DEA edging closer to rescheduling cannabis

In a story published in the Rapid City Journal, Alex White Plume said, “When they cut my crop down they spread the seeds something awful.” 'They' were federal agents who raided his reservation home and cut his crop of cannabis using weed-whackers with metal blades.
In a lengthy memo to lawmakers, the Drug Enforcement Administration said it hopes to decide whether to change the federal status of marijuana "in the first half of 2016." According to the memo, in the years between 2010 and 2015, the government provided marijuana for research purposes to an average of nine researchers per year. Given the rapidly changing marijuana policy landscape, experts say that level of support is nowhere near enough to keep up with research demand. In addition to detailed information about the quantity and type of marijuana the federal government makes available to researchers, the memo outlines the steps the government is taking to improve coordination among federal agencies on data quality. [Washington Post]
Governor Kate Brown of Oregon just signed a bill that removes state criminal liability from banks and credit unions that do business with the legal cannabis industry.

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders won the Wisconsin primary promoting cannabis reform. Public radio personality Rick Steves just endorsed California's Adult Use of Cannabis Act.

Let’s ensure that cannabis cultivation and distribution stay out of the hands of Big Dope. It’s time to enter compacts with the tribes and pueblos, let them distribute on the rez, on off-reservation properties and in Deadwood or in New Mexico's case in the town of Las Vegas where revenue could be generated for historic preservation.

Montana should consider similar statutes allowing Butte to be the non-tribal market tagging revenue for historic preservation enlisting the growers who have suffered under that state's unwieldy medical cannabis law.


Duffer said...

I've read for some time now that if a move was to be made (rescheduling), that it would be to Schedule II. Pontificators reasoned that change would main-line the future for big-pharma control. Been scratching my head over that line of thinking since the cat is already out of the bag - look at CO, WA, and OR. CA is CA. I do not know how you put the cat back in the bag in those places.

Okay - you've come back 'round to my wheelhouse.

More research my ass. Everyone knows the story - how cannabis was dealt with in '73. Nixon dealing with political enemies - and current day politicians/prosecutors that have been social outcasts their entire lives continuing the war (Graslie/Iowa). Include Hilary Clinton in that crowd too. CO is entering year 3 and things look quite normal to me. OR and WA are doing just fine. The only complaints are from those in the industry affected by never-ending attempts from legislative right-wingers to roll laws back or generally make shit up to be annoying. Hickenlooper in CO is no friend - while the new Guvnah in OR is a keeper.

Schedule II will be a mistake. De-scheduling is the right move - but it won't happen. Going to have to look to Barack to make a bold move here - moving cannabis all the way down the list makes most sense. Take this issue out of Hilary's hands. She makes bad decisions - just like her husband did.

One wonders how Jackboot could screw up a major Federal rescheduling. Let's cross our fingers for a bold move Mr. Kurtz.

larry kurtz said...

For the record, I would write very restrictive legislation for South Duck and New Mexico then present it to Govs. Daugaard and Martinez before even showing it to the legislatures. In my view edibles should only be available to patients suffering from debilitating diseases, disorders or conditions and be dispensed by pharmacists and taxed like other prescriptions.

larry kurtz said...

Tight control of the cannabis industry is the only way legislatures will legalize. Vermont's is struggling to find compromise. That's why i like my template that keeps Big Dope out of the industry.