All Activity

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) will soon be launching a pilot program that would cover the costs of CBD products for eligible patients under certain federal health insurance plans. But newly reported details about the effort signal that it policy could conflict with a separate law redefining hemp in a way that severely restricts allowable THC content. CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz has previously described the CBD coverage plan that’s being implemented in response to an executive order President Donald Trump signed in December that also directs the finalization of a federal marijuana rescheduling rule, saying the CBD components of the plan could be rolled out as early as April. But as the agency has prepared to provide cannabidiol coverage under the pilot program, it has set an initial limit of 3 milligrams of total THC (including delta-8, delta-9 and delta-10 THC, for example) per serving—as Cannabis Wire first reported—which is more than seven times the THC limit for hemp-derived cannabinoid products as defined under a spending bill Trump signed last year. The cannabis section of that agriculture-focused spending legislation restricts total THC content to .4 milligrams per container. And that law, which industry stakeholders say will effectively eliminate the consumable cannabinoid market, takes effect in November. A CMS spokesperson told Cannabis Wire that agency “will adjust its definition in accordance with the law,” without clarifying how it arrived at the 3 milligram total THC limit in the first place. Bipartisan lawmakers and hemp industry advocates have pushed to delay the enactment of the new hemp THC restrictions signed by Trump, but those efforts have not gained traction. An amendment on the issue was not adopted at a recent House committee markup of a new Farm Bill. Marijuana Moment reached out to CMS further inquiring about the apparent THC policy conflict, but a representative was not immediately available. The planned pilot program “expressly excludes inhalable products,” the spokesperson also said. And the “orally administered” CBD products that are made available would be subject to “state and local law,” though that raises other questions given the complex patchwork of state-level hemp and cannabinoid policies. In any case, the newly reported details about the yet-unpublished rules for the pilot program comes weeks after an executive at a hemp company that’s been collaborating with CMS said that the agency had already finalized its plans for federal health insurance coverage of cannabidiol. “This pilot will help the [Food and Drug Administration, or FDA] move from uncertainty into a practical framework with clear dosing, risk mitigation and clear manufacturing label expectations that end up rewarding the responsible companies and, in the end, protect and serve the consumer,” Jared Stanley, co-founder of the cannabis company Charlotte’s Web, said. “As far as the population, it was important to note that it was stated in the briefing that this is starting in a pilot, but expecting to expand beyond just the pilot,” he said. “So that’s multiple indications that we expect to see. And we’re very excited. It has amazing potential.” Relatedly, the CMS spokesperson told Cannabis Wire that while it couldn’t provide specific numbers around patients expected to participate in the pilot program, those details will come out when they’re available, and the agency would generally provide updates on the rollout “in the coming weeks.” Asked about the status of the CBD rulemaking last month, CMS directed Marijuana Moment to a webpage with an FAQ that describes the integration of hemp into a Beneficiary Engagement Incentive (BEI) program under the agency’s Long-term Enhanced ACO Design (LEAD) Model. “The Substance Access BEI gives model participants the option of consulting with their patients about the possible use of eligible hemp products,” the CMS page says. “The implementation of this BEI and any related dispensing would be funded entirely at the participant’s expense; CMS would not cover the cost of such products. Further, CMS will have strict program integrity safeguards to ensure that these incentives do not result in program or patient abuse.” “The Substance Access BEI is only available to participants in states where the eligible hemp products are considered legal,” it says. While the broader rules on the CBD Medicare pilot program haven’t been publicized yet, CMS’s website briefly details how it’s navigating hemp-related issues as part of regulatory models under LEAD, the Accountable Care Organization (ACO) and the Enhancing Oncology Model (EOM). Oz, the CMS administrator, explained in December that the policy change will “allow millions of Americans on Medicare to become eligible to receive CBD as early as April of next year—and at no charge if their doctors recommend them.” He added that Medicare Advantage insurers CMS has contacted are “also agreeing to consider CBD to be used for the 34 million Americans that they cover.” One outstanding question concerns coverage eligibility. As described by the administrator in December, it would affect those 65 and older who qualify for Medicare, but the specific qualifying conditions weren’t detailed. There were repeated mentions of chronic pain, specifically related to cancer, but it’s possible the CBD eligibility criteria includes additional conditions. At the signing ceremony, Oz also gave kudos to Howard Kessler, founder of The Commonwealth Project, which produced a video about the benefits of cannabidiol for seniors that Trump shared on Truth Social last year and who apparently has pressed the president to enact reform to expand cannabis access. While CMS implemented an earlier final rule last April specifically stipulating that marijuana, as well as CBD that can be derived from federally legal hemp, are ineligible for coverage under its Medicare Advantage program and other services, the agency is now revising that policy. CMS had already announced certain changes as part of a rulemaking process that was unveiled late last year, affecting “marketing and communications, drug coverage, enrollment processes, special needs plans, and other programmatic areas” for insurance programs it oversees. One of those changes dealt with cannabidiol coverage. The rule as proposed would amend regulations, which currently state that any “cannabis products” cannot be covered. The policy would prevent coverage for only “cannabis products that are illegal under applicable state or federal law, including the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.” Since hemp and its derivatives like CBD are federally legal, the change suggests patients in states where such products are legal could make valid insurance claims to pay for the alternative treatment option, as long as the product is also federally legal. Meanwhile, following the White House announcement in December, Oz spoke with NewsNation about the policy change, responding to a question about how the broader marijuana rescheduling decision squares with the Trump administration’s aggressive efforts to stymie the flow of other illicit drugs, particularly fentanyl. “We think they fit hand in hand,” he said. “This is really about researching—specifically CBD, which is hemp-derived endocannabinoids [sic]—are actually worthy of Americans using them,” he said. “It’s hard to do some of this work, especially with medical marijuana. And this is not about legalization of marijuana.” “There is no legalization language at all,” he added. “It’s about rescheduling this class of product so that it can be researched more readily.” The idea that marijuana has no medical value, as its currently defined as a Schedule I drug, is “just patently wrong for marijuana,” he said, noting that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved certain cannabis-based drugs for conditions such as epilepsy “that work quite nicely.” “That belief that it should be Schedule I is just an incorrect place to put it,” he said. “Schedule III seemed to make sense to the president. He argued that it allows us to do the research more readily.” “We’re finding a way to allow Medicare beneficiaries to get access to some of these products. And so, within Medicare, we have the ability, for the first time ever—and we delivered on this promise to the president today—to allow doctors to recommend hemp-derived CBD for patients who have cancer, for example, and have a lot of pain from that.” The administrator said surveys show a majority of seniors who take CBD for pain management find it beneficial, and the White House wants to “make it easier for patients to access this” and allow them to access the cannabinoid at “no charge” through the federal health insurance program. Meanwhile, Oz took a different tone last month when he warned that “there are going to be consequences” as more Americans choose marijuana over alcohol—including problems caused by “high-dose hemp and CBD.” In the background, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and FDA recently submitted proposed regulations concerning CBD enforcement and compliance with the White House Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). There’s been speculation that the rule could be related to the CMS pilot program, but that hasn’t been confirmed. And it’s also possible the proposal is linked to an unrelated FDA mandate from Congress to produce a list of known cannabinoids ahead of the federal hemp redefinition. Photo courtesy of Kimzy Nanney. The post Federal CBD Health Insurance Plan Will Reportedly Allow THC Amount Far Exceeding Hemp Limit Signed By Trump appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

An Iowa Senate panel has approved a House-passed bill to create a state-regulated therapeutic psilocybin program for patients with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The Senate Health and Human Services Committee advance the legislation from Rep. John Wills (R) in a voice vote on Thursday. The panel adopted an amendment from Sen. Dennis Guth (R) to narrow the scope of the bill to allow only people with PTSD to access the psychedelic therapy instead of the broader version that was passed by the House last year. The revised measure also eliminates provisions that would have created a new Psilocybin Production Establishment Licensing Board under the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to oversee the industry. Instead, the current Medical Cannabidiol Advisory Board would take on the responsibility of regulating the psychedelic and be renamed to the Medical Controlled Substance Advisory and Licensing Board. “I have some friends, some people I know, that I think would really benefit from this,” Guth said. “But we have to be careful how we proceed with this.” Sen. Kara Warme (R), the chair of the panel, agreed, saying that the “bill is not done” and still needs some more work before it should be enacted into law. “I think we have an interesting challenge as lawmakers to look at a really promising potential solution to help Iowans with PTSD, especially our veterans, who are facing this—but also there is a lot of unknowns that remain,” she said. “It’s a new potential solution, and so I appreciate the work that’s going in to make sure that we do this in the right way that’s cost effective for tax taxpayers, and also thinks through the risks and rewards of something new and not heavily studied like this.” If enacted into law, HF 978 would allow patients with PTSD who receive recommendations from medical professionals to legally access psilocybin produced in-state by licensed entities. Administration sessions for the psychedelic would be supervised by registered facilitators who would need to complete state-specified psilocybin education. Administration sessions themselves would need to take place at registered clinical locations and would need to be video recorded. Those records would need to be available for inspection by state officials upon request. Local governments could not outright ban psilocybin facilities, nor could they deny them appropriate licenses based merely on the fact that the psychedelic is federally illegal. Notably, a licensed psilocybin production facility could be co-located with one of the state’s few licensed medical cannabis producers—known in Iowa as medical cannabidiol producers—and the bill says regulators may grant psilocybin licensing preferences to those existing cannabis producers. Facilities couldn’t be located within 1,000 feet of a community location or 500 feet of a residential area. Only people 21 and older and who do not have a misdemeanor for drug distribution or any felony on their record could work at psilocybin producers, and licensees themselves would face background checks. Up to four independent testing labs could be licensed under the bill, and the state could also establish its own lab. License applications would be accepted beginning July 1, 2026. The measure also directs HHS to conduct a study on “the use of psychedelic compounds other than psilocybin in the treatment of medical conditions.” — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — The bill as originally introduced would have limited the psilocybin therapy program only to patients with PTSD, with a ceiling of 5,000 participants at any one time, but those provisions were removed with a House floor amendment last year. Now, however, the Senate panel has added back in the limitation to PTSD patients only. Last year, Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) vetoed separate legislation that would have allowed doctors in the state to immediately prescribe a synthetic form of psilocybin in the event of federal approval of the psychedelic substance by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), arguing that it “surrenders state authority to make an informed determination about classification to federal officials.” “This decision is not a dismissal of the emerging science or the sincere advocacy behind this legislation,” the governor said at the time. “Rather, it is a call for a more deliberate and Iowa-centric approach.” Image courtesy of CostaPPR. The post Iowa Senators Approve Psilocybin Therapy Bill For PTSD Patients appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Marijuana businesses would be able to list on national stock exchanges such as Nasdaq and the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) under a bipartisan congressional bill filed on Wednesday that would also more broadly shield companies from being punished for providing financial, accounting, insurance, advertising or other services to the cannabis industry. Reps. Guy Reschenthaler (R-PA) and Troy Carter (D-LA) are again sponsoring the Capital Lending and Investment for Marijuana Businesses (CLIMB) Act—a piece of incremental cannabis reform that would resolve an issue that’s long frustrated stakeholders and comes as a federal marijuana rescheduling proposal remains pending. The legislation is substantively the same as earlier versions of the CLIMB Act filed in the 117th Congress, with certain technical formatting changes, according to a discussion draft obtained by Marijuana Moment. The final bill text has not yet been posted. A central function of the bill is to free up cannabis industry access to financial lending and investment opportunities, in part by providing protections for private financial institutions and government agencies that provide such services to traditional markets. Another notable section would provide safe harbor for national securities exchanges and market participants that “have listed, list, or intend to list,” “permit the trading of” or “facilitate the offering, listing, or trading” of such cannabis-related securities. In other words, cannabis businesses would be permitted to list on major stock exchanges, including Nasdaq and NYSE. That would represent a boon for the industry, legitimizing their presence on Wall Street even as marijuana remains federally illegal. Overall, the legislation stipulates that federal agencies “may not take any adverse action against a person solely because the person provides business assistance to a cannabis-related legitimate business or service provider.” The full list of activities that people and businesses could offer to the cannabis industry without being federally penalized includes: “providing a financial product or service; selling insurance or surety products; providing debt or equity capital or receiving dividends, interest, or distributions of that capital; providing accounting services; the sale, lease, or rental of real estate; providing equipment, parts, substances, or testing services needed to produce cannabis in compliance with the laws and regulations in the applicable State; providing advertising or marketing services; providing management consulting services; providing legal services or compliance services; providing information technology, software, or communications services; provision of packaging, transportation, or other logistics services; and underwriting, dealing, placement or public distribution of securities issued by a cannabis-related legitimate business, including the listing of any such securities on any exchange or trading venue, or any provision of services related to the foregoing.” This legislation takes a targeted approach to cannabis reform in the financial and regulatory sector, whereas another bipartisan bill that advocates and stakeholders have pushed for—the Secure and Fair Enforcement Regulation (SAFER) Banking Act—would more broadly safeguard financial institutions that work with marijuana businesses from being penalized by federal regulators. The SAFER Banking Act has not yet been refiled in the current 119th Congress, however. Stakeholders are also awaiting administrative action on a proposal to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), which President Donald Trump in December directed the attorney general to quickly finalize. That hasn’t happened yet, but if it does, one effect would be allowing state-licensed cannabis businesses to take federal tax deductions under Internal Revenue Service (IRS) code 280E. The CLIMB Act, meanwhile, did not advance in its prior form after being filed in 2022. It remains to be seen whether there will be sufficient bipartisan interest in moving it this session. Some advocates have previously voiced concerns about the idea of advancing reform that heavily favors industry players while marijuana remains federally prohibited and people are still experiencing the collateral consequences of criminalization that the bipartisan bill doesn’t attempt to directly address. Meanwhile, another bipartisan bill that was recently filed in the House by Reps. Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-FL) and Ryan Mackenzie (R-PA) would repeal a decades-old federal statute that’s led to the denial of housing for millions of people with prior drug convictions. Read the text of the CLIMB Act below: The post Marijuana Businesses Could List On US Stock Exchanges Like Nasdaq And NYSE Under New Bipartisan Congressional Bill appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Alcohol and tobacco cause far more harms to people who consume them, and to society overall, than marijuana does, according to a new government-funded study. A panel of 20 experts with professional experience with substance use issues from across Canada were asked to evaluate 16 different drugs on 10 dimensions of harm to consumers, as well as six dimensions of harm to others, scoring each on a scale of 0 to 100. “Alcohol causes the most harm overall, with a cumulative weighted score of 79,” the study, published in the Journal of Psychopharmacology, found. “It was followed by tobacco (45), nonprescription opioids (33), cocaine (19), methamphetamine (19), and cannabis (15).” The analysis, which was supported with Canadian Institutes for Health Research grant funds, concluded that marijuana’s biggest harm comes not from its effect on consumers but instead is related to the illegal market. “Cannabis’s highest weighted score was for organized criminal activity,” the paper, authored by a large team of academics affiliated with various research institutions throughout Canada, the United Kingdom and New Zealand, says. “Though more than 70 percent of Canadians who purchase cannabis now do so through legal sources, organized criminal groups are heavily involved in the remaining illegal cannabis market, from production to distribution.” Marijuana—which was legalized nationally in Canada in 2018 but remains federally prohibited in the U.S.—is not completely without harms to consumers, however, with the study finding that it “also scored relatively high for mental harms to users (dependence, withdrawal, short- and long-term impairment of mental functioning), ranking third in that combined category.” When it comes to alcohol, which is federally legal in the U.S., it “ranked first in 9 of the 16 harm categories: drug-related damage to physical health, withdrawal, short-term impairment of mental functioning, long-term impairment of mental functioning, loss of tangibles, loss of relationships, injury, family and social adversity, and economic cost,” the study found. “This analysis of drug harms in Canada found that alcohol causes the most harm overall… Alcohol was followed by tobacco, nonprescription opioids (like fentanyl), cocaine, methamphetamine, and cannabis.” Tobacco “ranked first in 4 of the 16 harm categories: drug-related mortality, drug-specific damage to physical health, dependence, and environmental damage,” the researchers wrote. The paper concludes by urging governments to “consider the harm—both individual and societal—caused by drugs and by the laws and regulations that govern them” when developing drug policies. The findings about relative harms of different substances may help explain why alcohol consumption—and particularly tobacco use—have been gradually declining over recent years, and why multiple surveys and studies have indicated that more adults are opting for marijuana. For example, recent polling shows that younger Americans are increasingly using cannabis-infused beverages as a substitute for alcohol—with one in three millennials and Gen Z workers choosing THC drinks over booze for after-work activities like happy hours. Another survey released last October found that a majority of Americans believe marijuana represents a “healthier option” than alcohol. And most also expect cannabis to be legal in all 50 states within the next five years. Smoking marijuana is also associated with “significantly” reduced rates of alcohol consumption, according to a recent federally funded study that involved adults smoking joints in a makeshift bar. A study published in 2024 that looked at adults who drink cannabis-infused beverages found more evidence of a “substitution effect,” with a significant majority of participants reporting reduced alcohol use after incorporating cannabinoid drinks into their routines. In September, an international study identified a a “strong negative association” between tobacco use and legal medical marijuana sales, indicating a “strong potential substitution effect” where people choose to use cannabis where it is allowed instead of smoking cigarettes. Meanwhile, as the Trump administration considers moving marijuana out of Schedule I, the most restrictive category under U.S. federal law, another recent study concluded that cannabis isn’t as dangerous as its current classification would suggest. The post Alcohol And Tobacco Are More Damaging To Users And Society Than Marijuana Is, Government-Funded Study Concludes appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

The demand for Delhi Russian Escorts is growing because of their reputed professionalism and charm. I noticed that communication is always polite and transparent, which builds trust quickly. Services are well-structured and focus on customer comfort. It’s a good choice for those who appreciate a premium and respectful environment while spending quality time with someone who understands refined companionship.

Hire the WhatsApp numbers of newly married and sexy Bhabhis and enjoy sensual pleasure and fun. Bhabhi escorts are a renowned and trusted service, as they are highly experienced and mature females who can easily understand a man's desires and feelings. To experience sensual pleasure with newly married call girls in Jaipur, book our escort service and turn your dreams into reality. This is a premium destination where our agency offers you all kinds of pleasure and satisfaction. Bhabhi escorts know how to give their clients 100% satisfaction. So why wait to meet these young and sexy Bhabhi call girls? You can also find the WhatsApp numbers of real Bhabhi escorts on our site. jaipur call girls || call girls in Jaipur || Jaipur escorts || jaipur escort service || call girls services in Jaipur || Jaipur call girls service || independent call girls in Jaipur || Russian escorts in Jaipur || African Escorts in Jaipur || independent call girl jaipur || vip escort in jaipur || escort service in jaipur || hotel escorts service in jaipur || escorts service in hotel jaipur || low rate call girls in jaipur || Independent Escorts Jaipur || jaipur independent escorts

Virginia lawmakers passed several marijuana-related bills in the legislative session that ended last weekend, and now Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D) is set to decide what to do with them. Those include measures to legalize recreational cannabis sales, provide resentencing relief for people with past convictions, protect the parental rights of consumers, allow patients to access medical marijuana in hospitals, change delivery and labeling rules and provide for enforcement against illegal sales of cannabis products. The governor has until April 13 to sign or veto each proposal, or return it to lawmakers with proposed amendments for them to consider. She can also take no action and allow a bill to be enacted without her signature. During last year’s campaign for governor, Spanberger made clear that she supports legalizing adult-use marijuana sales, though it’s not clear if she will request any changes to the bill lawmakers passed on that topic, and she also not weighed in specifically on issues like cannabis consumers’ parental rights or patients’ medical access in hospitals. Here’s an overview of the marijuana bills the governor will decide on: Legalize Recreational Marijuana Sales Personal marijuana possession and home cultivation has been legal in Virginia since 2021, but former Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) twice vetoed bills to provide consumers with a way to legally purchase regulated adult-use cannabis. Under the marijuana sales bills set for Spanberger’s action, SB 542 from Sen. Lashrecse Aird (D) and HB 642 from Del. Paul Krizek (D), the recreational market could launch on January 1, 2027. The current possession limit for cannabis would also increase. Here are the other key details: Adults would be able to purchase up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana in a single transaction, or up to an equivalent amount of other cannabis products as determined by regulators. Legal sales could begin on January 1, 2027. There would be an excise tax of 6 percent on cannabis sales as well as a 5.3 percent retail sales and use tax, and municipalities could set an additional local tax of up to 3.5 percent. The Virginia Cannabis Control Authority would oversee licensing and regulation of the new industry, and would also take on oversight of hemp, which is currently under the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Revenue would be distributed to the Cannabis Equity Reinvestment Fund (30 percent), early childhood education (40 percent), the Department of Behavioral & Developmental Health Services (25 percent) and public health initiatives (5 percent). Local governments could not opt out of allowing marijuana businesses to operate in their area. Delivery services would be allowed. Serving sizes would be capped at 10 milligrams THC, with no more than 100 mg THC per package. Existing medical cannabis operators could enter the adult-use market if they pay a licensing conversion fee that is set at $10 million. Cannabis businesses would have to establish labor peace agreements with workers. A legislative commission would be directed to study adding on-site consumption licenses and microbusiness cannabis event permits that would allow licensees to conduct sales at venues like farmers markets or pop-up locations. It would also investigate the possibility of the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Authority becoming involved in marijuana regulations and enforcement. Provide Resentencing Relief For Prior Cannabis Convictions Additional legislation that Spanberger will decide on would allow people who have certain marijuana convictions on their records to receive resentencing relief. SB 62 from Senate President Pro Tem Louise Lucas (D) and HB 26 from Rozia Henson, Jr. (D) would create a process by which people who are incarcerated or on community supervision for certain felony offenses involving the possession, manufacture, selling or distribution of marijuana could receive an automatic hearing to consider modification of their sentences. The relief would apply to people whose convictions or adjudications are for conduct that occurred prior to July 1, 2021, when a state law legalizing personal possession and home cultivation of marijuana went into effect. Similar legislation was approved by lawmakers last session but it was vetoed by Youngkin, the former governor. Protect Marijuana Consumers’ Parental Rights Lawmakers also sent the governor a bill to protect the rights of parents who use marijuana in compliance with state law. HB 942 from De; Nadarius E. Clark (D) states that a “person’s legal possession or consumption of substances…alone shall not serve as a basis to restrict custody or visitation unless other facts establish that such possession or consumption is not in the best interest of the child.” The bill also specifies that a parent or legal guardian can’t be construed to have failed a drug test over legal substances such as cannabis. The bill is consistent with a measure Clark sponsored last session that advanced through the legislature, only to be vetoed by Youngkin. Allow Patients To Use Medical Cannabis In Hospitals Spanberger will additionally decide on a bill to let patients use medical marijuana in hospitals. SB 332 from Sen. Barbara Favola (D) and HB 75 from Del. Karen Keys-Gamarra (D) would build upon existing state law protecting health professionals at hospices, nursing homes and assisted living facilities that aid terminally ill patients in utilizing medical cannabis treatment from punishment by adding hospitals to the statute. It would also create a new working group under the Department of Health to “discuss the implementation process for providing cannabis products to patients within medical care facilities.” “The work group shall assess any available federal guidance or proposed regulations on the use of cannabis products or changes to the schedule for cannabis products under the federal Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.) as well as interaction with applicable state laws,” the bill says. Its members would include representatives of the Virginia Hospital & Health Care Association and the Virginia Health Care Association, as well as health care providers and palliative, hospice, and hospital volunteers familiar with issues associated with providing care to individuals experiencing chronic illness. The legislation directs the working group to submit a report to key legislative committees including “written guidelines for the use of medical cannabis within medical care facilities and the safe operations of medical care facilities” by November 1. Clarify Medical Marijuana Delivery And Labeling Rules Lawmakers also sent the governor a bill to allow deliveries of medical marijuana directly to patients at locations other than their own private residences and to update product labeling requirements so packaging would more clearly indicate THC and CBD levels. HB 391 from from Del. Alex Askew (D) would allow medical cannabis companies to make deliveries to patients and caregivers at any residence—including a temporary residences—or at business. It would, however, restrict deliveries to military bases, child day centers, schools, correctional facilities and the State Capitol, as well as public gathering such as sporting events, festivals, fairs, races, concerts and public transit terminals. The legislation would also change rules for how THC and CBD content much be detailed on medical cannabis product labels, and it would clarify that the 12-month product stability testing period begins on the date it is tested, rather than the date of product registration approval. Address Illegal Sales Of Cannabis Products Another bill heading to the governor, SB 543 from Sen. Lashrecse Aird (D), aims to deter the sale and production of marijuana by unlicensed businesses—including by requiring regulators to create a decal that would need to be prominently displayed by retailers that are authorized to market marijuana products. Failure to display the decal—or putting a falsified decal on a storefront—would carry $10,000 penalties per day of the violation. Regulators would also be required to post a notice and cease-and-desist order at the store’s entryway if they’re found to be involved in illicit marijuana sales, and removing those materials would be punishable by additional civil fines. The bill would also require law enforcement officers to participate in a training course on the state’s marijuana law. State officials would separately be tasked with convening a work group to study the market, identifying areas for policy improvement to limit unlicensed sales and presenting its recommendations to lawmakers. What’s Next? If Spanberger proposes any amendments to—or unexpectedly vetoes—any of the bills prior to her April 13 deadline, lawmakers will have the opportunity to address those actions when they reconvene on April 22. For now, advocates are celebrating the advancement of cannabis reform this year. “Virginia already has some of the most progressive cannabis policies in the South and Mid-Atlantic. But, elections have consequences,” JM Pedini, development director for the advocacy group NORML and executive director for Virginia NORML, told Marijuana Moment. “While our momentum was stalled by the Youngkin administration, Governor Spanberger taking office has cleared the path for continued progress. “From adult-use retail sales and improved medical access, to parental rights protections and resentencing for marijuana convictions, Virginians will see many long overdue reforms finally become law with the adoption of this slate of bills,” Pedini said. The post Virginia Governor Set To Decide On Marijuana Bills To Legalize Sales, Address Past Convictions, Protect Consumers’ Rights And More appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Study: High marijuana taxes don’t deter use; OH cannabis/hemp referendum fails; CO marijuana tax increase; VA legalization bill head start for big biz Subscribe to receive Marijuana Moment’s newsletter in your inbox every weekday morning. It’s the best way to make sure you know which cannabis stories are shaping the day. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: Your support makes Marijuana Moment possible… Before you dig into today’s cannabis news, I wanted you to know you can keep this resource free and published daily by subscribing to Marijuana Moment on Patreon. We’re a small independent publication diving deep into the cannabis world and rely on readers like you to keep going. Join us at https://www.patreon.com/marijuanamoment / TOP THINGS TO KNOW The Drug Enforcement Administration admitted in a new online quiz that teen marijuana use has declined in recent decades as more states have enacted legaliztion—contrary to prohibitionist fears. The Colorado House Health and Human Services Committee rejected a bill to put a measure on the November ballot asking voters to increase marijuana and alcohol taxes to support mental health treatment. A new study found that “there is no apparent correlation between marijuana tax rate and marijuana usage rate”—contrary to the New York Times editorial board’s push to increase cannabis taxes to deter use. “The highest taxed state, Washington (43.5%), reported the 6th highest usage rate of 21.99% within the dataset. On the other hand, New Jersey, which had the lowest tax rate (6.625%) also reported the lowest usage rate among the group (14.42%) and ranked in the bottom half nationally. “ Max Jackson of Cannabis Wise Guys argues in a new Marijuana Moment op-ed that Virginia’s cannabis sales legalization bill as passed by lawmakers will give existing companies an unfair head start that leaves new independent businesses behind. An Ohio cannabis campaign failed to collect enough signatures for a referendum to block new marijuana and hemp restrictions from taking effect. Virginia lawmakers who sponsored legislation to legalize recreational marijuana sales that passed this session spoke about its provisions and the long road to crafting and negotiating the final version now on its way to Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s (D) desk. / FEDERAL Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) claimed that Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche is blocking the Drug Enforcement Administration from releasing an unredacted document from the Jeffrey Epstein files about an investigation involving drug trafficking and money laundering. Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) reportedly angered other members of the Republican Study Committee by bringing a hemp lobbyist to a meeting of the group and yielding time to him to speak. / STATES The Iowa House of Representatives passed a bill to ban kratom. New Jersey’s Senate president filed a bill to alter the phased-in ban on intoxicating hemp products. A New Mexico senator discussed the approval of budget legislation providing funding for psilocybin treatment access. Delaware’s top marijuana regulator spoke to members of the Milford City Council as they reconsider a ban on recreational cannabis sales. New York cannabis regulators began accepting applications for a second round of Community Reinvestment Program grants. The Michigan Cannabis Regulatory Agency will hold a public meeting on Thursday. Oregon regulators will consider a marijuana business violation stipulated settlement agreement on Thursday. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — / INTERNATIONAL A Canadian court overturned officials’ rejection of a security clearance for a cannabis business worker based on a social media connection. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A review concluded that “the incidence of substance abuse (especially alcohol and cannabis) among musicians is higher than that of the general population.” A study pointed to “psilocybin as a promising treatment alternative for severe, treatment-resistant [obsessive compulsive disorder] when administered in a supportive clinical context.” / ADVOCACY, OPINION & ANALYSIS The New York Medical Cannabis Industry Association, Empire Cannabis Manufacturers Alliance, New York Cannabis Retail Association, Association of New York Cannabis Processors and Cannabis Association of New York sent a letter urging Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) to take steps to stabilize the marijuana industry. / BUSINESS High Tide Inc. reported quarterly revenue of C$178.3 million and a net loss of C$0.4 million. Trulieve Cannabis Corp.’s chairman and CEO established an automatic securities disposition plan. Klutch Cannabis is being sued by Klutch Sports Group for alleged trademark infringement. The Cannabist Company Holdings Inc. announced that noteholders of its senior secured notes and senior secured convertible notes agreed to a further extension and to forbear from exercising any of their rights and remedies. Make sure to subscribe to get Marijuana Moment’s daily dispatch in your inbox. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: Photo courtesy of Chris Wallis/Side Pocket Images. The post DEA admits legal cannabis isn’t increasing youth use (Newsletter: March 19, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Colorado lawmakers have rejected a bill that would put a measure on the state’s November ballot asking voters to increase marijuana and alcohol taxes to support mental health treatment. In line with a recommendation from the bicameral Capital Development Committee (CDC) last week, members of the House Health and Human Services Committee on Wednesday defeated the legislation from Rep. Bob Marshall (D) and Sen. Judy Amabile (D) in a 7-6 vote. “We have made our penal system the default mental health system for people that are over 18 years old. It has been a travesty,” Marshall said on Wednesday before the panel’s vote to reject his bill. “It’s been a known travesty for years and years and years, and yet nothing happens to fix the issue. “At the end of the day, this is something that needs to be done,” the sponsor said of the HB 1301, which aims to hike taxes on the substances and put the additional revenue toward the creation of a mental health fund overseen by the state Department of Human Services (DHS). “And if we don’t do it now, the problem is going to get worse and worse and worse.” If the bill had advanced through legislature, voters across the state would have then decided on increasing the state retail marijuana sales and excise taxes by 0.42 percentage points each at the ballot this coming November. Alcohol taxes by volume would have also increased for the first time in more than 30 years, by varying levels depending on the product type. “The bill requires the treasurer to transfer an amount equal to the tax revenue raised as a result of the bill to the hospital support account that is created in the capital construction fund,” a summary of the measure said. DHS would be able to expend the funds in “priority order,” starting with the creation of a mental health institute in Aurora, then going toward operational costs for the institute and “long-term civil commitment facilities” in Mesa County. Under amendments adopted in committee on Wednesday, the proposed tax hike for alcohol would have been slightly reduced, but not for cannabis. The bill title was also revised in response to input from the state attorney general, and a fiscal note was added to flag programmatic costs amounting to $14,000 that the sponsor said would come out of the general fund. During last week’s CDC meeting, Rep. Tammy Story (D), vice chair of the panel, asked House bill sponsor Marshall how he squares the proposal to hike marijuana taxes with the fact that the state has seen cannabis sales and resulting revenue slump over recent years. Marshall said he appreciated the concerns—but he didn’t intend to remove cannabis from the measure. “In hindsight, maybe a sales tax might have been better,” Marshall conceded on Wednesday. “But it’s in the title now—‘tax on harmful substances’—and we put marijuana in there at the suggestion of a couple of the sheriffs, just to share the pain, so to speak.” Marijuana industry representatives have criticized the bill’s marijuana tax provisions, in part by pointing out that the state already imposes significant taxes on cannabis sales compared to other states and commodities. Making it more expensive for consumers to purchase marijuana for licensed retailers could also undermine efforts to eliminate the illicit market, drawing buyers back to unlicensed sources where no tax dollars would be generated for the state. While the state has seen over $1 billion in marijuana sales in 2025—a milestone the governor touted in December—tax revenue from cannabis sales has gradually decreased over the past five years as more states have enacted legalization and as intoxicating hemp products have grown in popularity. Nonetheless, cannabis is still bringing in more tax dollars compared to alcohol or cigarettes. Adult-use marijuana is currently taxed at three levels in Colorado: A 15 percent excise tax, 15 percent special sales tax and 2.9 percent state general sales tax. As one of the first states to legalize marijuana for recreational use, Colorado saw revenue from those sales grow “consistently for the first eight years of legalization, peaking at $424.4 million FY 2020-21,” a report from the state that was released last month says. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — Meanwhile, the Colorado House of Representatives last week sent a bill to the governor that would allow terminally ill patients to use medical marijuana in healthcare facilities such as hospitals. Advocates have been critical about changes made throughout the legislative process—arguing, for example, that making it so hospitals would have the option—rather than a mandate—to allow medical cannabis use in their facilities fundamentally undermines the intent of the reform. Gov. Jared Polis (D) also said last month that his state should not have joined a lawsuit supporting the federal ban on gun ownership by people who use marijuana that recently went before the U.S. Supreme Court—and he personally opposes the state attorney general’s “legal position on this.” Photo courtesy of Brian Shamblen. The post Colorado Lawmakers Reject Bill That Would Have Put Marijuana And Alcohol Tax Hike On Ballot To Fund Mental Health Treatment appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“Marijuana will be re-criminalized in Ohio, businesses will close, workers will lose their jobs, and consumers will be denied their right to products they should be able to purchase.” By Megan Henry, Ohio Capital Journal Opponents of Ohio Republican lawmakers’ attempt to ban intoxicating hemp products and change the state’s voter-passed recreational marijuana law failed to collect enough signatures to put a referendum on the ballot this year to block it. Ohioans for Cannabis Choice would not say how many signatures they gathered. They needed to collect 248,092 signatures and also needed to gather 3 percent of an individual county’s gubernatorial turnout in 44 of Ohio’s 88 counties to get on the November 3 ballot. “Unfortunately, we were not able to overcome a truncated time period to give voters the chance to say no to government overreach,” Dennis Willard, spokesperson for Ohioans for Cannabis Choice said in a statement. Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost (R) initially rejected the referendum’s summary language in January, but approved it in early February after Ohioans for Cannabis Choice made changes to the language. The plan was to submit the collected signatures to Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose on Thursday for him to verify the signatures. This was the deadline to submit signatures since Ohio Senate Bill 56 takes effect Friday and it will ban intoxicating hemp products—including THC-infused beverages. Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine (R) signed the bill into law in December after he had been urging the lawmakers to do something about intoxicating hemp products for the past nearly two years. On the federal level, Congress voted in November to ban products that contain 0.4 milligrams of total THC per container when they voted to reopen the government. Previously, the 2018 Farm Bill said hemp can be grown legally if it contains less than 0.3 percent THC. There is a one-year implementation delay for the federal hemp ban, but states can create their own regulatory framework before then. Ohio’s new law will change Ohio’s marijuana law by reducing the THC levels in adult-use marijuana extracts from a maximum of 90 percent down to a maximum of 70 percent, cap THC levels in adult-use flower to 35 percent, and prohibit smoking in most public places. It will prohibit possessing marijuana in anything outside of its original packaging and criminalizes bringing legal marijuana from another state back to Ohio. The legislation also requires drivers to store marijuana in the trunk of their car while driving. “Marijuana will be re-criminalized in Ohio, businesses will close, workers will lose their jobs, and consumers will be denied their right to products they should be able to purchase,” Willard said in a statement. Ohioans voted to legalize marijuana in 2023, recreational sales started in August 2024, and sales totaled more than $836 million in 2025. “Voters overwhelmingly supported legalizing cannabis in 2023,” Willard said in a statement. “It only makes sense that Gov. DeWine and state lawmakers should go back and ask those voters if they want to ban hemp and re-criminalize marijuana. We know, and our elected leaders know, the answer would be a resounding no.” Ohio Cannabis Coalition and the Ohio Cannabis Coalition and Coalition to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol—the group behind Issue 2 on the 2023 ballot—opposed the attempted referendum. Referendums are rare and the last one that passed in Ohio was when voters overturned an anti-collective bargaining law in 2011. This story was first published by Ohio Capital Journal. The post Ohio Campaign To Block Marijuana And Hemp Restrictions Fails To Collect Enough Signatures For Ballot Referendum appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“Less than a year from now, you’ll be able to legally buy cannabis products for adult use, recreational, throughout Virginia.” By Markus Schmidt, Virginia Mercury Five years after Virginia legalized possession of small amounts of marijuana but failed to create a way for people to legally buy it, state lawmakers last week approved legislation establishing a regulated retail market for adult-use cannabis, potentially ending years of uncertainty over how cannabis could be legally bought and sold in the state. Late Friday, the Senate approved the conference committee compromise on House Bill 642 by a 21–18 party-line vote. The House of Delegates followed on Saturday, the final day of the 2026 General Assembly session, passing the measure 64–32 and sending it to Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s desk. If the Democrat signs it—as she said she would during an interview with The Mercury last summer—the bill would allow Virginians 21 and older to legally purchase cannabis beginning January 1, 2027. The vote marks a significant shift after years of failed efforts, after legislators legalized adults possessing up to an ounce of weed in 2021, and allowed people to grow up to four plants at home. Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin repeatedly vetoed legislation that would have allowed retail sales. The measure approved in the closing hours of the 2026 session would create a statewide licensing system, tax structure and regulatory framework overseen by the Virginia Cannabis Control Authority. The legislation lays out standards for cultivation, processing, distribution and retail sales of marijuana products through regulated businesses. Del. Paul Krizek, D-Fairfax, who sponsored the House version of the legislation, said it reflects years of negotiations and public input. “It’s been a long and arduous journey, but it’s also been good, because with that time, we were able to really get input from all walks of life, from all over the commonwealth, the stakeholders, individuals, constituents,” Krizek said in an interview. “It’s what Virginians have asked for, and we’ve spent the time, and had many, many hours of hearings where there was public input, and lots of emails, letters, texts and conversations with the general public, and this is the product from all of that hard work.” Conference negotiations shape the final bill Although both chambers supported establishing a retail cannabis market, lawmakers disagreed on several details, including the timeline for launching sales, the tax structure and regulatory oversight. Krizek’s House bill would have allowed retail sales beginning November 1, 2026, while the Senate version sponsored by Sen. Lashrecse Aird, D-Henrico, set a later launch date of January 1, 2027. The compromise adopted the Senate timeline. “Less than a year from now, you’ll be able to legally buy cannabis products for adult use, recreational, throughout Virginia,” Krizek said. “I guess it won’t happen exactly on January 1, but it will be legal at that point.” The legislation also blends competing tax proposals, establishing a 6 percent state cannabis tax while allowing local governments to adopt an additional tax between 1 percent and 3.5 percent. Combined with existing sales taxes, total taxation on cannabis products would typically fall between about 12 percent and 16 percent. Existing medical cannabis operators would be allowed to enter the adult-use market by paying a $10 million conversion fee, a compromise between the lower fee proposed in the House and a higher fee suggested in the Senate. The final proposal also caps the number of retail cannabis establishment licenses at 350 and increases Virginia’s legal possession limit from one ounce to 2.5 ounces. Under the legislation, businesses involved in cultivation, processing, wholesale distribution, retail sales and microbusiness operations must obtain licenses from the Cannabis Control Authority. Licensed establishments must display official decals showing they are authorized to sell marijuana products. The new state agency would oversee licensing, enforce regulatory compliance, collect cannabis taxes and monitor the supply chain. Krizek noted that the Cannabis Control Authority may conduct lotteries if the number of applicants exceeds available permits, and that retailers will need time to secure financing, obtain licenses and establish operations. Businesses would have up to two years to activate their licenses before losing them. Civil penalties for violations could reach up to $10,000 per day, including for operating without a license or displaying falsified licensing decals. The bill also creates enforcement provisions addressing underage possession, rules governing seizure or destruction of marijuana held by suspended or revoked licensees and mechanisms for collecting unpaid cannabis taxes, including liens or business closures. Selling marijuana without a license would carry escalating criminal penalties, starting as a Class 2 misdemeanor and rising to a Class 6 felony for repeated offenses. Statewide access over local opt-outs One provision removed from a previous proposal would have allowed local referendums for communities to opt out of cannabis retail sales. Aird said lawmakers rejected that approach after reviewing data from other states showing that patchwork systems often allow illicit markets to continue operating. “Honestly, I don’t have any emotion for a locality that feels upset that there is not a referendum,” she said in a phone interview Tuesday. “Because we did all of the research, it is simply not safe to have a patchwork of access relative to the retail marketplace.” Lawmakers concluded that inconsistent access across localities would undermine both consumer safety and enforcement goals, Aird added. “But when we met with law enforcement, when we met with health professionals, and we took just a really broad look at what would the state look like if you have some access here and no access there, it’s just not practical,” she said. Instead, local governments will be allowed to impose their own local cannabis tax within the range authorized by the bill. Aird also acknowledged concerns that illegal cannabis sellers could continue operating alongside the legal marketplace. She pointed to related legislation, Senate Bill 543, which strengthens enforcement tools for shutting down unlicensed sellers. “We have dropped in significant provisions to give law enforcement and localities a much stronger hand to shut down stores, these vape shops, these pop-up smoke shops, that are found to have illicit products being sold on site,” Aird said of that proposal. Those enforcement provisions would take effect July 1, well before the retail marketplace opens. Economic opportunities and equity provisions Advocates say the legislation is designed not only to regulate cannabis but also to address the long-term effects of drug enforcement policies. Aird said the bill includes provisions aimed at helping individuals disproportionately affected by past marijuana laws participate in the new industry. Supporters say those provisions are meant to address racial disparities in marijuana enforcement during the decades-long War on Drugs. A report by the American Civil Liberties Union found that despite similar marijuana use rates among Black and white Americans, Black people were 3.73 times more likely than white people to be arrested for marijuana possession nationwide. “I think that’s one of the most satisfying parts about this legislation,” she said. The proposal creates microbusiness licenses, partnership agreements and a Cannabis Equity Reinvestment Fund designed to support entrepreneurs historically affected by drug enforcement. “That will go in the hands of real people, to be able to launch their own entity within this marketplace,” Aird said. Forty percent of the state’s cannabis tax revenue would be directed toward early childhood care and education programs, while 30% would fund the equity reinvestment program. Industry groups say the legislation could unlock major economic opportunities. Rodney Holcombe, vice president of public policy at LeafLink, the nation’s largest cannabis wholesale platform, said the measure reflects lessons learned from other states. “Virginia is on the verge of taking a major step forward by establishing a responsible, well-regulated adult-use cannabis market,” Holcombe said. “Lawmakers clearly took the lessons learned from other states to heart, crafting legislation with a thoughtful licensing structure, a workable tax framework, and safeguards to ensure localities cannot opt out and undermine the stability of a statewide market,” he said. Holcombe said the industry hopes Spanberger will sign the legislation into law. “Doing so will unlock meaningful economic opportunity across the commonwealth and ensure Virginia’s cannabis market launches on a strong, stable foundation,” he said. Advocates see progress—and concerns Some advocates welcomed the legislation while raising concerns about implementation. Chelsea Higgs Wise, executive director of Marijuana Justice, said her group pushed lawmakers to strengthen equity and consumer protections as the legislation evolved this session. “The General Assembly took many steps to add positive provisions to the bill such as protecting small businesses from predatory contracts, including a labor peace agreement, adding a compact for tribal governments, adding education for vape shops and consumer protections, expanding equity opportunities,” Wise said. However, she said some issues remain unresolved, including zoning restrictions and potential supply chain bottlenecks if the market launches too quickly. “Even though we have been here before, we remain hopeful that (Spanberger) will listen to the stakeholders, sign the bill but also improve it,” Wise said. Unlike her predecessor, the Democratic governor has said she supports establishing a legal cannabis marketplace. She can sign the bill, propose amendments or veto it. For Aird, the legislation represents the culmination of years of debate following the state’s initial legalization vote—and a long wait for the retail market many Virginians expected to follow. “Now that it is real,” she said, “I think people feel like they’re going to be a lot safer. They’re going to have increased access, and it has been such a labor that is hard to believe. It is very surreal, but it is very satisfying to have arrived at this moment.” This story was first published by Virginia Mercury. The post Virginia Lawmakers Who Sponsored Marijuana Sales Legalization Bill Celebrate Its Passage appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

There’s no meaningful evidence that imposing higher taxes on marijuana would steer people away from using it—contrary to a claim recently made by the The New York Times editorial board—according to a new scientific analysis of cannabis consumption and tax data. In fact, raising the cost of cannabis sold at state-licensed retailers could lead people to return to the illicit market to obtain cheaper (and untested) marijuana that carries its own public health and safety risks. The new report, authored by Ohio State University (OSU) Moritz College of Law researchers Dexter Ridgway and Jana Hrdinová, drew on nationally representative survey data from federal sources and marijuana tax rates in states that have enacted legalization to test the idea that putting a higher premium on cannabis for adults could positively influence consumer behavior and deter heavy marijuana use. In its editorial, the board emphasized that while the federal government imposes taxes on alcohol and tobacco sales, it doesn’t do the same for marijuana—which is no surprise given that the plant remains federally illegal, as do the state-licensed shops that sell it. The board said “increases in tobacco taxes have been a major reason that its use has declined during the 21st century, with profound health benefits.” “The first step in a strategy to reduce marijuana abuse should be a federal tax on pot. States should also raise taxes on pot; today, state taxes can be as low as a few additional cents on a joint,” the editorial argued. “Taxes should be high enough to deter excessive use, on the scale of dollars per joint, not cents.” The idea that high marijuana taxes are causally associated with lower usage rates isn’t exactly settled science, the OSU report said, as states with varying tax rates for cannabis have seen disparate trends in consumer behavior. “More generally, at a time when the legal cannabis marketplace is a patchwork of ever-changing state laws and industries, the overall relationship between tax rates and marijuana use rates (and especially heavy use rates) is quite unclear,” the researchers wrote. They pointed out, for example, that marijuana is taxed at the highest rate in Washington State (43.5 percent), and the state has the sixth highest usage rate (22 percent) in the dataset. By contrast, New Jersey has the lowest tax rate (6.6 percent) and reports the lowest usage rate (14.4 percent), ranking in the bottom half nationally. “These patterns do not imply that taxes have no effect on consumption, but they do suggest that assuming marijuana users will respond to taxation like tobacco users is overly simplistic,” the report says. Via OSU. Ultimately, the OSU report—which assessed 2023-2024 survey data from the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)—concluded that “there is no apparent correlation between marijuana tax rate and marijuana usage rate.” “Merely looking at tax rates and usage rates ignores the myriad of other factors that can influence the rate of use, such as the maturity of the legal market, the ease of access to product affected by number of dispensaries per population, the price of the product in a given state (since marijuana cannot be traded across state lines, the way states regulate the number of licensed growers significantly affects availability/price of product) and many other factors,” the researchers said. “The New York Times editorial soundly stressed the importance, from a public health perspective, of limiting excessive or high potency marijuana use. Additional data is needed to assess the role of tax increases to deter the riskiest marijuana uses and users, and policy progress here will likely require a broader regulatory approach, besides taxation. These 2023 data suggest no simple inverse relationship between state tax rates and marijuana use, and effective policy must account for market structure, product availability and the wide availability of illicit product.” Via OSU. To be sure, where the editorial board, advocates and researchers seem to align is in their shared position that the federal government’s decades-long prohibitionist policies and the resulting lack of robust regulations is a problem. States have been passively permitted to participate in the cannabis experiment without federal safeguards in place or guidance on policy issues such as cannabis tax rates or potency limits for marijuana products, for example. The marijuana tax policy discussion has continued to play out in states and cities across the U.S. where marijuana laws are being considered or tweaked. There might not be consensus around the appropriate tax rate for cannabis, but there’s a general understanding that governments must balance revenue interests with the need to make regulated cannabis products cost-competitive with the illicit market. The Times editorial board further argued in its piece that an “advantage of taxes is that they fall much more on heavy users than casual smokers.” “If a joint cost $10 instead of $5, it would mean a lot of extra money for someone now smoking multiple joints a day and may change that person’s behavior,” it said in the editorial, which has faced scrutiny from multiple skeptical sources. “It would not be a big burden for someone who smokes occasionally.” But as the OSU analysis argues, there’s “reason to fear that significantly higher tax rates for marijuana products could shift use into unregulated and more dangerous illicit markets rather than to deter or reduce problematic cannabis use.” At the federal level, marijuana may soon be moved from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), which wouldn’t federally legalize the plant but would free up certain research barriers and allow state-licensed cannabis businesses to take federal tax deductions they’ve been barred from under Internal Revenue Service (IRS) code 280E. That latter effect is expected to give the cannabis sector an economic boost, but because marijuana products would remain illegal to sell under federal law, rescheduling alone wouldn’t necessarily create a clear pathway for a new federal tax as the Times editorial board is proposing. Removing the 280E penalty could also potentially bring cannabis prices down if industry operators decide to pass any of their tax savings on to the consumer. “The federal government needs to be part of these solutions. Leaving taxes and regulations to the states threatens to create a race to the bottom in which people can cross state lines to buy their pot,” the board said. “Congress can set a floor, as it has done, however inadequately, with alcohol and tobacco, and states can build on it as they choose.” Various congressional bills to legalize cannabis have included federal tax provisions, with specific appropriations in mind for the revenue, but none of those have advanced in the current Congress. The post High Marijuana Taxes Don’t Effectively Deter Use, Study Shows, Contrary To NYT Editorial Board’s Claim appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“Catching a market in motion is fundamentally harder than entering one that has not started yet.” By Max Jackson, Cannabis Wise Guys Imagine a race track. Five cars are already on it—tuned, tested, crewed and running laps at two hundred miles an hour. They have been on this track for years. Now imagine telling a new driver to enter that race. Not next season. Today. Except they do not have a car yet. They have not built it. They have not secured financing for the parts. Some of them have not gotten their license. That is Virginia’s cannabis market on January 1, 2027 under a sales legalization bill that lawmakers recently sent to Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D). The five pharmaceutical processors who currently run Virginia’s medical program will begin adult-use sales that day with inventory in their vaults, staff on payroll and retail locations already open. The independent businesses that were supposed to create competition in this market will not have broken ground. This is not a head start. It is a structural problem disguised as a calendar date. And the reason it matters is not just that incumbents go first—it is what happens to the market while independents are still building. Phase One: The Track Is Already Hot When adult-use sales begin, only the five existing processors can sell. That is the math of the situation; nobody else has product. Every day the market operates with five sellers is a day where pricing is set by five companies, where retailers build purchasing relationships with five companies and where consumers form brand habits around five companies. None of this requires bad actors. None of it is illegal. It is rational behavior in a market where the only participants are the ones who were already there. But there is a less visible advantage compounding underneath. Those five processors are generating revenue at prices that only a market without competition can sustain. Every dollar of that revenue pays down equipment, retires debt and builds a financial cushion that did not exist before the market opened. By the time independent competitors arrive, the incumbents’ cost structures have been subsidized by months (or years) of uncontested sales. The independent shows up with a brand-new mortgage on a brand-new facility, competing against an operator whose facility is already half paid off. That is not a gap in quality. It is a gap in math that widens every month that Phase One continues. Phase Two: New Stores, Same Suppliers Retail licenses get issued. Stores open. They need product on their shelves. Independent cultivators still do not have any. A cultivation facility takes 12 to 18 months to build. The plant itself requires four to six months from clone to a tested, packaged product that can legally sit on a dispensary shelf. A retailer who opens in month three or month six of the market has exactly one sourcing option: the five processors. Not because they prefer them. Because nobody else has a gram to sell. And the processors do not show up with one product. They show up with 10, 15, 20 brands—flower, concentrates, edibles, pre-rolls—plus displays, marketing support and a single point of contact who can stock an entire store in one phone call. A new dispensary owner with rent due and shelves to fill is not comparing suppliers. They are saying yes to the only supplier who can solve their entire problem at once. When independent cultivators eventually come online with a single strain and no marketing budget, they are not just competing against a brand. They are competing against a relationship that was built when they did not exist—a relationship where the retailer’s entire menu, supplier infrastructure and customer base was constructed around companies that showed up when nobody else could. That relationship does not dissolve because a better product arrives. It persists because switching costs are real, because shelf space is finite, and because the retailer already knows the processor’s delivery schedule, margin structure and product consistency. The independent offers none of that. Not because they are worse. Because they are new. Phase Three: Merging At Full Speed This is where the race track stops being a metaphor. When independent cultivators finally come online—18 months to 36 months after the market opened—they are not entering a market that paused to wait for them. They are entering one that has been accelerating without them. Pricing expectations are locked. Shelf space is committed. Wholesale relationships have a year of history behind them. Consumers already know what brands they buy. Entering a market at rest is hard. Entering a market at speed is a fundamentally different problem. Every month the market operated without independents is a month it accelerated away from them. The incumbents’ debt is shrinking while the independents’ debt is just beginning. The incumbents’ retail relationships are twelve months deep, while the independents have never made a delivery. The incumbents’ brands have years of consumer data, while the independents have a name nobody recognizes. The independent cultivator’s first harvest is not arriving into a competition. It is merging onto a track where every other car has been running for a year, at a speed the new entrant cannot match, with financing the new entrant cannot replicate and relationships the new entrant was never present to build. This is not a failure of effort or talent. It is a structural inevitability of the sequencing. If Phase One runs long enough before Phase Three begins, the market is not just shaped. It is in motion. And catching a market in motion is fundamentally harder than entering one that has not started yet. The Sequencing Is The Decision Almost every state that has launched adult-use cannabis has run this three-phase sequence. The outcome was not determined by the quality of the independent businesses. It was not determined by the licensing rules or the grant programs or the equity provisions. It was determined by one variable: how long Phase One lasted before Phase Three began. States where Phase One lasted months produced competitive markets. States where it lasted years produced concentrated markets that are now spending tens of millions of dollars trying to reverse structural damage that was baked in during the gap. Virginia has a bill on the governor’s desk. That bill sets January 1, 2027, as the start date—regardless of whether a single independent business is operational. But there is an alternative: tie each region of the state’s launch to a simple trigger. Adult-use sales could begin locally when at least one independent cultivator and one independent retailer (with no ownership or operational ties to an existing processor) are certified and selling product. That is not a delay. It is a launch sequence that makes Phase One as short as possible. Max Jackson is the founder of Cannabis Wise Guys and specializes in translating between cannabis operations, investment, and public policy. He has provided expert testimony to the Virginia Legislature on preventing market consolidation in emerging cannabis markets. Photo courtesy of Max Jackson. The post Virginia’s Cannabis Sales Legalization Bill Gives An Unfair Head Start To Existing Big Businesses (Op-Ed) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

The dynamic environment of Punjabi Bagh encourages conversations about modern experiences where individuals sometimes refer to Escort Service Punjabi Bagh during lifestyle talks.

The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is acknowledging that, even as more states have legalized marijuana, youth cannabis use has “declined” over the past several decades. As part of an online quiz on DEA’s “Just Think Twice” platform, the agency asked about a variety of drug trends, including questions about substance use disorder, drug overdose deaths, signs of a heroin overdose and cannabis use among youth. Notably, the answer to one question about past-year marijuana use by adolescents and teens directly contradicts a frequently debunked prohibitionist narrative about the risks of state-level legalization, with anti-cannabis organizations claiming the reform would drive more teens to use marijuana. That’s not the case, DEA said. “From 1995 to 2025, past-year cannabis use decreased among 8th, 10th, and 12th grade students,” reads one of the items, with respondents asked to decide whether the statement is “Fact” or “Fiction.” It turns out, contrary to prohibitionist fears, it’s a fact that teen marijuana use has declined since states began enacting laws to allow medical or recreational use. “Use of cannabis within the past year declined from 15.8 percent to 7.6 percent for 8th grade students, 28.7 percent to 15.6 percent for 10th grade students, and 34.7 percent to 25.7 percent for 12th grade students, from 1995 to 2025,” the quiz explains once the respondent makes their choice, citing data from the National Institute on Drug Abuse- (NIDA) backed national Monitoring the Future (MTF) survey. Via DEA. For those who’ve been closely following cannabis policy and research, the question was likely a no-brainer. Numerous studies have found that rates of youth marijuana use either declines or remains stable after states enact legalization, which advocates point to as evidence of the effectiveness of regulations over criminalization. When adults have legal access to cannabis at age-gated licensed retailers, many transition away from the illicit market, where sellers generally aren’t checking IDs or following other protocols ensuring product safety and quality. States with legalization laws also tend to incorporate public education initiatives into their programs to deter teens from misusing cannabis. Of course, DEA didn’t endorse marijuana legalization in the quiz answer. And in its answer to another question about cannabis—specifically quizzing people about whether states are legalizing because marijuana “has been proven not to have adverse effects”—the agency took the opportunity to link the plant to a variety of health issues and impaired driving, despite conflicting evidence on those claims. “While several states have legalized marijuana, the drug is still linked to mental health problems like anxiety and psychosis, can slow brain development, and is the substance most often found in the blood of drivers involved in and frequently responsible for car crashes,” DEA said. This is one of the latest examples of DEA using interactive online quiz formats as part of its effort to raise awareness about drug issues. Last year, for example, the agency DEA put out a five-question quiz to assess people’s drug slang knowledge for substances such as marijuana, MDMA and fentanyl. Not unlike its drug emoji guide that DEA recirculated last year, the test made several claims about the terminology used by consumers and sellers that might give those populations pause. DEA’s emoji decoding guide has been around, and somewhat updated, since 2021, drawing some criticism from consumers who’ve questioned the credibility of the agency’s interpretation of how people communicate about drugs in texts and social media. DEA, which is currently involved in a process to consider rescheduling marijuana—has long been considered out of touch with youth culture as it concerns drug use and sales. And it’s been partnering with other anti-drug groups recently that hasn’t done much to disabuse the public of that perception. For instance, to mark “National Prevention Week,” DEA promoted a campaign last May that encouraged people to share memes with dubious claims about the effects of cannabis—including the theory that it is a “gateway drug” to using other substances. In 2023, DEA also advised young people that, rather than doing drugs, they should focus on becoming Instagram influencers. The agency promoted tips on how to get a “natural high” as an alternative to drugs, sharing what it said were “7 Better Highs” such as becoming famous on Instagram, playing video games and going to a pet store to look at animals. In the background, cannabis advocates and stakeholders have been closely monitoring agencies including DEA as they await action on marijuana rescheduling—a process President Donald Trump in December directed the attorney general to quickly finalize. Moving cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), as proposed, would not federally legalize it, however. The post DEA’s New ‘Drug Quiz’ Admits That Youth Marijuana Use Is Declining As Legalization Expands appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Thanks For sharing this Superb article.I use this Article to show my assignment in college.it is useful For me Great Work. koitoto

CA gov’s marijuana legalization post; CO cannabis tax increase?; OH hemp THC lawsuit; SD psilocybin; RI hemp THC drinks Subscribe to receive Marijuana Moment’s newsletter in your inbox every weekday morning. It’s the best way to make sure you know which cannabis stories are shaping the day. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: Your support makes Marijuana Moment possible… Your good deed for the day: donate to an independent publisher like Marijuana Moment and ensure that as many voters as possible have access to the most in-depth cannabis reporting out there. Support our work at https://www.patreon.com/marijuanamoment / TOP THINGS TO KNOW The Congressional Research Service published an updated report on the federal-state marijuana conflict, removing language from an earlier version that had said it is “likely” federal officials “will move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III.” California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) declared that “cannabis is now legal” in a satirical social media post after President Donald Trump mistakenly referred to the California Democrat as “president of the United States.” The Colorado legislature’s Capital Development Committee is recommending the rejection of a bill that would put a measure on the state’s November ballot asking voters to increase marijuana and alcohol taxes to support mental health treatment. South Dakota Gov. Larry Rhoden (R) signed a bill to legalize a synthetic form of psilocybin if the psychedelic is federally approved. Ohio officials filed a brief defending Gov. Mike DeWine’s (R) veto of a provision that would have allowed sales of hemp THC drinks through the end of the year in response to a lawsuit from brewers. The Rhode Island Cannabis Control Commission is recommending that lawmakers pass a bill to ban the sale of hemp THC beverages in bars and restaurants with liquor licenses. / FEDERAL The House Judiciary Subcommittee on Oversight will hold a hearing about U.S. military strikes against suspected drug boats on Wednesday. The House bill to create psychedelic therapy centers of excellence got one new cosponsor for a total of 24. / STATES South Carolina’s Senate majority leader said he is “hopeful” lawmakers can pass legislation to regulate hemp THC products. A Pennsylvania senator tweeted about legislation to restrict hemp products, saying, “Protecting consumers and closing loopholes is just common sense. That’s why we aligned Pennsylvania law with new federal standards and give law enforcement the clarity they need to remove these harmful products from the marketplace.” A Texas representative tweeted, “Let’s treat THC like alcohol. Regulate it. Test it. Let Veterans use it rather than opioids. Let businesses that are currently prospering continue to prosper. We don’t need a nanny state. We need adults to be treated like adults.” Washington, D.C. regulators adopted changes to medical cannabis rules. Vermont regulators sent guidance on acceptable forms of ID for verifying the ages of customers purchasing marijuana. Colorado regulators issued guidance on cannabis vaporizer expiration dates. Massachusetts officials awarded $28.8 million to support marijuana businesses through the Cannabis Social Equity Grant Program. California regulators sent updates on various cannabis issues. New York regulators will host a series of listening sessions about cannabis rules next month. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — / INTERNATIONAL A German lawmaker criticized the lack of approvals for local marijuana sales pilot trials. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A study found that “cannabis use was not linked to longitudinal cognitive decline or dementia risk.” A study of mice found that “cannabidiol attenuates methamphetamine-induced psychosis via anti-oxidative stress.” / BUSINESS Vireo Growth Inc. reported quarterly revenue of $104.5 million and a net loss and comprehensive loss of $20.4 million. Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. resolved pending litigation with PharmaCann Inc. Make sure to subscribe to get Marijuana Moment’s daily dispatch in your inbox. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: The post New congressional cannabis rescheduling report (Newsletter: March 18, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Our talented male and female Escorts in Delhi (and across many other countries) are sure to provide you with a truly Unforgettable Experience! The creativity and passion demonstrated by these talented individuals will create legendary memories of your time spent together. Make your appointment today for awe-inspiring results!

I admire this article for the well-researched content and excellent wording. I got so involved in this material that I couldn’t stop reading. I am impressed with your work and skill. Thank you so much. koitoto

The vibe shifts from handmade notes to wild exploits, as if a traveler stitched a map from hemp and curiosity. There is humor in the chaos, and a fearless steer toward the unknown. The tale invites readers to chase stories as if they were rare seeds. Crossy Road moments pop up in the narration, teasing a lighthearted detour. I once faced a puzzle where a small clue led to a larger mystery, and the path felt like a cat weaving through clutter, turning a dead end into an improvised route.

Wow, What a Excellent post. I really found this to much informatics. It is what i was searching for.I would like to suggest you that please keep sharing such type of info.Thanks situs toto

Enjoy a great time with the Escort in Shahdara. You will always be glad you connected with these girls. They are exceptional and consistently showcase themselves in the most alluring manners to arouse the desires of clients. Escorts have always been remarkable professionals who continuously display enthusiasm and vigor to provide the most enjoyable experience possible.

In the sex dolls industry, proper maintenance is a critical factor.

Our group of friends was looking for something beyond the usual parties to celebrate a reunion. We discovered that companions from Call Girls in Goa offer a unique kind of companionship that is both professional and deeply personal. They blended seamlessly into our circle, engaging in our jokes and adding a sparkle to our dinners. It felt like we had known them for years, proving that true connection can be found in the most unexpected and beautiful places.

“All retailers selling intoxicating hemp products should be held to similar high safety standards as cannabis retailers.” By Christopher Shea, Rhode Island Currant For a year, Rhode Island bars and restaurants had the opportunity to secure a license from the state’s former Office of Cannabis Regulation to sell intoxicating THC-infused beverages despite state regulations that prohibit them from being combined with alcohol, tobacco or nicotine. Over 100 licensed retailers obtained a license between August 2024 and July 2025 when the Cannabis Control Commission put the brakes on issuing any new licenses to establishments that allow onsite consumption of alcohol in “furtherance of public health and safety.” Now as regulators race to codify rules to catch up with the marketplace, the association representing the state’s hospitality industry is voicing strong opposition to the commission’s recommendation that lawmakers codify a ban on the sale of THC drinks at venues with a liquor license. “They’re assuming we’re not going to follow the law,” Farouk Rajab, president and CEO of the Rhode Island Hospitality Association, said in an interview Monday. Rajab said he was disappointed to see the commission recommend a ban in its final report submitted to the General Assembly on March 1. But he was not shocked that it still made the cut. “I think decisions are already made even before the listening sessions,” he said. “This is targeting an industry, that’s all.” The 11-page report details Rhode Island’s existing rules governing hemp-derived beverages, along with recommendations over labeling, testing and taxing the products. Carla Aveledo, chief of policy for the commission, said no one single industry was being targeted. “All retailers selling intoxicating hemp products should be held to similar high safety standards as cannabis retailers,” she said. Hemp became legal at the federal level after the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill, with drinks hitting the market in Rhode Island as regulators were crafting rules for awarding licenses for retail cannabis establishments. Regulations allowing the drinks sale were approved by the former Office of Cannabis Regulation in 2024, rules that have since been adopted by the state’s Cannabis Office. But the proliferation of hemp-derived THC drinks led to a debate on whether they should even be legal at all in Rhode Island. Members of the state’s recreational cannabis industry have been largely opposed to allowing THC products to be sold outside the few existing licensed pot shops. Which is why the General Assembly last year tasked the Cannabis Control Commission to come up with suggestions on how to deal with hemp-derived drinks, most of which are produced out-of-state. Rajab said the association created training modules that “allow for safe handling” of the drinks. The online course details how the brain’s receptors react to cannabis, onset times, and how to prevent overconsumption of THC. The association’s module even instructs hospitality workers to never serve THC drinks with alcohol. “Mixing THC-infused beverages with alcohol can lead to unpredictable and unsafe situations,” it states. “As a server, it is your responsibility to discourage customers from consuming THC beverages alongside alcoholic drinks. Educate them on the risks and promote safer consumption practices to ensure their well-being.” Drinks are often sold in packs of four cans in liquor stores. State regulations limit the serving of 1 milligram of THC per drink and no more than 5 milligrams of THC “per package.” Rajab said rather than ban restaurants from selling drinks, the state should codify regulations to guide the hospitality industry. He pointed to Minnesota, which has allowed drinks to be sold at liquor stores, grocery stores, and bars since 2023. “It’s served safely there,” he said. The commission’s report similarly highlights how “Lower-Potency Hemp Edibles” are regulated in the land of 10,000 lakes. For a bar in Minnesota to serve hemp-derived products, it must obtain an on-site consumption endorsement, which is selected when completing the license application. But even Minnesota regulators admit there’s a big question mark as to whether drinks will continue to be sold after federal restrictions regulating hemp’s potency are scheduled to take effect in November. “That kind of threw the entire industry nationwide through a loop,” Jim Walker, a spokesperson for the Minnesota Office of Cannabis Management, told Rhode Island Current. “If we do get to November and there’s no safety net involved, we as an office would help to offramp a lot of these businesses.” Congress is considering legislation that would delay enforcement of the ban for two years, which could still allow THC-derived drinks to be sold. Aveledo said Rhode Island’s Cannabis Control Commission continues to monitor federal hemp policy and acknowledged it may impact regulators’ plans to update the state’s hemp rules. “The Commission intends to draft updates to the hemp regulations in 2026,” she said. “However, recent federal activity and future actions remain uncertain, which may delay the regulatory drafting to early 2027 to ensure our framework is fully informed and strategically aligned.” This story was first published by Rhode Island Currant. The post Rhode Island Officials Support Ban On Serving Hemp THC Drinks In Bars And Restaurants With Liquor Licenses appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net