• Do NOT click on any vaporpedia.com links. The domain has been compromised and will attempt to infect your system. See https://fuckcombustion.com/threads/warning-vaporpedia-com-has-been-compromised.54960/.

Cannabis News

macbill

Oh No! Mr macbill!!
Staff member
The Trump administration has found a new way to crack down on legal weed
  • New rules from the SBA will make it hard for companies that do business with the marijuana industry to gain access to loans.
  • Far from just weed companies, the new rule could extend to web designers, gardening suppliers and others who may derive just a small portion of their revenues from marijuana firms.
 

Adobewan

Well-Known Member

Tranquility

Well-Known Member
The prior administration used regulatory guidance and rulemaking like this to put the financial hit on disfavored, but legal, industries they didn't like in Operation Choke Point and latter such programs. (As well as cannabis. It's just that even completely legal industries, like payday loans, were "choked".)

That was for ANY banking use--not just government subsidized loans.

While the rule change could bring more into the orbit of businesses that are denied advantageous loans due to association with cannabis, I'm not sure the distinction will really make a difference. They're going to have to create some type of safe-harbor for what an "indirect" business is. Depending on how the bureaucrat deciding things feels that day, SBA loans might be completely denied to large swaths of the community. (If you do the taxes of an employee of a dispensary, have you gained income from "services that could reasonably be determined to support the use, growth, enhancement or other development of marijuana."?)

This is more difficult than a simple availability of private, but regulated, banking for disfavored industries. This has the federal government's direct participation (Through the SBA.) with underlying loans for those doing business with illegal industries. While I disagree with the rule change as I think it is not a good policy decision, unlike Choke Point, I don't have a philosophical opposition to the government making the rule as it seems to be reasonably related to a substantial government interest. (Of seeing the laws are faithfully executed as compared to attempting to reduce legal businesses.)

If regulated-legal is going to work, they're going to need access to banking and some are starting to try to make that happen--if even at a state level. I don't see how cannabis businesses will EVER have access to federal subsidies for favored industries (Or, just business subsidies in general.) until it is no longer a schedule I drug. The rule previously reflected that. The change is a lot scarier if you don't look at how most rules and statutes are written to cover as much as possible to let the discretion of the government determine the actual person(s) punished.
 
Tranquility,
  • Like
Reactions: macbill

florduh

Well-Known Member
The prior administration used regulatory guidance and rulemaking like this to put the financial hit on disfavored, but legal, industries they didn't like in Operation Choke Point and latter such programs. (As well as cannabis. It's just that even completely legal industries, like payday loans, were "choked".)

That was for ANY banking use--not just government subsidized loans.

While the rule change could bring more into the orbit of businesses that are denied advantageous loans due to association with cannabis, I'm not sure the distinction will really make a difference. They're going to have to create some type of safe-harbor for what an "indirect" business is. Depending on how the bureaucrat deciding things feels that day, SBA loans might be completely denied to large swaths of the community. (If you do the taxes of an employee of a dispensary, have you gained income from "services that could reasonably be determined to support the use, growth, enhancement or other development of marijuana."?)

This is more difficult than a simple availability of private, but regulated, banking for disfavored industries. This has the federal government's direct participation (Through the SBA.) with underlying loans for those doing business with illegal industries. While I disagree with the rule change as I think it is not a good policy decision, unlike Choke Point, I don't have a philosophical opposition to the government making the rule as it seems to be reasonably related to a substantial government interest. (Of seeing the laws are faithfully executed as compared to attempting to reduce legal businesses.)

If regulated-legal is going to work, they're going to need access to banking and some are starting to try to make that happen--if even at a state level. I don't see how cannabis businesses will EVER have access to federal subsidies for favored industries (Or, just business subsidies in general.) until it is no longer a schedule I drug. The rule previously reflected that. The change is a lot scarier if you don't look at how most rules and statutes are written to cover as much as possible to let the discretion of the government determine the actual person(s) punished.

The previous Admin were all "Anti-Business Socialists". Why is the Pro-Business Party making it harder for any small business at all? I get they don't want to "encourage" Cannabis Industry entrepreneurs, but actively putting in place regulations that make it harder for them? What happened to cutting red tape?

I get that Cannabis is a Schedule I substance. Fine. Don't allow Dispensaries and Grow operations to apply for a SBA loan. But denying web designers access because they worked for a cannabusiness? Utter insanity.
 

florduh

Well-Known Member
Feinstein drops opposition to legal pot, giving legal marijuana a new ally

Sen. Feinstein of California finally voices her support for passing legislation to prevent the Feds from interfering with States that legalized cannabis. Wow. Talk about a "profile in courage". She's represented the State with the world's largest legal marijuana market since 1992. California has had "legal" marijuana since 1996. And just now she's deciding to represent the will of her constituents in the US Senate
 

looney2nz

Research Geek, Mad Scientist
Feinstein drops opposition to legal pot, giving legal marijuana a new ally

Sen. Feinstein of California finally voices her support for passing legislation to prevent the Feds from interfering with States that legalized cannabis. Wow. Talk about a "profile in courage". She's represented the State with the world's largest legal marijuana market since 1992. California has had "legal" marijuana since 1996. And just now she's deciding to represent the will of her constituents in the US Senate

I thought HELL would freeze over before she would support it, she wasn't a supporter of ANYTHING cannabis her whole career.
 

florduh

Well-Known Member
Legislature overturns LePage veto on recreational marijuana bill

While it's been legal to grow and consume marijuana in Maine, it has remained illegal to buy or sell it. Maine's legislature just put an end to that nonsense. Sometimes our systems work:

AUGUSTA – The Legislature on Wednesday overturned a veto by Republican Gov. Paul LePage that would have again stalled the legal sale of recreational marijuana, taking a major step toward launching a legal retail market for the drug.

The votes of 109-39 in the House and 28-6 in the Senate sets Maine on a path to the legal sale and production of recreational marijuana some 18 months after voters approved legal marijuana at the ballot box in 2016.
 

macbill

Oh No! Mr macbill!!
Staff member
More businesses are mellowing out over hiring pot smokers
“It has come out of nowhere,” said Michael Clarkson, head of the drug testing practice at Ogletree Deakins, a law firm. “I have heard from lots of clients things like, ‘I can’t staff the third shift and test for marijuana.’”

Though still in its early stages, the shift away from marijuana testing appears likely to accelerate. More states are legalizing cannabis for recreational use; Michigan could become the 10th state to do so in November. Missouri appears on track to become the 30th state to allow medical pot use.
 

macbill

Oh No! Mr macbill!!
Staff member
While Other States Decriminalized, Texas Ranked No. 1 in Marijuana Arrests
https://www.sacurrent.com/the-daily...alized-texas-ranked-no-1-in-marijuana-arrests
The Lone Star State prides itself on a live-and-let live philosophy. But, apparently, that doesn't extend to weed 'round these parts.

Even as other states moved to decriminalize, Texas law enforcement officials made more annual marijuana arrests than did cops in any other state, according to FBI arrest data. Of the 531,000 pot arrests reported nationwide in 2016 — the most recent year for which data's available — some 12 percent were in Texas.
 

macbill

Oh No! Mr macbill!!
Staff member
3 States Most Likely to Legalize Marijuana This Year

Going green has taken on a new meaning in the U.S. Thirty states plus the District of Columbia now allow legal use of medical marijuana. Eight of those states, along with D.C., also have legalized recreational use of marijuana. The numbers in both categories could be higher in the not-too-distant future.


Public support for marijuana is growing. Will lawmakers follow?

Federally, pot remains illegal and is classified as a Schedule I drug, alongside substances like heroin and LSD.

But growing public support for legalization is placing new pressure on legislators to back legalization laws, said Keith Stroup, a founder of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, or NORML, a leading marijuana advocacy group.
 

Tranquility

Well-Known Member
It has to do with money, so it has to be true. In a marketing research report to see some effects of cannabis legalization, it was found things change in a legal environment.

https://mjbizdaily.com/report-rec-cannabis-consumers-use-less-alcohol-pain-medications-sleep-aids/

A new market research report has confirmed that marijuana consumers in states that have legalized recreational cannabis use less alcohol, over-the-counter pain medications and sleep aids.

The findings suggest that the cannabis market may be larger than many grasp. If some consumers are replacing alcohol or pain medications with marijuana, that indicates there may be millions more potential customers that cannabis companies have yet to reach.

The report, compiled by Chicago-based High Yield Insights, found that more than a fifth of rec MJ consumers use less beer, spirits, painkillers and sedatives than standard consumers.

More precisely, legal recreational cannabis consumers use 27% less over-the-counter pain medications, 22% less sleep aids, 21% less alcoholic spirits and 20% less beer than consumers in states that have not legalized adult-use marijuana.

“We are just starting to grasp how legalization has impacted consumer behavior, be it spending, usage occasions or shopping habits,” Mike Luce, co-founder of High Yield Insights, said in a news release.

“Understanding these changes will lead to new growth opportunities for cannabis and further disruption for other categories.”

According to Luce, the report “uncovered promising consumer niches for the industry as well.

“For example, many older consumers (55+) are re-engaging with marijuana, with 56% reporting a return to marijuana after having tried cannabis products at a younger age.”​
 

florduh

Well-Known Member
It has to do with money, so it has to be true. In a marketing research report to see some effects of cannabis legalization, it was found things change in a legal environment.

https://mjbizdaily.com/report-rec-cannabis-consumers-use-less-alcohol-pain-medications-sleep-aids/

A new market research report has confirmed that marijuana consumers in states that have legalized recreational cannabis use less alcohol, over-the-counter pain medications and sleep aids.

The findings suggest that the cannabis market may be larger than many grasp. If some consumers are replacing alcohol or pain medications with marijuana, that indicates there may be millions more potential customers that cannabis companies have yet to reach.

The report, compiled by Chicago-based High Yield Insights, found that more than a fifth of rec MJ consumers use less beer, spirits, painkillers and sedatives than standard consumers.

More precisely, legal recreational cannabis consumers use 27% less over-the-counter pain medications, 22% less sleep aids, 21% less alcoholic spirits and 20% less beer than consumers in states that have not legalized adult-use marijuana.

“We are just starting to grasp how legalization has impacted consumer behavior, be it spending, usage occasions or shopping habits,” Mike Luce, co-founder of High Yield Insights, said in a news release.

“Understanding these changes will lead to new growth opportunities for cannabis and further disruption for other categories.”

According to Luce, the report “uncovered promising consumer niches for the industry as well.

“For example, many older consumers (55+) are re-engaging with marijuana, with 56% reporting a return to marijuana after having tried cannabis products at a younger age.”​

Since our Campaign Finance system shows no signs of being reformed in the near future, Cannabis Businesses need to start buying politicians just like the Alcohol and Pharmaceutical industries.
 

florduh

Well-Known Member
Why, you think Boehner came along for nothing? That ball is already rolling. And I wouldn't get in it's way.

It's a good start, especially for a former Speaker of the House. Boehner isn't in office though. The Cannabis Industry needs to start buying sitting politicians. They aren't even that expensive.
 

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
I think most of the sitting ones who want in are going to have to get schedule I crushed before they will show fealty. The ones in already legal states can show their hands but the fed is the key and as long as the anti crowd can still point out its federal illegality they still get to deal. As the kitty gets bigger and bigger more players are gonna want to be dealt in and when critical mass occurs the resistance of most states will peter out. But the seismic change can't occur while cannabis is still schedule I.
 

florduh

Well-Known Member
Maybe the tide really is turning...

Legalizing Hemp Brings Schumer And McConnell Together

https%3A%2F%2Fspecials-images.forbesimg.com%2Fdam%2Fimageserve%2F917374622%2F960x0.jpg%3Ffit%3Dscale


There's not much that the U.S. Senate's top Republican and top Democrat agree on. But one of the few things that fosters bipartisan cooperation in Washington, D.C. these days is cannabis.

On Friday, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) announced that he's signing on as a cosponsor of a hemp legalization bill introduced last month by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).
 

Tranquility

Well-Known Member
Maybe the tide really is turning...

Legalizing Hemp Brings Schumer And McConnell Together

https%3A%2F%2Fspecials-images.forbesimg.com%2Fdam%2Fimageserve%2F917374622%2F960x0.jpg%3Ffit%3Dscale


There's not much that the U.S. Senate's top Republican and top Democrat agree on. But one of the few things that fosters bipartisan cooperation in Washington, D.C. these days is cannabis.

On Friday, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) announced that he's signing on as a cosponsor of a hemp legalization bill introduced last month by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

Both sides can agree on hemp. The only ones really against hemp legalization are some CBD merchants that worry that with legalization comes regulation. Some selling CBD would prefer their legal status stay less defined. They calculate little risk of legal action with little or no cost of regulations in the current scheme.
 
Tranquility,

florduh

Well-Known Member
Both sides can agree on hemp. The only ones really against hemp legalization are some CBD merchants that worry that with legalization comes regulation. Some selling CBD would prefer their legal status stay less defined. They calculate little risk of legal action with little or no cost of regulations in the current scheme.

True. But maybe Mitch won't actively oppose Chuck's upcoming Federal Marijuana decriminalization legislation. No reason to oppose that either. States can still keep cannabis illegal if they choose. We just won't waste Federal dollars on enforcement. It should make research easier as well.
 
florduh,
  • Like
Reactions: Whisper

Tranquility

Well-Known Member
True. But maybe Mitch won't actively oppose Chuck's upcoming Federal Marijuana decriminalization legislation. No reason to oppose that either. States can still keep cannabis illegal if they choose. We just won't waste Federal dollars on enforcement. It should make research easier as well.
There are multiple reasons to oppose federal legalization/decriminalization of marijuana. Hemp is a different issue.
 
Tranquility,
  • Like
Reactions: macbill
Top Bottom