All Activity

The Pennsylvania Senate has rejected a bill to create a new Cannabis Control Board (CCB) to oversee the state’s medical marijuana program and intoxicating hemp products—though lawmakers made an immediate motion to revive the proposal. The body contemplated under the legislation could also one day oversee recreational cannabis if it is legalized in the state. The measure from Sen. Dan Laughlin (R), which would also recriminalize many hemp THC products, was defeated in a 27-23 vote on Wednesday. Shortly thereafter, however, a motion to reconsider the proposal was approved in a vote of 29-21. It’s not yet clear when the body will take the bill back up. “This legislation is about protecting Pennsylvania families, consumers, patients and, most importantly, our children,” Laughlin said ahead of the initial vote. “Today, intoxicating hemp products are sold throughout every corner of Pennsylvania, in every Senate district, with zero oversight. These dangerous and psychoactive products can be found in convenience stores, smoke shops, gas stations and online marketplaces with no testing standards, no labeling, or safeguards to prevent access by children.” The senator argued that creation of a new CCB is “necessary” because management of the medical cannabis program by the Department of Health “has too often been marked by inconsistency and delay.” “The department has allowed Pennsylvania’s medical marijuana program to drift further and further from its original purpose,” he said, citing “lax oversight and ever-expanding interpretation of qualifying conditions.” “The program has increasingly operated as a de facto tax-free adult use market without the transparency, accountability or statutory framework,” Laughlin said. “Businesses and patients have experienced slow approvals, conflicting guidance, years-long delay in remediation reviews, uncertainty regarding workplace policies and regulatory decisions that have ultimately been overturned by the courts.” “These inconsistencies undermine confidence in the system and distract from what should be our primary mission: serving and protecting our patients. A dedicated Cannabis Control Board will provide focused expertise, consistent enforcement and transparent decision making.” Sen. Sharif Street (D), who has partnered with Laughlin on separate legislation to legalize recreational marijuana, said “we should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.” “My colleague has outlined many really good things that are addressed in this bill. Are there other things that are not sure? Are there other things that we could be doing in the space of cannabis? Absolutely,” he said. “But that doesn’t mean that today this legislation isn’t worthy of a positive vote… Should we pass it today, it would go to the House and there will be opportunity for additional work to be done in the legislation.” Sen. Jay Costa (D), the minority floor leader, however, urged colleagues to oppose the legislation. Today’s inaction leaves communities vulnerable and sends the wrong message. Parents, educators, and law enforcement need real tools to confront this escalating public health issue. I won't quit working to protect Pennsylvania families. Full Release: https://t.co/aFrFmJROtP pic.twitter.com/fw0zKekmhL — Senator Dan Laughlin (@senatorlaughlin) June 10, 2026 The Law & Justice Committee, which is chaired by the bill’s sponsor, had taken up and amended the measure several times this session before it came to the floor. The body’s Appropriations and Rules & Executive Nominations Committees also signed off on the legislation this week ahead of its consideration by the full chamber. In its current form, the measure, would transfer regulatory authority for the state’s existing medical cannabis program from the Department of Health to a new seven-member CCB. The governor would appoint three members—one with law enforcement experience, another with expertise in dealing with addiction and a third with experience in “cannabis matters.” The Senate president pro tempore, Senate minority leader, House speaker and House minority leader would also each get to make one appointment. The body would oversee cannabis permits, enforcement, seed-to-sale tracking, advertising, labeling, testing and other aspects of the legal industry. The legislation would also significantly restrict most hemp THC products, aligning the state with a new federal policy that is set to take effect later this year recriminalizing preparations with total THC content of more than 0.3 percent on a dry-weight basis or more than 0.4 milligrams of THC per container. The bill would also create new types of medical cannabis permits for warehousing/distribution and third-party transporters, and would require regulars to issue an additional permit to an independent grower/processor. It would additionally add a new requirement for dispensaries to have a physician, pharmacist, physician assistant or certified nurse practitioner available at all times during hours of operation. A new Cannabis Regulation Fund would be established, supported by fees from the program. Forty percent of revenue would fund CCB’s operations, 15 percent would help patients pay for medical marijuana, 10 percent would support drug misuse prevention and treatment, 10 percent would go to local police departments and the remainder would go into the state’s general fund. Laughlin, who is also sponsoring bipartisan legislation to legalize adult-use marijuana previewed the regulatory measure last year, writing that Pennsylvania should take initial steps to make sure the state is “ready to act when legalization becomes law” by establishing a CCB now. In a cosponsorship memo, Laughlin said his bill would “transfer regulatory control of the Medical Marijuana Program to the CCB, ensuring continuity, efficiency, and improved oversight of medical cannabis businesses and patient access.” It would further “establish uniform safety standards to protect consumers from untested and potentially harmful products.” The bill text itself would not enact recreational marijuana legalization on its own. But the description indicates that the sponsor feels the current regulatory regime under the Pennsylvania Department of Health should be replaced with a more targeted agency that would ostensibly be suited to oversee an adult-use market if lawmakers move to end prohibition. “By consolidating oversight under a single regulatory board, we can eliminate inconsistencies, enhance transparency, and provide the structure needed to responsibly manage this industry,” the memo says. The action on the cannabis regulatory bill, SB 49, comes shortly after the House of Representatives passed a bill to allow terminally ill patients to use medical cannabis in hospitals and other healthcare facilities. — 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. — It also comes as lawmakers in Pennsylvania continue to consider broader recreational marijuana legalization—a reform that a state senator recently said will be easier to achieve now that the Trump administration has rescheduled cannabis at the federal level. Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) has repeatedly called on lawmakers to send him a marijuana legalization bill and for the last several years has included the reform in his budget requests to the legislature. The Democratic-controlled House of Representatives passed a bill last year to end prohibition, but the Republican-controlled Senate has not followed suit. Republican gubernatorial nominee Stacy Garrity, who is running against Shapiro, recently pledged to veto a marijuana legalization bill if lawmakers ever sent one to her desk—though she added that she doesn’t think the reform stands a chance of making it that far in the state. “I don’t support legalizing recreational marijuana,” she said. “Recreational marijuana will not end up in the budget. They’re never going to pass it…not as long as Senate Republicans are in control of the Senate.” Her running mate for lieutenant governor, Jason Richey, claimed that legalizing marijuana would be “catastrophic” for the state, arguing it would increase the size of the illegal market, undermine job creation and harm public health. A spokesperson in the governor’s office said the Trump administration’s federal marijuana rescheduling move is an “important step” that “adds support” to his push to legalize cannabis in the state. The governor also used this year’s unofficial cannabis holiday 4/20 as an opportunity to press lawmakers once again to send him a bill to legalize marijuana. “Pennsylvanians who want to buy recreational marijuana are already driving across the border to one of our neighboring states who’ve legalized it,” Shapiro said in a social media post that day. “That’s hundreds of millions in revenue going out of state instead of being spent here in Pennsylvania.” In April, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives passed budget legislation proposed by Shapiro that relies on revenue that would be generated from recreational marijuana sales, which has yet to be legalized in the state. The governor earlier this year, as he has in past years, included cannabis legalization and the resulting expected revenue in his budget request. The $53.2 billion budget legislation, which doesn’t itself include provisions to actually legalize marijuana even as it contemplates allocating money that would result from it, now heads to the Senate for consideration. The House of Representatives last year passed a bill to legalize marijuana and put sales in state-owned dispensaries, but the Republican Senate majority has criticized that plan while also not advancing a cannabis legalization model of its own. Separately this session, lawmakers have advanced a bill to allow terminally ill patients to use medical cannabis in hospitals and other healthcare facilities The legislative developments come as a recent poll shows that seven out of ten Pennsylvania likely voters support legalizing adult-use marijuana—including majority backing for the reform across party lines. When asked whether they “support or oppose the regulation and taxation of legal cannabis for use by adults 21 and older in Pennsylvania,” 69 percent of respondents said yes. Support was strongest from Democrats, at 72 percent, but also includes 67 percent of Republicans and 64 percent of independents. Meanwhile, Shapiro is continuing to pressure on lawmakers to send him a bill to legalize marijuana in the state, saying that doing so would generate new revenue that could be invested in key programs. “While some in Harrisburg claim we can’t afford to make bigger investments in our kids, public safety, and our economy, know this: If we legalized and regulated adult-use cannabis, we’d bring in $1.3 BILLION in revenue for our Commonwealth over the first five years,” the governor said in another recent social media post. “Those are dollars that can be invested back into our people and our communities,” he said. “Stop with the excuses. Let’s get this done.” The state’s Independent Fiscal Office (IFO) reported in February that legalizing cannabis in Pennsylvania would generate nearly half a billion dollars in annual revenue by 2028, an estimate that is a significantly larger cash windfall compared to projections from Shapiro’s own office. With a proposed 20 percent wholesale cannabis excise tax, 6 percent state sales tax for retail and licensing fees, IFO said the governor’s legalization plan would generate $140 million in tax revenue in the first year of implementation from 2027-2028 and increase to $432 million by 2030-2031. That’s a much higher revenue estimate than what the governor’s office put forward in the latest executive budget. According to his office’s analysis, legalization would generate about $36.9 million in tax dollars in its first year from a 20 percent wholesale tax on marijuana—rising gradually to $223.8 million by 2030-2031. In February, a coalition of drug policy and civil liberties organizations urged Shapiro to play a leadership role in convening legislative leaders to get the job done on cannabis legalization this session. The post Pennsylvania Senate Rejects Bill To Regulate Marijuana And Restrict Hemp THC Products, But It May Be Revived appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“The moment federally legal hemp crosses Ohio’s borders, it becomes ‘marijuana’ for purposes of Ohio law.” By Phillip Smith, The American Hemp Monitor Nearly a dozen hemp beverage makers and distributors have filed a class action lawsuit seeking to block the state of Ohio from enforcing the hemp provisions of a new state law governing hemp and marijuana, which is legal in the state. That law, Senate Bill 56, redefines hemp to exclude any product containing more than 0.4 milligrams of THC, defining such products as marijuana instead. And all products defined as marijuana can only be sold at licensed marijuana retailers. The lawsuit from 10 companies, including Cleveland-based Titan Logistics Group, Saucy Seltzer and Hopportunity Holding Company, charges that the state law defines hemp so narrowly that products legal under current federal hemp law are considered illegal marijuana in Ohio. “The moment federally legal hemp crosses Ohio’s borders, it becomes ‘marijuana’ for purposes of Ohio law,” the lawsuit says. The lawsuit also argues that the state law unlawfully bars companies in the state from using out-of-state hemp, violating the Interstate Commerce Clause, and exposing them to possible felony criminal charges for transporting or processing “marijuana.” And because the law that makes state-licensed marijuana retailers the only legal outlet for these products requires that all cultivation, processing and retail sales occur in-state, it also bars out-of-state operators from any legal entree to the market. The lawsuit notes that marijuana licenses are capped and not currently being issued, leaving out-of-state businesses with “no pathway” to participate. “If every state acted as Ohio has, there would be 50 siloed markets for hemp-derived products rather than a single national market,” the lawsuit says. Plaintiffs named the state’s 88 county prosecutors, along with nine city prosecutors, as defendants. State Attorney General Andy Wilson (R) is expected to intervene in the case to represent the defendants. Plaintiffs are seeking both a temporary and a permanent injunction to block enforcement of the law, with a hearing set for Thursday. While there have been other challenges to the law, only one has resulted in a positive outcome, and for only one company. Seattle-based hemp beverage producer Cycling Frog won a temporary injunction in Sandusky County last month, allowing it to continue to sell its products at a handful of retail outlets in the state. This story was first published by The American Hemp Monitor. The post Hemp THC Companies Are Suing Ohio Officials To Block New Product Restrictions From Being Enforced appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Campaigns that are working to put measures to roll back marijuana legalization on the ballot in two states are facing accusations of “fraudulent” and “misleading” signature gathering tactics—and not for the first time. Now, however, new social media posts from both states appear to show signature collectors for each measure arguing that people who support legal cannabis access should sign the petitions in order to advance or protect marijuana reform. A video posted to Reddit of a signature gatherer for the Massachusetts proposal—which would repeal state laws allowing the regulated commercial sales of recreational marijuana while maintaining legal possession and continuing the medical cannabis system—shows the man collecting signatures outside a supermarket next to a sign that says “keep cannabis legal.” When confronted by a marijuana reform supporter who recorded the petitioner’s interactions with voters, he appeared to be trying to convince them that it is important to qualify the anti-cannabis measure for the ballot in order to then defeat it. “This is what we’re fighting against right here. That’s why we vote no,” he said. “If we can get this to the ballot right here, we vote no.” The person who captured the video pointed out that Massachusetts voters already approved marijuana legalization years ago, and that the only way it could be imminently repealed is if the new ballot measure qualified for the November election. If the initiative does not get enough signatures to go before voters, the state’s laws will remain the same. “It’s my job,” the petitioner insisted, however. “I know what I’m talking about.” “It’s a group of rich folks from out of state that want to basically take marijuana to when it was a medical marijuana card,” he said. “We don’t want that to happen.” The same man also appears to also be gathering signatures for a separate measure in Maine that would similarly repeal laws allowing regulated adult-use marijuana sales and home cultivation rights for adults while keeping possession legal and adding new testing requirements for medical cannabis. A Reddit post shows photos of the man and a colleague sitting at a table with what appears to be the same “keep cannabis legal sign” from the Massachusetts video. In one photo, he is using one hand to hold up a flyer that says “Maine Cannabis Reform” and the other hand to flip off the camera. The person who posted the photos said in a comment that the petitioners “told me that ‘a bunch of billionaires are trying to make recreational cannabis illegal in Maine’ so they’re up here to help keep it legal,” they said. “After showing a variety of confusing images on their phones, they asked me to sign to have it ‘added to the ballot so that I can vote No in November.'” The Reddit posted went on to say, “They were hired by those ‘billionaires.'” Wendy Wakeman, a spokesperson for the Coalition for a Healthy Massachusetts, which is behind the initiative in that state, told Marijuana Moment that she would have a “formal statement later today on how we’ll address this.” A staffer for the prohibitionist organization Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), whose affiliated group SAM Action is largely funding the anti-cannabis ballot campaigns in both states, declined to comment for this story when reached by Marijuana Moment. Maine State Rep. David Boyer (R) warned voters in a Facebook post about petitioners circulating the legalization rollback measure in conjunction with the state’s elections this week. “Cannabis legalization repeal petition is out. DECLINE TO SIGN,” Boyer, who led the fight to pass cannabis legalization at the ballot about 10 years ago when he was a staffer for the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), said. “They have been reported to lie about what the petition does, saying things like it’s about testing.” The campaigns in both states have previously been accused of misleading petitioning tactics. In Massachusetts, some voters reported that the campaign used fake cover letters for other ballot measures on unrelated issues like affordable housing and same-day voter registration. Legal cannabis supporters filed a formal complaint about the prohibitionist effort’s tactics, but the State Ballot Law Commission rejected the challenge. Under state law, Massachusetts ballot campaigns must turn in signatures in two waves. After the first submission, the legislature gets a chance to enact proposed ballot measures after organizers submit an initial round of petitions. Lawmakers last month declined to act on the anti-marijuana measure, however, and now organizers need to submit additional 12,429 certified signatures by July 1 to make the November ballot. The measure is also facing a legal challenge from cannabis industry operatives who say it contains “impermissibly unrelated subjects,” and that the state attorney general’s official summary is “misleading and deficient.” The state Supreme Judicial Court heard oral arguments on the litigation challenging the anti-marijuana initiative last month. In Maine, Boyer, the state lawmaker, previously posted a recording of a petitioner appearing to significantly misrepresent what the anti-cannabis proposal would accomplish. Secretary of State Shenna Bellows (D) told lawmakers at a hearing in January that she would tell the cannabis campaign’s organizers that her department had received a significant number of complaints about its petition circulators’ behavior. Organizers behind that initiative failed to meet a signature submission deadline to qualify for the November ballot this year, and the measure could now appear on the ballot in 2027 if they collect enough valid petitions. Separately, marijuana opponents had filed a similar legalization rollback initiative in Arizona, but that effort was scrapped after the local campaign leader said he has “adjusted my viewpoints on the threat to kids” posed by the legal marijuana industry. Sean Noble, president of the political strategy firm American Encore, told local media that while he launched the campaign due to concerns about marketing of cannabis to children, he has come to realize that marijuana businesses in Arizona have “not done some of the things that I thought they were doing.” “I went into it with a pretty profound belief that it was happening,” Noble said. “I was kind of relying on things that I had seen or read from other people.” “I don’t think that they’re specifically marketing gummies and candies and that kind of thing the way that I was led to believe that they were doing,” he said. “Maybe they’re doing that in other states. But it’s not happening here in Arizona.” The post Anti-Marijuana Ballot Campaigns In Maine And Massachusetts Accused Of ‘Fraudulent’ And ‘Misleading’ Petitioning Tactics appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“They cannot currently help a veteran access cannabis through official channels. This is not a gray area. It is a bright line that shapes every clinical interaction.” By Mike Davis, Veterans Action Council What happens when a veteran sits down with a clinician in a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center and mentions cannabis? For years, that moment carried uncertainty, even fear. Veterans worried about losing benefits, being arbitrarily labeled or having their medical care restricted and their needed pain medicine denied. Providers, in turn, often navigated a gray zone between federal law, seemingly conflicting policies, evolving science and patient reality. This article is the second installment in an ongoing Veterans Action Council (VAC) series examining internal VA cannabis policies obtained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and what those documents reveal about veterans’ access to medical cannabis. Today, cannabis-related interactions between veterans and VA providers are more defined, not because policy has liberalized within the department, but because it has been formalized, the documents show. At the center of that structure is Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Directive 1315, which governs how providers interact with veterans about cannabis. It is supported by internal educational materials, including a Cannabis Provider Education Packet and policy slide decks obtained through VAC FOIA disclosures. These documents do not change the law, but they do reveal different perspectives of what the law actually requires. The first medical cannabis state initiative, California’s Proposition 215, passed in 1996, inspired many doctors inside VA to seek guidance from the department’s Office of General Counsel (OGC) about medical cannabis. A 2008 opinion from VA OGC cites an informal communication from the Department of Justice (DOJ) that warned that it “may seek civil or criminal penalties for federal physicians and practitioners who completed forms that either recommend the use of medical marijuana or forms that describe the patient’s physical condition in order to facilitate the patient’s procurement of medical marijuana pursuant to state law.” The VA operationalized this DOJ interpretation, records show. And in doing so, it shapes exactly what veterans experience in the exam room every day. The Script Behind The Conversation The VA’s guidance to providers can be distilled into four core directives: Discuss cannabis use openly Document it in the medical record Do not fill out the needed recommendation for veterans’ access in state medical cannabis programs Remind veterans they are subject to arrest for cannabis possession while on federal VA medical center property At the same time, the policy is explicit on a fifth point: Veterans are not to be denied VA care solely for cannabis use. On paper, this appears balanced. In practice, it creates a very specific tone within the clinic, one that VAC believes veterans should clearly understand. When a veteran discloses cannabis use, providers are trained to respond in a structured, clinical manner. The emphasis is on screening: frequency, quantity, method of use and potential signs of Cannabis Use Disorder (CUD). Providers are encouraged to assess interactions with other medications, mental health conditions and overall functioning. This is not a casual conversation. From VA’s perspective, this is about safety and continuity of care. From the veteran’s perspective, it can feel like being interrogated rather than being heard. What Providers Are Told Not to Do The most rigid boundary in VA’s cannabis policy remains unchanged: providers cannot complete paperwork to recommend cannabis for state medical cannabis programs. This prohibition is rooted in cannabis’s status as a Schedule I controlled substance and dates back to when DOJ warned VA physicians that recommending cannabis could be viewed as effectively aiding and abetting illegal activity. The landmark federal case Conant v. McCaffrey later established that physician recommendations are protected speech and an integral part of the doctor-patient relationship. Yet VA physicians were never formally informed of the implications of the case, nor has DOJ ever publicly withdrawn its original threat. As discussed in the first article in this series, a move of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III could significantly alter the legal foundation for VA’s current prohibition. Internal VA documents obtained by VAC indicate that department officials have already acknowledged that rescheduling may enable VA providers to complete state medical cannabis recommendation forms. At the same time, those documents suggest that the department’s broader clinical posture toward cannabis, particularly within mental health settings, would not automatically shift simply because of rescheduling. For veterans, this creates a disconnect that is difficult to ignore. In many states, cannabis is a legal therapeutic option. Outside the VA system, physicians can recommend it, guide its use and integrate it into treatment plans. Inside VA, providers must stop short of that line. They can discuss cannabis up to a point where such a discussion might be interpreted as a recommendation. They can document cannabis use. But they cannot currently help a veteran access cannabis through official channels. This is not a gray area. It is a bright line that shapes every clinical interaction. The “Do Not Deny Care” Clause And Its Limits One of the most important protections in Directive 1315 is the prohibition against denying care based solely on cannabis use. This provision did not emerge in a vacuum. It reflects years of advocacy by veterans, including leaders within the VAC, who fought to ensure that honesty about cannabis would not come at the cost of treatment. Before this policy existed, the reality was far harsher. Veterans were removed from pain management programs, flagged in ways that affected prescribing decisions or discouraged from discussing cannabis at all. The culture was punitive. Directive 1315 changed that. If a doctor is told by policy that they can freely discuss cannabis use as long as the doctor’s words, or printed clinical notes, cannot be interpreted as a recommendation, how does the doctor handle this? It is the experience of many veterans that when they discussed medical cannabis under Directive 1315, only negative things about cannabis would be documented in their files. Absolutely no positives, which can then lead to veterans being labeled as having CUD and being denied access to pain medication or facing other implications. One outcome of this lack of clear systemic medical guidance for physicians is that it leaves room for doctors to act inappropriately by injecting their own beliefs. This outcome varies for veterans depending on the VA facility they visit. Treatment by geography does not work. Education Packets And The Framing Of Risk The Cannabis Provider Education Packet that VAC obtained via FOIA plays a critical role in shaping how providers interpret and communicate about cannabis. These materials rely heavily on evidence synthesis, meta-analyses, systematic reviews and position statements from organizations such as the American Psychiatric Association. The framing is consistent: cannabis carries risks, particularly in mental health contexts. Providers are taught to focus on potential harms, including dependency, cognitive effects and exacerbation of psychiatric conditions. What is less emphasized, and often absent, is any real-world clinical nuance. Many veterans report using cannabis to manage chronic pain, PTSD symptoms or sleep disturbances—but acknowledging any of these motivations starts looking like a recommendation. These lived experiences do not fit neatly into the risk-focused framework presented in VA materials. As a result, the conversation inside the clinic can feel very one-sided. A veteran may describe relief. A provider, following guidance, responds with caution. Both perspectives are real. But only one is institutionally reinforced. Humanizing The Policy Policy documents are sterile by design. They speak in directives, not dialogue. But their impact is deeply human. Imagine a veteran sitting across from a VA clinician: They mention cannabis use, perhaps hesitantly. The provider asks structured questions and documents responses. They explain that they cannot recommend cannabis or assist with state certification. They may discuss risks, particularly related to mental health. They reassure the veteran that care will continue regardless. This is the interaction Directive 1315 was built to standardize. It is safer than in the past. It is clearer than the past, but it is not fully aligned with the reality that many veterans live in today. There is also a disconnect within VA where the top administrators in Washington, D.C. expect doctors in the field to take their guidance with a grain of salt, focus on the medical standards of care and their medical training and not defer to “some memo.” Still, medical professionals working in VA hospitals, all too often, act like these memos are the law and must be followed even at the detriment of patient care. The VAC Perspective From the Veterans Action Council’s standpoint, the issue is not whether the VA should ignore risks or abandon clinical rigor. It is whether the system can evolve to meet veterans where they actually are. Right now, VA’s approach is rooted in caution, liability and federal constraint. It relies heavily on synthesized evidence rather than VA-driven clinical trials. It prioritizes documentation over integration. And it draws a hard line at recommendation. VAC believes that the line deserves reexamination. Veterans are not asking for reckless endorsement. They are asking for informed, honest and collaborative care—care that acknowledges both risks and benefits, and that does not artificially separate VA from the broader medical landscape. What Veterans Should Know If you are a veteran receiving care through VA, here is the reality of the current system: You can and should discuss cannabis use openly with your provider Your use will be documented as part of your medical record Your provider cannot complete the recommendation forms for cannabis under the state program You will not be denied VA care solely for using cannabis Understanding this framework removes uncertainty. It allows veterans to walk into appointments informed, rather than fearful. The Path Forward Directive 1315 was a step forward. It replaced silence with structure and fear with defined boundaries. But it is not the final word. As cannabis policy continues to evolve nationally, the gap between federal systems and state-level realities will only become more pronounced. VA cannot remain static in a dynamic landscape. Inside the clinic, the conversation has already changed. Veterans are speaking more openly. Providers are listening. The next step is to decide whether those limits still serve the people the system was built to care for. Congress has taken up our effort to educate veterans and the public that the recommendation of cannabis needed to participate in state medical cannabis programs is a necessary part of the doctor-patient relationship and considered to be free speech that is being denied to our veterans. VAC appreciates Congress’s effort to codify this reality by attempting to pass a federal law to protect VA doctors from punishment for recommending medical cannabis. However, we don’t know of any doctors who have ever been punished for it, and, in fact, the prohibition on free speech is at the core of the veterans system of care. The issue is not whether VA physicians have free speech rights identical to those of private citizens. The issue is that veterans receiving care through VA are subject to a healthcare system in which physicians face restrictions that private-sector doctors do not. Veterans should not lose access to open and informed medical discussions simply because their healthcare provider works for the federal government. The Conant v. McCaffrey ruling on the right of providers to recommend medical cannabis held that: “An integral component of the practice of medicine is the communication between a doctor and a patient. Physicians must be able to speak frankly and openly to patients. That need has been recognized by the courts through the application of the common law doctor-patient privilege.” VAC asks: If VA doctors are not allowed to speak freely with their patients about matters affecting their health, should VA continue to hold primary responsibility for treating those patients at all? At this point, we would prefer that the Veterans Equal Access Act, the legislation focused on allowing VA providers to recommend medical cannabis, be withdrawn. It has served its function of educating everyone as to the detriment of the veterans’ healthcare caused by this lack of free speech within the doctor/patient relationship. We worry the bill could backfire. Rather than leading VA to loosen restrictions on what its doctors can say about cannabis, it might cause VA and DOJ to join forces and defend the current rules. Mike Davis is a medically retired Army combat veteran and disabled veteran with 15 years of active-duty service and a member of the Veterans Action Council. He focuses on veterans’ access to medical cannabis, federal policy reform and government transparency. His advocacy includes Freedom of Information Act investigations, regulatory analysis and participation in international discussions on drug policy and veteran healthcare. Read VA’s Cannabis Provider Education Packet obtained via FOIA below: The post VA Documents Reveal Rules For Medical Cannabis Conversations Between Veterans And Government Doctors (Op-Ed) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Outstanding article! I want people to know just how good this information is in your article. Your views are much like my own concerning this subject. I will visit daily your blog because I know. It may be very beneficial for me. เว็บแทงบอล

I'd personally declare that will this is the a terrific article of an wonderful man or woman, i am just very happy to discover this specific. แทงบอลสด

Medical marijuana extracts “meaningfully” improve cancer-related symptoms such as sleep difficulties and anxiety—though responses varied among patients depending on personal preferences for individual cannabinoid content of the extracts—according to a new study Researchers at the University of British Columbia, University of Ottawa, University of Manitoba and Queen’s University investigated the impact of extracts containing different concentrations of THC and CBD on common cancer symptoms. The randomized, placebo-controlled, triple blind study found that, overall, medical marijuana oil extracts “can be meaningfully beneficial for cancer-related symptoms in approximately 50 percent of patients, particularly for sleep and related symptoms.” The research involved THC-dominant, CBD-dominant and 1:1 oil extracts, as well as a placebo. Notably, it found that the “most helpful extract differed between individuals,” and no single extract type was “routinely better than the others on average.” There was “no significant preference of one extract over another on average, but a clear preference between extracts for most individuals.” Regardless of a patient’s primary symptom, about half of participants saw improvements with respect to sleep, anxiety and daytime tiredness. Also, 66 percent of patients expressed a personal preference for an extract with an active cannabinoid as opposed to a placebo. “Fifty-six percent of the 89 participants with complete Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) data reported at least a 1.4-point improvement compared to placebo with at least one extract,” the study authors said. “Subgroup analysis showed response rates of 50 percent for the pain, 47 percent for sleep, and 60 percent for anxiety subgroup.” “More than half of participants experienced a clinically meaningful benefit over placebo with at least one type of cannabis extract.” The treatment further found that 2.5 milligrams of THC and CBD extract three times daily was “well-tolerated.” However, “personalization of treatment is required to optimize response.” “Though it would be convenient to be able to recommend a single agent for everyone, this would clearly not meet the needs of a diverse population,” the study said. “Our finding that no preparation was better than the others on average, but most participants found one to provide greater benefit individually may further explain why trials that focus on a single preparation may have underestimated the potential benefit of cannabinoids. Restricting patients to a single extract ignores the known heterogeneity in endocannabinoid physiology.” The study builds upon an expanding body of scientific literature exploring the therapeutic efficacy of cannabis in cancer treatment. For example, a recent scientific review found that components of marijuana show “consistent and statistically significant anti-tumor effects” in certain types of cancer, including glioblastoma and breast cancer. It also found cannabinoids seem to “enhance chemotherapy efficacy.” Another systemic review concluded that studies “consistently show” that the CBD is a potential “anticancer agent across different cancer types”—and that effect applies to dogs as well as humans. A similar analysis showed that CBD “holds substantial promise as an anti-tumor agent” in addition to its other anti-inflammatory properties. Scientists explored CBD’s effect on many types of cancer—including some of the most aggressive ones, such as glioblastoma, which affects the brain. They also noted it can help suppressing the growth and metastasis of other cancers, including breast, lung, colorectal, ovarian and prostate, among others. In 2025, a paper published in the journal Pharmacology & Therapeutics, assessed a range of clinical and preclinical findings that the efficacy of chemotherapy drugs can be enhanced by medical marijuana. In a sign of greater acceptance of medical applications of cannabis, President Donald Trump’s choice to serve as the next White House drug czar has called medical marijuana a “fantastic” treatment option for seriously ill patients and said she doesn’t object to legalization, even if she might not personally agree with the policy. Also last year, a study found that “patients with cancer using cannabis report significant improvements in cancer-related symptoms.” The post Marijuana Extracts ‘Meaningfully’ Improve Cancer Patients’ Symptoms Such As Sleep Trouble And Anxiety, Study Shows appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

I am impressed. I don't think Ive met anyone who knows as much about this subject as you do. You are truly well informed and very intelligent. You wrote something that people could understand and made the subject intriguing for everyone. Really, great blog you have got here. kokitoto

Used to do appreciate reading through content articles submitted on this website. They're amazing and it has lots of helpful info. แทงบอลสเต็ป

A powerful congressional committee has voted to prevent federal employees from having medical marijuana covered under their workers’ compensation programs—regardless of the Trump administration’s move to reschedule cannabis. On Tuesday, the House Appropriations Committee approved a Fiscal Year 2027 bill covering Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies (Labor-HHS) in a vote of 34-28. In addition to including the medical cannabis and workers’ comp provision, the legislation and an attached report also addresses other drug policy issues such as overdose prevention centers and a health condition experienced by some marijuana consumers. One section of the Labor-HHS bill says that no funding provided to the Department of Labor under the measure can be used to “authorize, provide, reimburse, or otherwise recognize marijuana or any cannabis-derived substance as a compensable medical treatment or benefit” under any federal workers’ compensation program—”regardless of any change in the scheduling of marijuana” under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). “SEC. 532. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used by the Department of Labor, including the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, to authorize, provide, reimburse, or otherwise recognize marijuana or any cannabis-derived substance as a compensable medical treatment or benefit under any Federal workers’ compensation program, including the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act, regardless of any change in the scheduling of marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act. Nothing in this section shall be construed to require or permit reimbursement for marijuana under any Federal workers’ compensation program.” The Trump administration in April announced that it was moving state-licensed medical cannabis, as well as any cannabinoid products approved by the Food and Drug Administration, from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act to Schedule III. Broader reclassification of marijuana to Schedule III will be the topic of a hearing scheduled to begin later this month. The bill approved by the committee also contains a separate rider that blocks the use of funds for “any activity that promotes the legalization of any drug or other substance included in schedule I” of the Controlled Substances Act. “SEC. 509. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act may be used for any activity that promotes the legalization of any drug or other substance included in schedule I of the schedules of controlled substances established under section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act except for normal and recognized executive-congressional communications. (b) The limitation in subsection (a) shall not apply when there is significant medical evidence of a therapeutic advantage to the use of such drug or other substance or that federally sponsored clinical trials are being conducted to determine therapeutic advantage.” The provision has been included in federal spending legislation since the 1990s. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) in past years has attempted to get that language deleted by arguing that it impedes research on psychedelics, but her amendments have been defeated. The report attached to the Labor-HHS bill says members are “concerned by the rise in reported cases of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome” and calls on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to follow through on a previous directive to publish a report on the issue. “Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome in Youth.—The Committee is increasingly concerned by the rise in reported cases of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS)—a condition associated with prolonged, high-potency cannabis use that leads to severe nausea and vomiting. With the growth of high-THC vaping products and their increasing use among adolescents, the Committee believes further study is warranted. The Committee instructs CDC to complete the directive under this heading in the explanatory statement that accompanied Division B of P.L. 119–75.” The report for a separate Homeland Security bill that was before the committee on Tuesday additionally says federal officials should use provided funds to “enhance detection, seizure, and investigation of illegal grow operations,” particularly those that are associated with countries of concern like China. “Border Enforcement Security Task Forces (BESTs).—The recommendation includes an increase of $5,000,000 to support BESTs in their efforts to combat illicit activities of transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), with an emphasis on initiatives countering fentanyl. The Committee is also concerned about the increased production and distribution of marijuana products by foreign nationals associated with TCOs, particularly from countries of concern, to include the People’s Republic of China. Within the funds provided, BESTs shall enhance detection, seizure, and investigation of illegal grow operations, include seizures of marijuana in official reports, and provide an update to the Committee on resource needs to further advance these efforts within 180 days of the date of enactment of this Act.” The LaborHHS legislation as approved additionally contains a rider restricting the use of funds for syringe exchange programs and a prohibition on support for safe consumption sites for illegal drugs. “SEC. 525. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, no funds appropriated in this Act shall be used to purchase sterile needles or syringes for the hypodermic injection of any illegal drug: Provided, That such limitation does not apply to the use of funds for elements of a program other than making such purchases if the relevant State or local health department, in consultation with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, determines that the State or local jurisdiction, as applicable, is experiencing, or is at risk for, a significant increase in hepatitis infections or an HIV outbreak due to injection drug use, and such program is operating in accordance with State and local law: Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated in this Act may be used for the operation of a supervised drug consumption facility that permits the consumption onsite of any substance listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812).” The report also celebrates the Trump administration’s moves to undermine harm reduction-based approaches to drug policy that focus on keeping consumers safe when they aren’t willing to stop using drugs. “Harm Reduction.—The Committee commends the Trump Administration’s recent guidance to shift away from harm reduction activities that facilitate illicit drug use and run counter to Federal law, including the use of taxpayer dollars to purchase drug testing kits. The Committee continues to prioritize funding for evidence-based addiction treatment and recovery, including the use of FDA-approved medications for opioid use disorder. While the Committee provides no funding for harm reduction activities, the Committee continues to support the availability and provision of naloxone and other opioid overdose reversal medications to reduce overdose deaths.” Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-PA) filed an amendment to remove much of the anti-harm reduction language from the bill and report, but it was defeated on a voice vote. Not adopted by voice vote. — House Appropriations Amendments (@AppropsAmendmts) June 9, 2026 Last week, the House Appropriations Committee approved a separate spending bill and attached report that directs federal officials to continue requiring government employees and safety-sensitive workers such as truck drivers and airline pilots to be drug tested for marijuana, “regardless of any future changes to the legal status or scheduling.” The panel also voted last month to advance a provision that, if enacted, would prevent federal officials from taking further steps to carry out marijuana rescheduling. That funding bill also contains an updated version of a longstanding rider that since 2014 has protected state medical cannabis programs from federal interference. The committee report attached to that legislation also contains a number of cannabis-related provisions, including one calling on the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to address the “proliferation of Federally unregulated ingestible, inhalable, and topical products that contain intoxicating cannabinoids” and that “threaten consumer safety.” Separately, the House Appropriations Committee recently approved a spending bill and an attached report that expresses concerns about health risks from cannabis-derived products, while also encouraging research into the therapeutic benefits of psychedelics. — 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 in Congress, the House last month approved amendment to let military veterans receive recommendations for medical marijuana through their doctors at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) The full House also recently passed a Farm Bill with provisions aimed at aiding industrial hemp producers—but without any language to delay or alter the federal recriminalization of hemp THC products that’s scheduled to take effect later this year. The post Federal Employees Couldn’t Get Medical Marijuana Covered By Workers’ Comp Under Bill Advancing In Congress appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Thanks for providing recent updates regarding the concern, I look forward to read more. แทงบอลสด

Our Female Call Girl Service in Chandigarh aims to ensure you feel so fulfilled that you plead with them to cease satisfying you. Don’t be misled by their adorable smiles; these beings are more lustful than they seem.

One decision can change your entire evening. One call can change your entire mood. To get the services of our companions, you only need to make a call to us. We work undercover and do not disclose client information. Our companions are available for incall at their home or outcalls at a hotel, house, or any other comfy location of your choice. We have flexible packages depending on your needs and your pocket. Don't wait any longer! Please call and make an appointment to engage a Dehradun Call Girl. For your convenience, we provide our customer support services round-the-clock each day of the week. To rest our clients' queries and answers, we avail ourselves to emails and calls often. Your next great memory is one decision away. Make it now.

thanks for the tips and information..i really appreciate it.. แทงบอลสด

Congressional psychedelics mandate for Pentagon; CA AI marijuana packaging tool; States move to increase cannabis possession limits 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… BREAKING: Journalism is often consumed for free, but costs money to produce! While this newsletter is proudly sent without cost to you, our ability to send it each day depends on the financial support of readers who can afford to give it. So if you’ve got a few dollars to spare each month and believe in the work we do, please consider joining us on Patreon today. https://www.patreon.com/marijuanamoment / TOP THINGS TO KNOW The House Armed Services Committee attached report language to the National Defense Authorization Act calling on the military to pay greater attention to potential “access pathways” to psychedelic therapies for servicemembers—including “psilocybin-containing investigational products, including naturally derived whole-mushroom formulations administered in structured therapeutic settings.” Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D) said she and lawmakers have been having “really productive” and “incredible” conversations about a compromise approach to legalizing recreational marijuana sales that could pass as part of budget legislation this month. The California Department of Cannabis Control launched a new artificial intelligence tool to help marijuana businesses comply with rules banning product packaging or labeling that may be attractive to children. Several states this year are moving to significantly increase the amount of marijuana that adults can legally possess—a notable trend of expanding previously enacted cannabis legalization laws. The Kentucky House majority whip is asking the attorney general to prosecute any officials who implement an executive order to expand medical cannabis qualifying conditions that was signed by Gov. Andy Beshear (D). / FEDERAL The Department of Health and Human Services posted a request for information about “substance research, policy, and strategies to improve the prevention, treatment, recovery of chronic disease of addiction and mental illness.” / STATES Colorado Gov, Jared Polis (D) signed a bill to establish an ibogaine research pilot program. Oklahoma Republican attorney general candidate Jeff Starling said he would ask President Donald Trump for federal help to combat illicit marijuana operations. Minnesota regulators posted a list of tax-delinquent cannabis businesses. West Virginia regulators posted a list of registered hemp products. Michigan regulators posted data on medical cannabis revenue distributions to localities. California regulators sent updates about various cannabis issues. Oregon regulators posted updated data on the psilocybin services program. New York regulators will host a cannabis job fair on August 11. / LOCAL A court reversed Albert Lea, Minnesota officials’ denial of a marijuana business registration. / INTERNATIONAL Spain’s secretary of state for health said the government is not considering legalizing marijuana beyond medical use. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A review concluded that “current data support the biological plausibility of cannabinoids as modulators of neuroinflammatory and synaptic processes in” Alzheimer’s disease. A study found that “cannabidiol alleviates D-galactose-induced muscle tissue aging in mice by modulating oxidative stress.” / ADVOCACY, OPINION & ANALYSIS A poll of UK adults found that 68 percent support allowing psilocybin-assisted therapy for end-of-life psychological distress, 61 percent want to allow it for physical and neurological conditions and 53 percent back allowing it for mental health conditions. / BUSINESS Altria purchased a stake in CanAdelaar, which is participating in The Netherlands’s regulated cannabis experiment. Trulieve Cannabis Corp. authorized a share repurchase program. Ascend Wellness workers in Barry, Illinois voted to strike while fighting for a contract. 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 VA gov has “productive” cannabis legalization conversations with lawmakers (Newsletter: June 10, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

I think this is an informative post and it is very useful and knowledgeable. therefore, I would like to thank you for the efforts you have made in writing this article. แทงบอลสด

Some people believe you can't find authentic companionship through an agency. That changes after they experience our Gurgaon Escorts Services approach. We treat matching like a skill, not a gimmick. Our consultants remember repeat client preferences from months ago. That personal touch shifts perceptions.

I really appreciate the smooth flow and clarity used throughout this article. Every section is explained in a practical and reader-friendly manner that improves understanding. While exploring Escorts in Lodhi Road related content, your blog stood out for its informative and organized presentation.

In the world of www, there are countless blogs. But believe me, this blog has all the perfection that makes it unique in all. I will be back again and again. แทงบอลสด

If you are looking for a fun online driving game, Escape Road 3 is an excellent choice. The exciting missions, intense gameplay, and fast vehicles create an addictive arcade racing experience. I always come back to this game because every run feels unique!

California cannabis regulators are rolling out a new AI tool to help businesses identify marijuana product packaging may appeal to kids in violation of state rules. The Department of Cannabis Control (DCC) on Monday announced that licensees can now utilize a Cannabis Product Image Analyzer (CPIA) that was developed to aid in preventing the market launch of potentially problematic packaging that violates state statute by enticing minors. Marijuana business licensees can “simply snap a photo using their smart phone or mobile device, screenshot or any other supported file format and upload to the CPIA tool,” DCC said. “The image will be analyzed and provide a summary of its findings.” DCC said it won’t retain images uploaded to the CPIA database, or the summaries of findings that it produces. Rather, the goal is to “assist licensees in their independent evaluation of whether packaging or labeling may be attractive to children.” That includes packaging and labels that depict: Images of minors or anyone under 21 years of age Cartoons A likeness to images, characters, or phrases that are popularly used to advertise to children Images that are any imitation of candy packaging or labeling and Images with the terms “candy” or “candies” or variants in spelling such as “kandy” or “kandeez” “The CPIA uses artificial intelligence technology to review images submitted by a user to identify issues that may indicate attractiveness to children for further evaluation,” DCC said in a notice. “The CPIA may not identify all concerns an image may present, or that the Department may find attractive to children.” Regulators stressed that licensees should not “rely on the CPIA’s output, as it does not establish definitively whether advertising or marketing violates” state rules. And if the tool finds that an uploaded image is likely compliant, that alone “does not preclude a finding by the Department or a factfinder in a disciplinary or administrative action from determining the uploaded image violates the regulation.” “Because artificial intelligence systems evolve, update, or produce variable outputs, the CPIA’s evaluation may change from day to day, even when reviewing the same image. The quality, clarity, angle, lighting, or completeness of an image uploaded by a user may affect the CPIA’s review and assessment. Users are solely responsible for ensuring uploaded images accurately depict the product’s labeling.” Cannabis licensees are being encouraged to provide feedback on the AI tool through an online survey. California regulators also recently adopted emergency rules changes for the state’s marijuana licensing process that are intended to make it easier for businesses to qualify for benefits in line with the Trump administration’s recent move to federally reschedule medical cannabis. Separately, a California Senate committee on Monday approved an Assembly-passed bill that would allow marijuana retailers to offer drive-thru windows to serve customers. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), meanwhile, recently took credit for helping to lead the push for the state to legalize marijuana and discussed his own limited experience with using cannabis. In October, however, Newsom vetoed a bill that would have allowed certain marijuana microbusinesses to ship medical cannabis products directly to patients via common carriers like FedEx and UPS, stating that the proposal “would be burdensome and overly complex to administer.” Newsom did sign a bill earlier that month aimed at streamlining research on marijuana and psychedelics. In September, the governor also signed a measure into law to put a pause on a recently enacted tax hike on marijuana products. Separately, the state attorney general says Indian tribes cannot independently engage in marijuana commerce with licensed cannabis businesses without first obtaining their own commercial license from state officials. California officials recently awarded nearly $30 million in grants for marijuana-focused academic research projects. The post California Marijuana Regulators Unveil New AI Tool To Prevent Product Packaging That May Appeal To Kids appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“Any organization, any licensee, that participates in this unlawful expansion should be prosecuted.” By Sarah Ladd, Kentucky Lantern Kentucky’s House Majority Whip Jason Nemes (R) asked Attorney General Russell Coleman (R) to help ensure agencies “not cooperate” with Gov. Andy Beshear’s (D) expansion of qualifying conditions for medical marijuana recommendations. Nemes, a Louisville Republican, made the comments Tuesday morning during the Interim Joint Committee on Judiciary. He called Beshear’s June 2 executive order, which added several conditions to the state’s list of approved conditions for medical marijuana, an “unlawful expansion of conditions.” “Any organization, any licensee, that participates in this unlawful expansion should be prosecuted,” Nemes said during Tuesday’s meeting. “This is not the way forward.” He also said: “The General Assembly does not approve of” the expansion. Scottie Ellis, a spokeswoman for Beshear, said “The governor’s action only clarifies the law so people suffering with serious conditions like the chronic pain associated with terminal illness or sickle cell anemia know that they qualify under the existing statute.” “Rep. Nemes’s comments do the opposite and cause more confusion and fear among Kentuckians,” she said in a statement. “It’s ultimately up to an individual’s doctor or APRN to make the decision of whether a person has a qualifying condition. The Governor’s action helps doctors and nurses better understand the law.” In 2023, the legislature legalized medical marijuana for Kentuckians suffering from chronic illnesses including ​any type or form of cancer, chronic or severe pain, epilepsy or other intractable seizure disorder; multiple sclerosis, muscle spasms, or spasticity; chronic nausea or cyclical vomiting syndrome; or post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). In early June, Beshear said the law suffered from a “lack of clarity.” He signed an executive order directing the Office of Medical Cannabis to issue an emergency regulation clarifying that Kentuckians have access to medical cannabis if they have these additional conditions: Terminal illness, sickle cell anemia, ALS, Parkinson’s disease, HIV, AIDS, Huntington’s disease, muscular dystrophy, wasting syndrome, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, neuropathies, severe arthritis, fibromyalgia and glaucoma. “I would say to the governor, and to everyone who supports this: You are jeopardizing the program in its entirety because this General Assembly is not playing around when we say we want the tightest medical marijuana program in the country,” Nemes said. Some lawmakers want to add more conditions, Nemes said, and “some of us don’t.” “There is a lawful process to do that. The governor…skirted that law after he asked us to do it, and we said no,” he said in his comments to Coleman. “So I’m asking you, as our chief law enforcement officer, to do all that you can do to make sure that the law is followed, and that those who break the law, even under the understanding that they might be following an unlawful executive order, are prosecuted and they lose their license.” Coleman did not directly address the request. He responded with, “As always, Representative Nemes, appreciate the input.” “This is the second time this week Republicans in the General Assembly have resorted to threats and intimidation against suffering or even dying Kentuckians while trying to reverse an action by the Governor,” Ellis, Beshear’s spokesperson, also said in a statement. “From lowering the gas tax to ease soaring prices at the pump to offering a safe alternative for pain relief for patients with terminal illnesses, ALS and more, Gov. Beshear’s steps are focused on helping Kentuckians, and they are supported by the law.” This story was first published by Kentucky Lantern. Photo courtesy of Philip Steffan. The post Top Kentucky GOP Lawmaker Wants State Officials Prosecuted For Abiding By Governor’s Medical Marijuana Expansion Order appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Virginia’s governor says she is having “really productive” and “incredible” conversations with lawmakers about crafting a compromise approach to legalizing recreational marijuana sales that could pass as part of budget legislation this month. “I don’t want to get ahead of the process,” Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D) said on Monday when asked about the fact that she has been holding meetings with legislators on the issue in recent days after vetoing an earlier proposal to enact the reform, as Marijuana Moment reported last week. “I will say that I have had incredible conversations, really productive, and that’s always been the case,” she said, citing talks with Sen. Laschrecse Aird (D) and Del. Paul Krizek (D), who sponsored the Senate and House of Delegates versions of the cannabis commercialization legislation that the governor vetoed last month. “Our teams and we have had substantial conversations where we have the shared priorities of wanting to have a legal framework for recreational market that can make sense of where we are today,” Spanberger said, “that can put real constraints and guidelines on the market, with ensuring that we are working in the best interests of Virginians—certainly protecting kids, ensuring public safety and community priorities—but also ensuring that we have clear rules of the road.” “I’m very heartened by the progress we’ve made, and I don’t want to get ahead of it by promising any timelines, but we are moving in a very strong direction,” she said in response to question from a reporter with WVTF radio. NOW: @SpanbergerForVA says she, @KrizekForVA and @lashrecseaird have had “substantial” conversations about getting a legal recreational marijuana bill in the budget #valeg pic.twitter.com/uCOxLdps1J — BK (@BradKutner) June 8, 2026 Lawmakers passed the cannabis sales bills in March, but the governor then suggested changes to the legalization proposal—including delaying the start date for sales by six months, increasing taxes and instituting new criminal penalties for cannabis consumers. The legislature in April declined to take up the amendments during a one-day reconvened session, however, effectively rejecting them. Spanberger then issued a veto. Krizek, the sponsor, of the now-vetoed bill, called the ongoing discussions “promising.” “She’s been fair and knowledgeable, and we’ve made some great progress on a compromise,” he said of the governor. “I’d say we’re one big team on this effort.” Sources told Marijuana Moment last week that the administration and legislators are getting closer to reaching a deal on the issue. “The negotiation with the governor has been very fruitful and it is clear that we have made a great deal of progress,” Krizek said on Friday. A spokesperson for Spanberger told Marijuana Moment that the governor “has made clear that she continues to support setting up a legal retail marketplace for cannabis that prioritizes the health and safety of Virginians, protects communities and consumers and operates with clear enforcement and regulatory authority.” The governor and the sponsors of the legalization legislation “share these same goals, and she looks forward to moving this across the finish line together,” the spokesperson said. Following Spanberger’s veto, top lawmakers have been openly discussing the possibility of including provisions to legalize adult-use cannabis sales in still-outstanding budget legislation that they are due to pass by July 1. Sen. Glen Sturtevant (R), however, objected to the idea of including cannabis sales legalization in the fiscal legislation. “That’s legislating through the budget,” he told WWBT-TV. “It is something that is not supposed to be done.” The effort to keep the issue alive was a topic of discussion last week at the first meeting of the legislature’s Joint Commission to Oversee the Transition of the Commonwealth into a Cannabis Retail Market since the governor’s move to kill the previous proposal to regulate adult-use marijuana sales. The governor, meanwhile, is continuing to try to publicly explain her veto—including by saying it is her view that “taking a little bit longer” to launch the market is not something she sees as “negative” because it is more important to get the details right than to do it fast. A recent survey found that bipartisan majorities of Virginia voters wanted Spanberger to sign the cannabis legislation into law, and that they specifically disagreed with her desire to slow the launch timeline for legal sales. The governor recently acknowledged in a separate interview that “a lot of people are not pleased” with her veto of the cannabis legislation. “Friends and family are displeased as well,” she said. Spanberger has repeatedly responded to criticism of her cannabis amendments from the bill sponsors and advocates by saying the suggested changes came after she spoke to the leaders of other states that have already implemented adult-use marijuana markets. A spokesperson for Spanberger declined to name any other governors she talked to about cannabis in response to a question from Marijuana Moment, however. The governor separately recently sought to explain her veto in an earlier interview, reiterating that she supports launching a legal cannabis market but worried about what she called a “rushed timeline” and “far more stores across Virginia” than she thinks are appropriate. Prior to vetoing the cannabis commerce bill, the governor did sign separate legislation to provide resentencing relief for people with past cannabis convictions. Personal marijuana possession and home cultivation of marijuana has been legal in Virginia since 2021, but then-Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) twice vetoed bills to provide consumers with a way to legally purchase regulated adult-use cannabis. Aird and Krizek, the sponsors of the legalization bills, had urged colleagues to vote against the governor’s amendments—even if that meant risking a veto from Spanberger when the legislation returned to her desk, which has now occurred. Here are the other key details of the cannabis bills—SB 542 and HB 642—as approved by lawmakers and with the governor’s suggested amendments: Lawmakers voted to allow adults to 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. That would represent an increase from the limit in current law of 1 ounce. The governor, however, wanted the amount increased to only 2 ounces. Under the legislature’s plan, legal sales could begin on January 1, 2027, but the governor proposed to push that back to July 1, 2027. Lawmakers voted to impose an excise tax of 6 percent on cannabis sales as well as a 5.3 percent retail sales and use tax, while allowing municipalities to set an additional local tax of up to 3.5 percent. The governor’s plan was largely the same, though it would have increased the excise tax to 8 percent starting on July 1, 2029. Under the legislation as approved by lawmakers, revenue would have been 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). The governor, however, wanted to put all revenue into the general fund while earmarking it “for purposes such as early childhood education, behavioral health, public health awareness, prevention, treatment, and recovery services, workforce development, reentry, indigent criminal defense, and targeted reinvestment in historically disadvantaged communities.” The Virginia Cannabis Control Authority would have overseen licensing and regulation of the new industry, and would have also taken on oversight of hemp, which is currently under the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Local governments could not have opted out of allowing marijuana businesses to operate in their area. Delivery services would have been allowed. Serving sizes would have been capped at 10 milligrams THC, with no more than 100 mg THC per package. The governor proposed to make public marijuana use a class 4 criminal misdemeanor instead of civil violation punishable by a $25 fine as under current law. She also wanted to make possessing cannabis by people under the age of 21 a class 1 misdemeanor, punishable with a mandatory minimum fine of $500 or 50 hours of community service, as well as the suspension of drivers licenses for at least six months. Illegally selling or distributing 50 pounds or more of marijuana would have been a class 2 felony punishable by life in prison. The governor sought to eliminate support for the Cannabis Equity Reinvestment Fund. Existing medical cannabis operators could have entered the adult-use market if they pay a licensing conversion fee that was set at $10 million. Cannabis businesses would have had to establish labor peace agreements with workers. As passed by lawmakers, the bill would have directed a legislative commission 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, but the governor proposed to remove that language. A coalition of cannabis reform organizations sent the governor a letter urging her not to veto the sales legalization legislation even though her amendments were rejected. “Together, these bills address the real issues surrounding cannabis in the Commonwealth today: an already-existing, unregulated marijuana market operating openly across the state while consumers, communities, and law enforcement are left without the protections of a legal framework,” the groups wrote. “Let’s be clear: these bills do not create a marijuana market in Virginia. That market already exists,” the letter said. “What these bills do is replace today’s predatory and unaccountable illicit operators with a regulated marketplace, enforceable rules, oversight, product safeguards, age verification, and the strict consumer safety standards already in use for Virginia medical cannabis.” The letter was signed by Virginia NORML, Marijuana Justice, Virginia Cannabis Association, Marijuana Policy Project and other groups. Separately, a coalition of hemp businesses that joined with a major alcohol retailer in asking Spanberger to veto the marijuana bill before she did so said the move presents an “opportunity” to craft better cannabis policy. Meanwhile, the governor signed several other reform bills this session—including measures to protect the parental rights of marijuana consumers and allow patients to access medical cannabis in hospitals. The post Virginia Governor Touts ‘Productive’ Negotiations On Bill To Legalize Marijuana Sales This Month appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

This is only the internet My organization is choosing all around you. Kudos in your webpage, We add your email your blog. This may be a fine webpage. . totosgp.com This is the good guidelines specially for you to those people new at all to blogosphere, simple along with exact information… Cheers pertaining to expressing this. Absolutely essential go through content. totosingapur.com You could be allowed to put up manufacturers, except for shortcuts, in the event that they've been recognized not to mention concerning content. https://livetotobet.com/

Now i am definitely content to uncover this page in addition to performed delight in examining practical articles or blog posts placed in this article. This thoughts on the article author seemed to be brilliant, appreciate it with the write about. แทงบอลสเต็ป