks ahead of Election Day, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine (R) is talking to local TV stations about his opposition to Issue 2, a ballot initiative that would legalize adult-use marijuana in the state. But newly released state data on campaign fundraising indicate that supporters have an edge, having raised nearly four times what opponents have collected.

DeWine said voters are confused about both the cannabis measure and a separate initiative, Issue 1, which would protect access to contraception, fertility treatment and abortion. He downplayed polls showing popular support for both proposals.

“These are gonna go right down to the wire,” DeWine told WLWT news, a local NBC affiliate. “I think there’s still confusion about both of them, and I think that both of these will be close.”

Asked about polls showing strong support for legalizing marijuana, the governor was dismissive.

“The old saying is, ‘the only poll that really counts is the one on Election Day,'” he said.

A recent survey of likely voters found that 57 percent supported the legalization measure, including a slim majority of Republicans. Another survey of state lawmakers found that majorities of both Democrats (63 percent) and Republicans (52 percent) expected voters to approve the measure.

DeWine’s opposition to legalizing marijuana is not new, but in the past week he’s spoken out against Issue 2 in a number of interviews.

“I don’t think the little bit of money that this will generate to the state of Ohio is worth the damage to the people of Ohio,” he told Spectrum News 1, saying that reforms could be accomplished by growing the state’s medical marijuana program instead.

Legalization through Issue 2 would likely produce around $260 million in net benefits to the state on an annual basis, according to a recently released economic report by Scioto Analysis.

“Although there is a chance the costs outweigh the benefits,” the group said, “our simulation model suggests that in 90 percent of likely scenarios, recreational marijuana legalization will have a positive net economic benefit on society.”

A separate analysis published in August by Ohio State University researchers found the change could bring in $404 million in annual tax revenue.

Meanwhile, DeWine is also attacking Issue 2 as unfair to businesses. In his WLWT interview, he said the initiative “favors certain people and says certain—people who already have a license to sell medical marijuana—it favors them over anybody else.”

That argument appears to play on concerns Ohioans had over a 2015 legalization measure that voters roundly rejected on a 64–36 vote. That plan would have given control of the market to a small group of producers, which led to many advocates holding back support for the bill. Organizers for the current campaign have said they drew on lessons learned from that failure in crafting the current initiative.

DeWine also argued in a separate WTOL interview that legalization would send the wrong message to kids.

“They see it being sold legally in their state and say, ‘well, it must, obviously marijuana must be okay,'” he said.

In terms of campaign fundraising, the yes campaign has a strong lead, fillings made by supporters and opponents on Thursday show. The Coalition to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol has brought in nearly $1.2 million in total contributions, while the opposition Protect Ohio Workers and Families campaign has raised about a quarter of that (almost $343,000).

Local news reports point out that campaigns for and against Issue 2 have spent only a combined $1 million in the weeks so far leading up to the election—far less than campaigns have spent around Issue 1, the abortion amendment. It’s also a fraction of the nearly $20 million that business interests spent in support of the 2015 legalization measure.

On the yes side, the majority of funds—about $883,000—came from cannabis companies and their executives. Curaleaf, a New York-based multistate operator, gave $200,000, while Pittsburgh company FarmaceuticalRx donated $250,000.

Two contributions totaling $275,000 came from donors marked as “unknown,” which is not permitted under Ohio law. Campaign spokesperson Tom Haren told Marijuana Moment that those funds came from the advocacy group Marijuana Policy Project.

Haren has said the missing information was the result of a “miscommunication” among staff and will be updated.

Funders opposing Issue 2, meanwhile, include the Ohio Manufacturers Association ($101,000), a manufacturing company owner ($100,000), a nursing home advocacy group ($25,000), the D.C.-based American Jobs and Growth Fund ($50,000) as well as state Sen. George Lang (R) ($10,000).

Campaign fundraising data is not scheduled to be updated again prior to the November 7 vote.

Here are the key provisions of the legalization ballot measure on the November 7 ballot:

• The initiative would legalize possession of up to 2.5 ounces of cannabis for adults 21 and older, and they could also have up to 15 grams of marijuana concentrates.
• Individuals could grow up to six plants for personal use, with a maximum 12 plants per household.
• A 10 percent sales tax would be imposed on cannabis sales, with revenue being divided up to support social equity and jobs programs (36 percent), localities that allow adult-use marijuana enterprises to operate in their area (36 percent), education and substance misuse programs (25 percent) and administrative costs of implementing the system (three percent).
• A Division of Cannabis Control would be established under the state Department of Commerce. It would have authority to “license, regulate, investigate, and penalize adult use cannabis operators, adult use testing laboratories, and individuals required to be licensed.”
• The measure gives current medical cannabis businesses a head start in the recreational market. Regulators would need to begin issuing adult-use licenses to qualified applicants who operate existing medical operations within nine months of enactment.
• The division would also be required to issue 40 recreational cultivator licenses and 50 adult-use retailer licenses “with a preference to applications who are participants under the cannabis social equity and jobs program.” And it would authorize regulators to issue additional licenses for the recreational market two years after the first operator is approved.
• Individual municipalities would be able to opt out of allowing new recreational cannabis companies from opening in their area, but they could not block existing medical marijuana firms even if they want to add co-located adult-use operations. Employers could also maintain policies prohibiting workers from consuming cannabis for adult use.
• Further, regulators would be required to “enter into an agreement with the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services” to provide “cannabis addiction services,” which would involve “education and treatment for individuals with addiction issues related to cannabis or other controlled substances including opioids.”
• With respect to social equity, some advocates are concerned about the lack of specific language on automatic expungements to clear the records of people with convictions for offenses that would be made legal under the legislation. That said, the measure does include a provision requiring regulators to “study and fund” criminal justice reform initiatives including expungements.

DeWine is among a number of Republican elected officials who’ve come out strongly against cannabis legalization.

As early voting kicked off this month, the GOP-controlled Senate passed a resolution urging residents to reject measure. Despite the GOP-led resolution, other Republicans officials in Ohio remain divided on the issue.

State Sen. Mark Romachuk (R) has warned that passing Issue 2 would lead to more problems for children, on roadways and at work. “This creates challenges to maintaining safe workplaces, especially in industries that require high alertness and precision like Ohio’s manufacturing businesses,” he said, according to local media reports.

If the measure does pass, Senate President Matt Huffman (R) said earlier this month, it’s “coming right back before this body” for lawmakers to amend. Huffman later clarified that he wouldn’t seek to repeal the legalization plan entirely but would instead “advocate for reviewing it and repealing things or changing things that are in it.”

A number of Ohio lawmakers said last month that they doubted the legislature would seek to repeal a voter-passed legalization law. “There are not a majority of legislators in both chambers that would be pro-repeal,” Rep. Ron Ferguson (R) told The Dispatch. “That’s definitely not the case. You would have no Democrats, and there are not enough Republicans to put them in the top.”

Both sides of the campaign have been stepping up messaging and get-out-the-vote efforts as the election draws nearer. Earlier this month, the yes campaign sent cease and desist letters to TV stations airing what organizers called opposition advertisements “filled with lies.” And the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol put out a pro-Issue 2 election ad of its own.

Attorney General Dave Yost (R), meanwhile, published an analysis of the initiative that he said is meant to provide voters with “vital clarity and transparency” amid a campaign that has seen “inflamed and inaccurate” rhetoric.

DeWine previously said in August that he believes “it would be a real mistake for us to have recreational marijuana,” adding that he visited Colorado following its move to legalize in 2012 and saw what he described as an “unmitigated disaster.”

Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO), who was Colorado’s governor in 2012, said last year that while he was initially concerned that legalization would encourage more use by young people, he came to believe those worries were unfounded.

“I think we’ve proven and demonstrated that there is no increase in experimentation among teenagers. There is no change in frequency of use, no change in driving while high,” Hickenlooper said. “All the things we most worried about didn’t come to pass.”

Unlike the top state Republican lawmakers, U.S. Rep Dave Joyce (R-OH), co-chair of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus, said last month that he’ll be voting in favor of the initiative in November. And he encouraged “all Ohio voters to participate and make their voices heard on this important issue.”

The Ohio Ballot Board approved summary language for the legalization measure in August.

Bipartisan Ohio lawmakers filed a separate bill to legalize marijuana in May, offering the legislature another opportunity to take the lead on the reform. But it has yet to advance, and now the stage is set for voters to make the choice.

If the initiative becomes law, it would bring the total number of states with adult-use legalization to 24.

31 Bipartisan House Lawmakers Push DEA To Consider ‘Merits’ Of Marijuana Legalization As It Completes Scheduling Review

The post Ohio Governor Attacks Marijuana Legalization Ballot Measure, Downplaying Polls Showing Broad Voter Support appeared first on Marijuana Moment.

The upcoming vote in Ohio on recreational cannabis legalization, known as Issue 2, could chip away at Michigan’s established stronghold in the industry if voters approve it.

For years, Michigan has been a go-to destination for Ohioans seeking more affordable and accessible cannabis. With an abundance of dispensaries near the border between the two states, Michigan has enjoyed a steady stream of out-of-state clientele.

The measure, set for a vote on Nov. 7, would allow adults aged 21 and over in Ohio to purchase, possess, and cultivate marijuana for recreational use. The framework of the proposal is similar to Michigan’s, with a 10% tax levied on top of the state sales tax.

“The two biggest opponents of Issue 2 are Michigan dispensary owners and drug dealers,” Tom Haren, spokesperson for the Coalition to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol, recently told the Columbus Dispatch.

Michigan’s cannabis prices have been very appealing to people from Ohio. As more shops opened in Michigan, prices went down, and now there are many discount deals available to attract customers.

But businesses in Ohio believe they can match Michigan’s prices and hope that the new proposal will make things easier for existing patients in the Buckeye State’s medical program, which has suffered from limited access and plummeting prices.

Beyond that, there will be an adjustment period. If the proposal passes next month, it would still take a while for a new program framework to get set up.

And market dynamics in new cannabis states are often unpredictable.

For example, when Missouri launched adult-use sales, it took a bite out of Illinois demand along the border. But the cannibalization wasn’t as dramatic as some may have initially thought.

Though Michigan has a head start, with legal adult-use marijuana approved by voters in 2018, Ohio’s entrance more than anything could pose a predicament for state coffers. The revenue from Michigan’s sales, which partly funds schools and road maintenance, could see a decline if Ohio’s proposal succeeds and keeps its residents’ spending in state.

The post What Ohio’s Push for Recreational Cannabis Might Mean for Michigan appeared first on Green Market Report.

A federal appeals court has ruled against the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in a lawsuit over a Washington State doctor’s petition to reschedule psilocybin. The court said DEA failed to explain its reasoning when it denied the petition, and it ordered the agency to provide a more complete justification.

The court did not, however, send the petition to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for review, as lawyers for the doctor had requested.

The opinion, handed down Friday by panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, does not change the legal status of psilocybin itself. But it keeps alive the rescheduling petition, filed by physician Sunil Aggarwal in February 2022, and requires DEA “to either clarify its pathway for denying Aggarwal’s petition or reevaluate Aggarwal’s petition on an open record.”

Aggarwal has been working since at least 2020 to find a way to legally obtain psilocybin for terminally ill cancer patients undergoing end-of-life care. He initially sought to win permission from regulators under state and federal right-to-try laws, which allow patients with terminal diseases to try investigational medications that haven’t been generally approved.

When DEA rebuffed that request, Aggarwal sued. But in early 2022, a federal appellate panel dismissed the lawsuit, opining that the court lacked jurisdiction because DEA’s rejection of Aggarwal’s administrative request didn’t constitute a reviewable agency action. The doctor then filed a formal rescheduling petition, the denial of which is a reviewable action.

DEA denied Aggarwal’s petition in September of last year. In its denial letter, the agency wrote that a “prerequisite to transferring a substance from schedule I to schedule II under the CSA is for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to conclude that a substance has a currently accepted medical use in the United States.”

“To date, the FDA has not articulated any accepted medical use for psilocybin in treatment,” DEA said. “Accordingly, the CSA requires that psilocybin remain in schedule I.”

In its ruling, the Ninth Circuit panel said the denial “failed to provide sufficient analysis” and “failed to clearly indicate that it has considered the potential problem identified in the petition.”

Specifically, the opinion says, “DEA’s denial letter failed to define ‘currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions,’ the standard applicable to transferring a drug from schedule I to schedule II.”

While Department of Justice lawyers for DEA addressed some of those matters during the course of litigating the current suit, the panel said that after-the-fact explanation didn’t cut it.

“Although the DEA addresses some of these issues on appeal, ‘[p]ost hoc explanations of agency action by appellate counsel cannot substitute for the agency’s own articulation of the basis for its decision,'” wrote the three-judge panel.

The court issued its ruling as an unpublished opinion, meaning it does not create legal precedent beyond the current case.

Lawyers for Aggarwal had wanted the judges to send the rescheduling petition to the Food and Drug Administration, an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services, which would be in a better position to evaluate the accepted medical use of psilocybin. But Friday’s ruling instead sent the petition back to DEA.

“Given the inadequacy of the DEA’s denial letter,” the court wrote in a footnote, “we do not address Aggarwal’s statement that 21 U.S.C. § 811(b) requires the DEA to refer Aggarwal’s petition to the Department of Health and Human Services.”

Reached by phone Friday, attorney Matthew Zorn, who argued the case before the three judges last week, said the legal team is assessing its options. He declined to comment further.

Kathryn Tucker, another attorney who has worked on the case, noted in a LinkedIn post the speed with which the court issued its decision.

“Oral argument was held on 10/20 and the decision issued today, one week later,” she said. “I have never seen such a speedy issuance of opinion from this court, perhaps reflective of the impatience the court has with DEA’s slow walking both of this petition to reschedule and request for a Right to Try waiver.”

Even as Aggarwal’s effort has made its way through the courts, a number of studies have strengthened the case for psilocybin’s legitimate medical use. Last month, for example, researchers at Johns Hopkins and Ohio State universities published a report that linked psilocybin use with “persisting reductions” in depression, anxiety and alcohol misuse, as well as increases in emotional regulation, spiritual wellbeing and extraversion.

Those results were “highly consistent with a growing body of clinical trial, behavioral pharmacology, and epidemiological data on psilocybin,” authors of the study said. “Overall, these data provide an important window into the current resurgence of public interest in classic psychedelics and the outcomes of contemporaneous increases in naturalistic psilocybin use.”

In August, a separate study from the American Medical Association (AMA) found that people with major depression experienced “clinically significant sustained reduction” in their symptoms after just one dose of psilocybin.

And a survey by Canadian researchers published earlier this month said psilocybin use can help ease psychological distress in people who had adverse experiences as children. Researchers said psilocybin appeared to offer “particularly strong benefits to those with more severe childhood adversity.”

A first-of-its-kind analysis released in June offered novel insights into the mechanisms through which psychedelic-assisted therapy appears to help people struggling with alcoholism.

At the federal level, the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) recently started soliciting proposals for a series of research initiatives meant to explore how psychedelics could be used to treat drug addiction, with plans to provide $1.5 million in funding to support relevant studies.

The findings aren’t limited to psilocybin. For example, a peer-reviewed study published in the journal Nature recently found that treatment with MDMA reduced symptoms in patients with moderate to severe PTSD—results that position the substance for approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as soon as next year.

Read the full Ninth Circuit opinion in Aggarwal v. DEA (22-1718) below:

Marijuana Companies Sue Attorney General To Block Enforcement Of ‘Unconstitutional’ Federal Prohibition

The post Federal Appeals Court Rules Against DEA In Psilocybin Rescheduling Lawsuit Brought By Doctor Who Wants To Give Psychedelic To Cancer Patients appeared first on Marijuana Moment.