All Activity

Superbly written article, if only all bloggers offered the same content as you, the internet would be a far better place.. teslatoto

Excellent and very exciting site. Love to watch. Keep Rocking. situs togel online

I like your post. It is good to see you verbalize from the heart and clarity on this important subject can be easily observed... toto slot

Cheers pertaining to delivering the latest changes in connection with worry, My spouse and i expect go through additional. how often should i get IV vitamin therapy in las vegas

Many thanks for that publish as well as excellent ideas.. actually We additionally believe that effort is actually the most crucial ingredient of obtaining achievement. how effective is platelet rich plasma for anti-aging in las vegas

The web is actually bogged lower along with phony weblogs without any actual information however the publish had been wonderful as well as really worth the actual study. Thanks with regard to discussing this particular beside me. 犀利士效果

May possibly fairly recently up and running an important web log, the data one offer you on this web site contains given a hand to all of us substantially. Bless you designed for your current precious time & get the job done. 犀利士購買

Thanks a lot for the purpose of rendering up to date update versions about the challenge, I just await read through further. 犀利士5mg

“It’ll help the businesses, we’ll have great revenue, and everybody smoking the stuff will be a lot happier.” By Sam Stockard, Tennessee Lookout Tennessee’s hemp industry has reached an agreement with state agencies, dismissing a lawsuit and enabling some businesses to keep selling hemp-derived products such as THCA for a short time after new restrictions take effect. The Tennessee Healthy Alternatives Association announced it entered an order with the state Agriculture and Revenue Departments allowing businesses with licenses issued before December 31, 2025 to continue using a 2023 regulatory framework until their licenses expire June 30, 2026. Such a move allows stores to keep selling many products that will be banned after a new law takes effect January 1. Because of the agreement, a pending declaratory judgment against the Agriculture and Revenue departments has been dismissed, the association said in a statement. Part of the new law adopted by the legislature this year transfers regulatory authority over hemp products and beverages from the state Agriculture Department to the Tennessee Alcoholic Beverage Commission. The new law also bans the hemp derivative, THCA, which converts into delta-9 THC–an illegal substance in Tennessee in greater than trace amounts–when smoked or heated. The synthetic cannabinoid, THCP, is also banned under the law. Hemp industry representative Clint Palmer, who testified before lawmakers this year, said about 75 percent of the market will be considered illegal under the new ban, which includes THCA flower and vapes. The new law will push consumers to synthetic cannabinoids, he said. “If you ask your typical consumer, they’re gonna say gross,” Palmer said. Palmer told lawmakers early this year hemp businesses will be forced to shut down despite spending millions of dollars to comply with state regulations. State Sen. Richard Briggs, a Knoxville Republican, said during a committee meeting that the legislature should withdraw the bill and consider another one allowing recreational marijuana. “Let’s be perfectly honest. It’ll help the businesses, we’ll have great revenue, and everybody smoking the stuff will be a lot happier,” Briggs said. This story was first published by Tennessee Lookout. Photo courtesy of WeedPornDaily. The post Tennessee Officials Reach Agreement With Hemp Industry To Temporarily Allow THCA Sales appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

B52 CLUB là một trong những nền tảng giải trí trực tuyến phát triển mạnh mẽ tại Việt Nam. Với hàng loạt trò chơi phong phú và hấp dẫn, cổng game này nhanh chóng thu hút được sự quan tâm của đông đảo người chơi. Được thiết kế với giao diện thân thiện và dễ sử dụng, B52 CLUB mang đến cho người dùng những trải nghiệm giải trí tuyệt vời ngay tại nhà. Một trong những điểm nổi bật của cổng game B52 CLUB chính là sự đa dạng trong các loại trò chơi. Từ các trò chơi casino như Baccarat, Roulette cho đến các trò chơi slot machine hấp dẫn, người chơi có thể dễ dàng tìm thấy những trò chơi yêu thích của mình. Thêm vào đó, cổng game còn cung cấp nhiều loại hình cá cược thể thao, đáp ứng nhu cầu của những ai yêu thích thể thao và muốn thử vận may của mình. B52 CLUB không chỉ thu hút người chơi bằng trò chơi mà còn bởi các chương trình khuyến mãi hấp dẫn. Cổng game thường xuyên tổ chức các sự kiện và chương trình khuyến mãi dành cho người chơi mới cũng như khách hàng thân thiết. Điều này không chỉ giúp người chơi có thêm cơ hội nhận thưởng mà còn tạo thêm động lực để họ tham gia và trải nghiệm nhiều hơn. Một yếu tố không thể bỏ qua khi nói về cổng game B52 CLUB chính là tính bảo mật và an toàn. B52 CLUB sử dụng công nghệ mã hóa tiên tiến để bảo vệ thông tin cá nhân và tài khoản của người chơi. Điều này giúp người chơi yên tâm hơn khi tham gia cá cược và trải nghiệm các trò chơi trực tuyến mà không lo ngại về việc bị lộ thông tin. Ngoài ra, B52 CLUB còn cung cấp dịch vụ chăm sóc khách hàng tận tình và chuyên nghiệp. Đội ngũ hỗ trợ luôn sẵn sàng giải đáp thắc mắc và hỗ trợ người chơi 24/7. Dù bạn gặp phải vấn đề gì trong quá trình chơi, bạn đều có thể dễ dàng liên hệ với đội ngũ hỗ trợ để được giúp đỡ. Điều này góp phần tạo nên trải nghiệm chơi game tốt nhất cho người dùng. Với tất cả những yếu tố trên, cổng game B52 CLUB đã khẳng định được vị thế của mình trong ngành giải trí trực tuyến tại Việt Nam. Nếu bạn đang tìm kiếm một nơi để thư giãn và thử vận may, B52 CLUB chính là lựa chọn hoàn hảo cho bạn.

Thanks, that was a really cool read! situs mawartoto

The Delhi Call Girls Service of ours assures you of the company of passionate, seductive, stylish, and fun-loving escorts. Whether it is romance or erotic moments that you desire, Delhi Call Girl WhatsApp Number the girls will deliver everything with the deepest satisfaction and charm. Total privacy is guaranteed every time.

I was reading some of your content on this website and I conceive this internet site is really informative ! Keep on putting up. bandar togel

I enjoyed the Call Girl Service in Delhi companion’s kindness, warm communication, friendly attitude, and calm presence, making the entire session pleasant and welcoming.

“Kellum’s tenure will succeed only if he recognizes that the agency he now leads cannot rebuild trust without acknowledging, clearly and without qualification, the depth of the failures that preceded him and his commitment to charting a new course.” By Hirsh Jain, Ananda Strategy Late on the Wednesday evening before Thanksgiving, California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) quietly announced the appointment of Clint Kellum as the next director of the state Department of Cannabis Control (DCC). The timing of the announcement, released at a moment when the Newsom administration could be confident that few Californians would be paying attention, was not lost on close observers of the cannabis market. It revealed the administration’s deep discomfort with the conversation this transition should provoke: a candid examination of DCC’s failures under the leadership of current director (and longtime Newsom ally) Nicole Elliott, and the profound damage those failures have inflicted on California’s legal cannabis market. It is a conversation that’s long overdue. Nearly a decade after the passage of Proposition 64, California’s legal cannabis system bears little resemblance to what voters were promised. Instead of a well-regulated market that displaced the illicit one, the state has allowed unlicensed cannabis operators to flourish, unsafe and untested products to proliferate and enforcement to collapse. The legal market is now forced to compete with the very illicit activity legalization was meant to eliminate. But many of the industry’s deepest wounds were not inevitable consequences of legalization. They were regulatory failures, and specifically failures of DCC under its longtime leadership. Since its inception, DCC has been at the center of a long and unbroken sequence of scandals and breakdowns. Most prominent was the pesticide testing scandal, in which the agency allowed products contaminated with banned pesticides to be sold on the legal market. This failure undermined the very premise of “legal and tested” cannabis in California, a premise the state had used to justify stringent compliance costs and high taxation. As the regulatory agency tasked with ensuring safety failed at the most basic level of product oversight, consumer confidence in the legal cannabis market predictably collapsed. Equally damaging was DCC’s failure to close loopholes in its “track and trace” system that allowed so-called “burner distributor” licenses to move illicit cannabis into the legal supply chain. These loopholes were well known within the industry, repeatedly discussed in public forums and raised directly with regulators. Yet DCC declined for years to take meaningful enforcement action, allowing illicit actors to benefit from a system that was supposed to regulate them. This failure not only deprived legal operators of a level playing field, it further blurred the line between legal and illicit commerce. It produced the very outcome legalization was intended to prevent. DCC’s mismanagement also extended to the administration of local grant programs. In a formal report, the California state auditor criticized DCC’s “inadequate oversight” of cities receiving millions of dollars in state equity grants, describing the “inappropriate expenditures” made using these taxpayer dollars. Programs intended to remedy decades of disproportionate enforcement instead became examples of weak accountability and public corruption, perhaps unsurprising in a state where large sums of taxpayer funds routinely go missing. The state auditor found that cities received funding without ensuring that grants reached their intended beneficiaries, and that DCC did little to intervene. Tellingly, DCC faced serious allegations from its own employees as well. A whistleblower lawsuit accused the agency of retaliating against employees who had raised concerns about DCC’s regulatory failures and uneven, retaliatory enforcement practices. Such allegations reinforced a broader perception that the agency was animated by personal grudges, resistant to criticism, unable to self-correct and particularly intolerant of dissent within its own ranks. These substantive failures were compounded by DCC’s unyielding insistence, often stated boldly and publicly, that the legal cannabis market in California was “healthy” and “growing.” In reality, legal cannabis sales in California have fallen by more than 30 percent since 2021—a staggering decline. DCC’s refusal to acknowledge these declines fostered an Orwellian culture of official unreality. Instead of confronting the crisis, the agency’s messaging sought to obscure it, hindering reform and leaving legislators, operators and consumers without an honest assessment of the system’s condition. Meanwhile, senior statewide leaders have begun to say openly what DCC has long refused to admit. State Treasurer Fiona Ma (D) recently stated that California’s cannabis legalization framework was a “failure” and suggested that the state may need to start over entirely. Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) acknowledged that California’s cannabis taxes are punitively high and are responsible for pushing consumers back into the dangerous illicit market. These comments represent clear and unambiguous admissions, from the highest levels of state government, that the system is not working. The cumulative effect of these failures has been devastating. Hundreds of municipalities in California still prohibit legal cannabis businesses, understandably citing the visible failure of the legal market across much of the rest of the state as justification. Licensed dispensaries continue to compete with unlicensed storefronts that operate in the open, in part because state and local authorities lack a coherent enforcement strategy. Consumers face high prices, limited access, questionable testing integrity and a regulatory environment that provides little confidence that legal products are meaningfully safer or more reliable than illicit alternatives. California’s failures have also rippled nationwide. Because California is by far the largest potential cannabis market in the United States, its chronic underperformance has suppressed the growth of the cannabis industry nationwide. If California’s legal cannabis market reached per-capita performance levels comparable to other states like Michigan or Montana, its annual legal sales would be more than three times higher—thirteen billion dollars, rather than the merely four billion dollars recorded today. The national implications are staggering. If the California market were functioning properly, the United States legal cannabis industry would now exceed forty billion dollars annually, rather than the roughly thirty-two billion dollars it currently generates, and would support one hundred thousand additional jobs in the cannabis industry. Instead of propelling the national industry forward, California has become a drag on national growth, an anchor weighing down an industry that should be expanding far more rapidly. These failures have also weakened the political case for cannabis legalization across the country. In red and purple states, policymakers regularly point to California’s regulatory chaos as evidence that legalization produces disorder, fuels illicit activity and overwhelms enforcement systems. California, once expected to be the national model for cannabis regulation, has become a cautionary example that opponents of reform invoke to slow progress elsewhere. DCC’s refusal to acknowledge these failures is not merely a bureaucratic flaw. It is a political one. For more than a decade, then-candidate and now-Governor Newsom has presented himself as a champion of cannabis reform and promised that California would build the most effective and equitable cannabis system in the world. By any honest assessment, these promises were never fulfilled. Under Newsom’s watch, legalization faltered, the illicit market expanded, local bans entrenched themselves and regulatory incoherence became the norm. The administration has consistently avoided acknowledging these failures, treating any admission of systemic breakdown as a political liability for Newsom’s future ambitions, rather than a logical prerequisite for urgently needed reform of California’s system. DCC’s insistence that the California market is “healthy” and “growing” reflects the governor’s unwillingness to admit that his cannabis legacy has been defined by unfulfilled promises and steadily worsening conditions. But Newsom is now a lame-duck governor, whose focus has clearly left California and drifted toward national politics. This creates an opening for Clint Kellum—that is, if he is willing to exercise independence in his new role—not too much to ask in a position that pays a $230,000 base salary ($300,000 in “total compensation” once the lavish benefits for California state executives are included). Unbeknownst to most taxpayers footing the bill, it turns out that “public service” in California pays quite well. Clint Kellum appointed new DCC Director by Governor Newsom@CAcannabisdept pic.twitter.com/OkdVwOuqFz — Hirsh Jain (@anandastrategy) November 27, 2025 A new DCC director cannot, on his own, revise tax structures, mandate local participation or rewrite Proposition 64. But Kellum can do something that has been conspicuously absent from the agency in recent years. He can speak honestly. Kellum can acknowledge the failures that occurred under his predecessor, describe the structural weaknesses the agency now faces, reject the “political spin” that suggests the California market is healthy and growing and commit to forthright, data-driven leadership going forward. He can echo what Ma and Bonta have already said: that California’s cannabis system has been a failure, that it has harmed market participants and consumers alike and that it requires immediate and comprehensive reform. Honesty, however, is not a responsibility that falls on regulators alone. For years, many California cannabis stakeholders—including operators, attorneys, consultants and even trade associations—declined to criticize DCC publicly, out of fear of retaliation or a desire to preserve professional relationships. Some spoke critically of DCC behind closed doors, while offering praise in public settings. That omission was not a neutral decision. It was an act of complicity. It insulated the agency from accountability, allowed dysfunction to deepen and contributed to the erosion of the legal market. A sustainable regulatory system cannot exist unless those subject to regulation are willing to criticize the regulator, even at the cost of maintaining personal relationships with powerful officials, which many “white collar” professionals are often loath to do. California’s cannabis industry now faces a choice. It can continue to treat regulators with a dishonest deference in public and frustration in private, a pattern that has helped produce the system that exists today. Or it can insist on transparency, accountability and integrity from an agency whose decisions affect billions of dollars and tens of thousands of livelihoods. DCC does not need perfection. It needs competence, candor and a willingness to confront the truth—lacking to date. Kellum’s tenure will succeed only if he recognizes that the agency he now leads cannot rebuild trust without acknowledging, clearly and without qualification, the depth of the failures that preceded him and his commitment to charting a new course. Moreover, whether the coming years become a period of recovery for the California cannabis market or simply a continuance of a “lost decade” of cannabis regulation will depend not only on Kellum’s choices, but also on the willingness of all industry stakeholders to be unafraid to publicly insist that California’s cannabis regulator finally rise to the level of the important task before it. However it unfolds in California, the entire country will be watching. Hirsh Jain is the CEO of Ananda Strategy, a cannabis-focused business advisory firm that works with many of California’s leading cannabis brands and retailers on matters ranging from competitive licensing, legislative strategy, regulatory intelligence, market expansion, and other corporate initiatives. The post New Top California Cannabis Regulator Appointed By Newsom Must Fix The Program’s Failures (Op-Ed) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A public interest law firm representing a man who says federal law unconstitutionally infringed on his property rights has joined the chorus of voices urging the U.S. Supreme Court to take up a case challenging a key underpinning of federal marijuana prohibition. In an amicus brief filed with the court on Wednesday, the Pacific Legal Foundation—representing Florida resident Michael Colosi—said their client’s property dispute “exemplifies” how the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution has been misinterpreted and misapplied, giving the federal government unsanctioned authority over intrastate commerce. In Colosi’s case, he was told by his local government that, in order to build a home on a specific property in Charlotte County, he needed to pay $200,000 development fee because a bird species known as the Florida scrub-jay could someday populate the area. That’s because the federal government classifies the species as “threatened.” “Colosi sued, alleging that the federal government has no authority to regulate an intrastate species without a direct connection to interstate commerce,” the brief says. “Colosi and Petitioners face the same dilemma: they are injured by federal regulation of activities the Constitution does not authorize the federal government to regulate.” To that point, the Massachusetts-based marijuana businesses that are asking the Supreme Court to take their case similarly argue that federal law unconstitutionally prohibits intrastate cannabis activity, contravening the Commerce Clause. “Canna Provisions is not the first petitioner to ask this Court to clarify the Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clauses’ scope, but its case presents a unique opportunity to temper wrongly decided past precedent and protect property rights,” the filing says. “Colosi’s effort to build a house was blocked by federal regulation because a threatened, intrastate species, the Florida scrub-jay, may nest on the land. When challenged as to the condition it placed on Colosi’s planned land use, the federal government used the Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clauses to justify its regulation of intrastate species with no aggregate impact on interstate commerce. Its argument is made possible by this Court’s acceptance of the rational basis test in its Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clause jurisprudence. Colosi is not the first, and will not be the last, landowner harmed by government overreach under unconstitutional federal laws.” “This Court should seize this chance to correct its Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clause precedents before federal overreach harms more people,” it says, adding that the policy dissonance “has broad negative impacts on property owners, local governments, and the liberty that the enumerated powers are meant to protect. This Court should grant the petition.” The filing highlights how the cannabis case, if taken up by the high court, could end up having broad implications beyond the marijuana issue specifically, depending on how the justices rule. The amicus brief was filed one day after The Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, similarly implore justices to consider the case, Canna Provisions v. Bondi. The court scheduled a closed-door meeting for next month to consider addressing the issue. The powerhouse law firm Boies Schiller Flexner LLP last month submitted their petition for writ of certiorari from the court on behalf of their clients, and the Justice Department earlier this month declined the opportunity to file a brief for or against the case’s consideration by the justices. A lead attorney representing the petitioners recently told Marijuana Moment that he’s “hopeful”—albeit somewhat “nervous”—about the prospect of justices ultimately taking up the matter and deciding to address the key legal question about the constitutionality of federal cannabis prohibition. “Time is of the essence,” Josh Schiller said, noting the dramatic shift in public opinion and state laws governing cannabis. “We think that this is the right time for this case because of the need—the industry needs to get relief from federal oversight at the moment.” Before the conference was scheduled, the Koch-founded Americans for Prosperity Foundation also submitted an amicus brief encouraging justices to take the case. A U.S. appeals court rejected the arguments of the state-legal cannabis companies the firm is representing in May. It was one the latest blows to the high-profile lawsuit following a lower court’s dismissal of the claims. But it’s widely understood that the plaintiffs’ legal team has long intended the matter to end up before the nine high court justices. Four justices must vote to accept the petition for cert in order for the court to take up the case. While it is not clear if SCOTUS will ultimately take the case, one sign that at least some on court might be interested in the appeal is a 2021 statement from Justice Clarence Thomas, issued as the court denied review of a separate dispute involving a Colorado medical marijuana dispensary. Thomas’s comments at the time seemed to suggest it’d be appropriate revisit the precedent-setting case, Gonzales v. Raich, where the Supreme Court narrowly determined that the federal government could enforce prohibition against cannabis cultivation that took place wholly within California based on Congress’s authority to regulate interstate commerce. The initial complaint in the current case, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, argued that government’s ongoing prohibition on marijuana under the CSA was unconstitutional because Congress in recent decades had “dropped any assumption that federal control of state-regulated marijuana is necessary.” — 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. — At oral arguments on appeal late last year, David Boies told judges that under the Constitution, Congress can only regulate commercial activity within a state—in this case, around marijuana—if the failure to regulate that in-state activity “would substantially interfere [with] or undermine legitimate congressional regulation of interstate commerce.” Boies, chairman of the firm, has a long list of prior clients that includes the Justice Department, former Vice President Al Gore and the plaintiffs in a case that led to the invalidation of California’s ban on same-sex marriage, among others. Judges, however, said they were “unpersuaded,” ruling in an opinion that “the CSA remains fully intact as to the regulation of the commercial activity involving marijuana for non-medical purposes, which is the activity in which the appellants, by their own account, are engaged.” The district court, meanwhile, said in the case that while there are “persuasive reasons for a reexamination” of the current scheduling of cannabis, its hands were effectively tied by past U.S. Supreme Court precedent in Raich. This comes in the background of a pending marijuana rescheduling decision from the Trump administration. President Donald Trump said in late August that he’d make a determination about moving cannabis to Schedule III of the CSA within weeks, but he’s yet to act. Meanwhile, last month the Supreme Court agreed to hear a separate case on the constitutionality of a federal law prohibiting people who use marijuana or other drugs from buying or possessing firearms. The Trump administration has argued that the policy “targets a category of persons who pose a clear danger of misusing firearm” and should be upheld. The post Supreme Court Should Hear Marijuana Case That Could Affect Other Issues, Man In Endangered Species Act Dispute Says appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is proposing to raise the quota for legal production of multiple psychedelics—including psilocybin, 5-MeO-DMT and methylone—for research purposes in 2026. In a notice published in the Federal Register on Friday, DEA said it is moving to boost the quotas for the psychedelics substances so researchers can study whether they could serve as “potential treatment of conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression.” The proposed production goal for psilocybin rose from 30,000 grams this year to 40,000 grams in 206, while the psilocyn quota increased from 36,000 grams to 48,000 grams. DEA also evidently sees ample potential for research into lesser-known psychedelics as well. For example, it is proposing to nearly triple the quota for 5-MeO-DMT—from 11,000 grams this year to 30,000 grams in 2026. Just four years ago, in 2021, the agency only called for 35 grams of the psychedelic. That grew to 2,550 grams in 2022 and 11,000 grams the next year, where it’s stayed until this latest proposal. And for methylone, an MDMA-like compound, the increase is even more dramatic: In 2025, the agency set a goal of 5,200 grams, but in 2026 it wants 30,000 grams produced. Like 5-MeO-DMT, the production goal for methylone was minuscule four years ago, when DEA proposed the manufacturing of just 40 grams of the substance. The same quota was set in 2022 before increasing to 5,200 grams for each subsequent year until this latest proposal. Over recent years, DEA has generally ramped up production goals for marijuana and certain psychedelics as interest in their therapeutic potential has grown within the public and scientific community. The proposed 2026 quotas for cannabis, THC, ibogaine, MDMA, LSD and mescaline were not adjusted since last year, however. “These proposed 2026 quotas reflect the quantities that DEA believes are necessary to meet the estimated medical, scientific, research, and industrial needs of the United States, lawful export requirements; and the establishment and maintenance of reserve stocks,” DEA said. The agency said that, in setting the quotas, it took into account several factors, including “projected demand for such class as indicated by procurement quotas,” information obtained by federal health agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and “other factors affecting medical, scientific, research, and industrial needs in the United States and lawful export requirements.” The Controlled Substances Act (CSA) requires the attorney general to set APQs for Schedule I and Schedule II drugs each year. Notably, that would mean marijuana would not be part of this annual research production list if President Donald Trump follows through on a campaign pledge to move cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the CSA. DEA said in a notice last month, however, that the rescheduling process remains stalled, despite the head of agency’s prior commitment to senators that he would prioritize the issue if confirmed for the role. Also, earlier this month, a lawyer for DEA faced a grilling by a federal appeals court over delays in a request for a religious group to use the psychedelic ayahuasca in their practice—a complaint similar to one that marijuana reform advocates have vented over decades amid repeated efforts to end federal cannabis prohibition. Photo courtesy of Dick Culbert. The post DEA Moves To Boost Production Of Psychedelics To Explore Therapeutic Potential For PTSD And Depression appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A GOP congressional leader says he’s “cautiously optimistic” that President Donald Trump will move forward with marijuana rescheduling, arguing that it aligns with the administration’s “America first” agenda and states’ rights principles touted by Republicans. Rep. Guy Reschenthaler (R-PA), the House chief deputy whip, also talked about his support for medical marijuana, which he said “serves as an alternative to highly addictive opioids,” including for military veterans who return home with severe pain or other health conditions. The congressman made the remarks on Sunday at IgniteIt’s Cannabis Capital & Policy Summit, where Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) was also a featured speaker. Cresco Labs CEO Charlie Bachtel, who led the conversation with Reschenthaler, asked to get the lawmaker’s take on the prospects of federally rescheduling cannabis under the Trump administration. The president endorsed the reform on the campaign trail and said in mid-August that he’d make a decision within weeks, but that hasn’t materialized yet. “We know the president is interested. He’s made some comments, and if you look at the president’s track record, he has a habit taking what seems like very complex issues—controversial issues—distilling it, getting behind it and then moving forward,” Reschenthaler said, pointing to Trump’s role in relocating the U.S. embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. “When it comes to rescheduling, I think I’m cautiously optimistic with the administration, and as soon as he gets behind it and does it, I think everything’s going to fall into place,” he said. “Ultimately the DEA has the statutory authority to do it, and again I feel cautiously optimistic we’re going to see something on that.” Part of that optimism comes from the fact that “parties are shifting just in general” on the issue, with more GOP buy-in for reform, the congressman said. “I mean, the bases are so different than what they were 10 years ago—so just a totally different political landscape. But there’s a lot of reasons why it’s become an issue on the right,” he said. “I think if we look at what happened to global war on terror, a lot of people coming coming back [are] being helped by medical cannabis and other forms of treatment.” That includes Reschenthaler’s colleague, Rep. Morgan Luttrell (R-TX), who’s been candid about his experience receiving psychedelic therapy that helped him recover from serious brain injuries he incurred in combat as a Navy SEAL. The point of providing access to medical cannabis is “making sure that veterans get care,” Reschenthaler said. “You also then have the opioid epidemic, where we have an alternative that is not physically addictive [like] opioids.” “Then you have just the states’ rights position of the Republican party, where it should be up to the states to decide, so I hear a lot of congressmen who may not be supportive of [marijuana reform], but they think that this is really a state issue. The federal government shouldn’t be involved.” He said that’s why Congress should move forward and advance incremental policy changes, including a bipartisan bill he’s previously sponsored to let U.S. cannabis businesses get listed on stock exchanges at a time when Canadian companies are already able to be listed. “It’s technically offensive that you can have Canadian companies that are involved in the same exact business activities as American companies that are traded on our stock exchanges,” Reschenthaler said. Another measure he said is ripe for passage is one that would provide cannabis businesses access to the banking system and other basic financial services. The congressman said, “If you’re engaged in lawful activity, you should be able to have the same access to capital and the same access to banks as of any other business.” “For all those reasons, I’m feeling we’re turning the corner—and I think it’s very important that you just keep the [issue] bipartisan,” he said, as first noted by Ignite It. The conversation touched on a variety of marijuana policy topics, and Reschenthaler repeatedly noted his support for providing access to medical cannabis for people with certain health conditions. “The more we can say, when it comes to medical cannabis, that there’s an alternative to highly addictive opioids, I think that’s going to help too,” he said. “And I think one of the pathways through the veteran community.” Commenting on the omission of provisions to expand that marijuana access for veterans in a spending bill Trump signed this month, Reschenthaler said he’s “not happy that that fell out of the discussion.” “We were looking at the [continuing resolution] moving that forward,” he said, adding that there’s “a lot of sausage-making” and, while it may be too late to put the medical cannabis language into the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) this year, “I think that there’s a way forward.” “It’s already been moving and very close to being finished, but we might be able to do it on an appropriations bill. That might be possible. We might be able to take another bite in a minibus appropriations package as well moving forward,” the congressman said. “So there’s other ways we can do this.” He also advised cannabis proponents to try and convince the House Freedom Caucus to get on board with reform—without mentioning the fact that one of the chamber’s most anti-marijuana lawmakers, Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD), chairs that caucus. Photo courtesy of Chris Wallis // Side Pocket Images. The post GOP Congressional Leader Is ‘Cautiously Optimistic’ Trump Will Reschedule Marijuana—Which He Says Is ‘An Alternative To Highly Addictive Opioids’ appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A top conservative think tank says the federal government needs to step up and create a national standard for marijuana product labeling in legal states in a way that’s consistent with tobacco—even as cannabis remains federally prohibited. In a new report, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) called out the “regulatory free-for-all” for marijuana labeling that’s resulted from the patchwork of state laws amid the federal government’s inability to adopt regulations. “The absence of federal policy means there is no standard nationwide package warning for cannabis products as there is for tobacco,” it says. Some legal states might require warning labels with information about potential harms of marijuana use, but the inconsistency warrants national-level guidance, Howard Husock, senior fellow in domestic policy studies at AEI, said. “In this regulatory free-for-all, it would make sense for some federal entity to suggest standardized warning labels and graphics.” The report says that, although the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has identified 12 potential health issues related to marijuana use, no states that have legalized cannabis “cite all those concerns.” California and Nevada require labels to include information about seven out of 12, and nine states “merely note that the products should be kept away from children and avoided by pregnant women.” “The relatively rapid move at the state level toward cannabis legalization has occurred despite cannabis’s continued federal classification as a drug whose dangers put it formally on a par with heroin,” AEI said, referring to marijuana’s Schedule I status. “It is akin to allowing states to set their own alcohol policies during Prohibition.” “The result is a hodgepodge of warnings and public health education programs that can alert consumers to the fact that cannabis is far from a risk-free product,” the report says, adding that it would “make sense” in this regulatory environment for a “federal entity” such as a the surgeon general, Centers for Disease Control (CDC) or Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to recommended “standardized warning labels and graphics.” “It is one thing to legalize the use of cannabis but another to acquiesce to its use. Responsible governments should use their authority to discourage cannabis use and minimize the harm that impairment can inflict on individual users, their families, and the general public,” AEI said. The report comes about a year after the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) under NIH awarded researchers a $2.9 million grant to study how to improve the efficacy of cannabis warning labels—a project involving interviews with state regulators and online experiments designed to develop and implement “more effective warning labels that inform people about the risks associated with cannabis use.” In 2023, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) urged states where marijuana is legal to include warning labels on cannabis products that caution against driving while under the influence. The board noted that federal prohibition is a barrier to nationalizing such consumer education to mitigate public safety risks, recognizing at the time that several legal states already require such labeling, but others don’t. Also last year, a coalition of marijuana reform organizations called on regulators across the world to adopt a universal symbol for marijuana products in the interest of promoting safety in the evolving cannabis market and making it easier to facilitate interstate commerce if states choose to enact that policy. The groups said in a letter to regulators that there should at least be uniformity in labeling so that people know what products contain cannabis no matter where they’re shopping. The International Intoxicating Cannabinoid Product Symbol (IICPS)—a yellow triangle with an image of a cannabis leaf and black border—has already been adopted by Montana, New Jersey, South Dakota and Vermont, while other states like Alaska are also considering it. Doctors for Cannabis Regulation (DFCR), which played a leading role in developing the symbol and is spearheading the campaign for its universal adoption, said in a press release at the time its goal was “communicating a simple public health message,” which is: “Caution with cannabis.” David Nathan, founder and president of DFCR, also criticized New York regulators in an op-ed for Marijuana Moment after the state moved forward with a more complex, individualized label for cannabis products despite being encouraged to follow the lead of other states and adopt the universal symbol. The National Conference on Weights and Measures (NCWM)—which in 2023 adopted national standards for cannabis packaging, labeling and storage—has considered adopting guidance calling for a universal label on marijuana products. But last year it opted to forego that plan because members were concerned that the body, which focuses primarily on scientific measurement, lacked the necessary health expertise to craft an appropriate label. The post Leading Conservative Think Tank Calls For Federal Marijuana Labeling Standards Despite Prohibition appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Senate report warns DC about marijuana; Dem lawmakers’ hemp plan; Top FL Dem says state will legalize in 2026; SCOTUS cannabis brief 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… Hold on, just one second before you read today’s news. Have you thought about giving some financial support to Marijuana Moment? If so, today would be a great day to contribute. We’re planning our reporting for the coming months and it would really help to know what kind of support we can count on. Check us out on Patreon and sign up to give $25/month today: https://www.patreon.com/marijuanamoment / TOP THINGS TO KNOW The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services is preparing to provide coverage for CBD in line with a proposed rule change set to be published in the Federal Register on Friday—and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently discussed the policy with the head of an organization that President Donald Trump promoted a cannabis video from. Senate Appropriations Committee Republicans released a bill that would continue blocking Washington, D.C. from legalizing recreational cannabis sales and a report warning the District that “marijuana remains illegal under Federal law, which includes enhanced penalties” for sales near schools. Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Tina Smith (D-MN), alongside Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), discussed plans to reverse the federal recriminalization of hemp THC products before it takes effect—with Omar saying House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-MN) is “amenable” to the idea. Florida Democratic Party Chair Nikki Fried told Marijuana Moment that a new federal ban on hemp THC products is why people “hate government”—and predicted that voters in her state will legalize cannabis on the ballot next year. The Cato Institute filed a brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to take up a lawsuit from marijuana businesses that are challenging the constitutionality of federal prohibition—saying it touches on whether “Congress may wield a near-boundless commerce power to criminalize activity that is lawful under state law and confined within a state’s borders.” FundCanna CEO Adam Stettner argues in a new Marijuana Moment op-ed that recriminalizing hemp THC products was an “incredibly shortsighted” move that will “put consumers at risk, rob municipalities and states from taxable revenue and ultimately hurt farmers nationwide.” The Michigan Court of Claims held a hearing on a marijuana industry lawsuit challenging the state’s newly approved cannabis tax increase. / FEDERAL Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. again spoke about wanting to see dinosaurs while taking LSD as a teenager. The Drug Enforcement Administration promoted a podcast about culturally tailored drug prevention programs. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) defended his effort to recriminalize hemp THC products, saying it is aimed at “rooting out the bad actors and protecting the growing hemp industry.” Former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) tweeted, “Reschedule Marijuana = Win the Midterms.” / STATES A Missouri court ruled that counties can collect taxes from marijuana dispensaries in unincorporated areas but not from those within municipal boundaries. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit revived lawsuits challenging Rhode Island regulators’ marijuana social equity business licensing system. California announced a recall of marijuana products due to packaging and labeling that is attractive to children. Colorado regulators announced a recall of marijuana products with pesticides above acceptable limits. Oklahoma regulators announced a recall of medical cannabis products that failed microbial testing. Oregon regulators filed changes to rules about communications with marijuana businesses. A former Massachusetts marijuana regulator coauthored a journal article titled, “Same Story, Different Seller: Teaching the Public How Cannabis Models Driven by Profit Create the Same Injustices as Prohibition.” Washington, D.C. officials shut down more unlicensed marijuana businesses. The Minnesota Board of Marriage and Family Therapy heard a report on cannabis issues. — 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. — / LOCAL New York City’s mayor-elect joked about looking like he ate a cannabis edible on his flight to meet President Donald Trump at the White House. Evanston, Illinois officials are seeing fewer cannabis revenues to support the city’s reparations program than expected. / INTERNATIONAL The Canadian federal government and provinces have generated more than C$5.4 billion in marijuana tax since legalization in late 2018. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A study “confirms the effectiveness and good tolerability of CBD in a real-world [developmental and epileptic encephalopathies] population, including off-label use.” A review concluded that “psilocybin seems to reset Default Mode Network (DMN) activity, thereby reducing depressive symptoms with long-term and sustainable antidepressant efficacy.” / ADVOCACY, OPINION & ANALYSIS The Journal Gazette editorial board is calling on Indiana lawmakers to take up medical cannabis legislation in 2026. / BUSINESS Tilray Brands, Inc. implemented a one-for-ten reverse stock split. 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 Feds plan to cover CBD under Medicare (Newsletter: November 28, 2025) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Great to see such diverse voices in cannabis advocacy! The variety of perspectives from business leaders to activists really enriches the conversation. I've been exploring different platforms lately and stumbled upon Suika Game - it's surprisingly relaxing after intense business content like this. The merge mechanics are oddly satisfying when you need a mental break from heavy industry discussions.

Erica Fuller has been an active Grassroots Member since February 2018 and has attended over 37 Tokeativity events. As the Founder of Fuller Strategies, a Political Consulting Firm, she is dedicated to being a major dot connector in Oregon and beyond. Erica is running for the Centennial School Board At-large Director Position 6. If you live in the Centennial district in Gresham, OR, please vote for her on 5/18! And don’t forget to take a break and play Slope for some fun!

The levels in Wacky Flip are quick but exciting. You’ll flip over hills, bounce off platforms, and aim for perfect landings. It’s fast-paced fun that keeps you focused.

Wacky Flip has a variety of missions that keep the action exciting and interesting, including survival runs, trick goals, score challenges, and daily duties. These exciting obstacles turn every single session into a different experience, which in turn encourages players of every level to flip, progress, and enjoy themselves.

“What this will do is put consumers at risk, rob municipalities and states from taxable revenue and ultimately hurt farmers nationwide.” By Adam Stettner, FundCanna Congress just did something incredibly shortsighted. They slipped a massive policy change into a budget deal and erroneously called it “public safety.” If the change holds, it will wipe out a $28+ billion market, kill roughly 300,000 jobs and erase one of the best functioning national pathways we currently have toward safe, sensible cannabis reform and regulation. A great example of government burning down a house to kill a spider. This isn’t policymaking. It is an example of underhanded politics being used to reverse the 2018 Farm Bill and kill an industry without the courage to address it head-on. The Straw Man: “Unregulated hemp is dangerous, so we need a blanket ban.” Proponents of the change argued that hemp-derived intoxicants like Delta-8 THC are a public health threat. That they’re sold to kids. That they’re untested. That they slipped through a loophole in the 2018 Farm Bill. While there are some elements of truth in their arguments, this isn’t representative of the whole truth. In short, that narrative is written to support blanket prohibition. Every industry has bad actors, companies and people that game the system. Instead of destroying an entire industry to rid yourself of the bad actors, you analyze the problem, determine the underlying issue and use logic and the law to create, regulate and enforce structure. That is not what Congress did. Leading this charge is Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who appears to be trying to clean up what he sees as a legislative mess he authored. Back in 2018, he championed the Farm Bill that legalized hemp. Today, he argues that this law unintentionally unleashed an unregulated floodgate of what he calls “gas station cannabis” and that the only solution is to shut down the entire industry. The correct solution? A framework that includes max potency, lab testing, package size, distribution guidelines, age gating and the structure to enforce the above. All of which would address the buzzword concerns about “gas station hemp” and danger to kids. In short, I am supportive of regulation. This isn’t regulation. It’s eradication. The Reality: This is a Legal, Licensed, Thriving, Job-Creating Industry The 2018 Farm Bill legalized hemp. That law was written, passed and signed by Congress and President Donald Trump, who himself has since endorsed the benefits of CBD and cannabinoids and affirmed that cannabis policy should be left to the states. In the years since, an entire market has grown around hemp-derived cannabinoids. Manufacturers, retailers and financial partners have invested hundreds of millions in building compliant, taxpaying, job-creating businesses. Cannabis entrepreneurs have built legitimate, highly regulated businesses that now employ hundreds of thousands of Americans. Their success depends not on speculation but on sustainable business models, sound financial management and steady access to capital—the same fundamentals that drive growth in any emerging industry. The new provisions prohibit products with more than 0.4mg of THC per container. If upheld, that would eliminate 95 percent of the hemp-derived market, according to industry estimates. And it would do so without a single hearing or public comment period—driving an industry begging for regulation underground. What this will do is put consumers at risk, rob municipalities and states from taxable revenue and ultimately hurt farmers nationwide. It will drive cultivation, production and manufacturing to the black market like it has done with every other instance of prohibition or haphazard legal structure. One just has to look at the state legal cannabis market still operating under federal prohibition to see a legal market that has grown to $35 billion but at the same time, fueled an illicit market that is estimated to be north of $100 billion. Prohibition does not work. Half-baked structures and scattershot laws without clear framework, understanding of basic economic principals and lacking regulation/enforcement do not work. “This Is Just the Beginning”? Let’s Not Invent Ghosts Some in the broader cannabis industry fear this is a stalking horse for future attacks on legal THC. That paranoia is understandable, but wrong. This is not part of a coordinated federal crackdown. It’s a misguided, last-minute attempt to solve a real consumer safety concern using the wrong tool. The cannabis industry’s maturity will be defined by its ability to differentiate good policy from bad process. This is the latter. Every part of the plant, no matter the label, needs logic, science back education, data, debate and reasonable and thoughtful regulation. Want Safety? Regulate, Don’t Annihilate Intoxicating products should be tested, sales should be restricted to adults, packaging and potency should be clearly labeled. That’s called regulation. We regulate alcohol, tobacco and caffeine. We regulate thousands of other industries. What we do not do is ban entire industries through fine print in budget bills. If Congress wants to fix the flaws in the Farm Bill, then hold hearings. Invite scientists. Ask the Food and Drug Administration to lead. Bring industry leaders to the table. What we don’t need is a stealth policy reversal that’s shoe-horned into a spending bill with no public debate. Over decades, prohibition brought us figures like Al Capone and El Chapo, and created drug trafficking from all corners of the world. It leads to crime, money laundering, lost lives—and is all unnecessary. What will prohibition create in this instance? One can only imagine. Despite scientifically being more dangerous than cannabis, regulated alcohol and tobacco industries today employ millions, generate billions in sales and most critically, offer consumers safer, standardized products through proper oversight. Yet we continue to vilify and prohibit rather than regulate. The Financial Consequences Are Real Ban hemp, and you don’t just eliminate “gas station” hemp. You kill an entire industry, even the good parts. You eliminate hundreds of thousands of jobs. You wipe out tax revenues federally and at the state and municipal level. You remove $30 billion from the economy instantly and push that money to illicit channels instead. You deliver the product you have outlawed directly into the hands of children and those you claim you want to protect. Removing jobs and the opportunity for regulation, oversight, safer product and age gating in the process. Banning the industry doesn’t protect consumers, rather it punishes law abiding, responsible business owners who are open to regulation and oversight. The cannabis sector doesn’t want a free pass, but it deserves fair and responsible regulation. That begins with policymaking that is deliberate, transparent and informed by the people doing the work on the ground. Congress, your actions have created a problem that is much larger than the problem you sought to fix. If you want to keep our children safe and support our farmers and industry, do it the right way by regulating with logic. There is a way to have it all, this isn’t it. Adam Stettner, CEO of FundCanna, has has overseen more than $20 billion in lending across underserved markets. Photo courtesy of Max Jackson. The post Hemp Isn’t A Loophole—It’s A Legal Industry, And It’s Under Attack (Op-Ed) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net