This week, a Pennsylvania House Committee held its second hearing to provide information on marijuana legalization as the momentum for reform grows in the state. Pennsylvania Governors both reacted to the Ohio voters’ decision of last month legalizing recreational cannabis. Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, and U.S. Senator John Fetterman, a Democrat from Pennsylvania (PA), have both said that it is time for Pennsylvania to follow suit.
“It is so simple, it’s so easy – just give people what they desire,” Fetterman stated late last month. “Make it pure, make it safe and create jobs.”
Gillian Schauer was the executive director of CANNRA, a nonpartisan organization of state officials involved in cannabis regulation. Members questioned Schauer about various aspects of marijuana regulation, including social equity, business opportunities, lab testing, and public or private operation of state-legal cannabis industries.
At the beginning of the meeting on Wednesday, Rep. Dan Frankel, the chair of the Health Committee, stated: “I am convinced that the way we regulate legal marijuana will have a major impact on the outcome if we are to correct harms caused by the criminalization cannabis and promote health and safety.”
Frankel, who had sponsored cannabis legalization legislation circulated an co-sponsorship memorandum earlier this year previewing his plans to file another reform measure this session.
Schauer was the only speaker of the day and he presented a lot of information during the meeting. She is a research scientist, consultant and PhD in behavioral sciences with a masters in public heath. Schauer told the subcommittee her focus was not advocacy but rather support and education in “this emerging issue”.
She told lawmakers that the presentation was a good opportunity to discuss the importance of a single agency to oversee both adult-use and medical cannabis, as well as hemp-derived products containing cannabinoids. Also, the need for “regulatory flexibilty” that would allow the agency to have the discretion to implement rules within a timeline that balanced expediency with public safety and equity concerns.
Schauer also stressed that public education is important, not only about cannabis and its responsible use, but also to educate the public on what laws will be passed and when they will come into effect.
Watch the second informational meeting on marijuana legalization in the video below.
In describing “regulatory flexibilty,” Schauer explained to lawmakers that state cannabis regulators are often forced to adapt quickly to rapidly changing issues. This can make it “extremely difficult” for an agency if they have to go back to the state legislature for approval of a variety of rules.
She said that in terms of the timeline for legalization, the key is to “find the sweet spot.”
Schauer said that if a timeline is set for the implementation of new policies and the opening of stores, it may be too short. “You might compromise on public health, safety, and sometimes equity factors.” If you wait too long, an illicit market may take hold, and it will take some time to dissipate.
She also told the subcommittee that they should think about interstate trade. “It’s not here yet.” She said that it may not be there tomorrow. It will come, but you will need to create the policy to allow Pennsylvania to enjoy the interstate market you want.
She advised the lawmakers to ask: “How can we ensure that businesses are successful, not only now but also in the future?”
Schauer was invited to the panel to answer lawmakers’ questions about different options available to them when deciding how to legalize marijuana and regulate it.
Rep. Rick Krajewski, who chairs the subcommittee said, after last month’s first hearing, that “we heard many extensive questions from members about how cannabis is regulated by other states and provinces, [and] which different regulatory structures we can use to ensure that we promote public safety and equity.”
Frankel, chair of the full committee, was asked by lawmakers to ask how they could best support small, independent, and equity-owned companies.
He told Schauer that he was concerned about the way we deal with social equity. He also wanted to know “how we can provide opportunities beyond how tax revenue is allocated to address social equality, in terms how we model business as we move from adult use.”
Schauer stated that she is less qualified to speak on social equity than some state regulators to whom she has offered to refer the Subcommittee. She explained, however, that marijuana social equity is divided into three areas: expungement of records and community reinvestment; and participation in the market for those from communities who have been affected by the drug war.
She said: “We know expungement should be automatic. It shouldn’t be a petition-process, and it must be funded.” “Equity on the market has been difficult for many reasons,” she said.
She said that one of the challenges is that “adult use is often layered over a program that does not have equity as its focus. This creates a problem.”
She stated that regulators were “learning about some variables which are important here” including providing early access to social equity applicants.
She said that states which allow “access to everyone at once or licenses for medical operators in the first place” have a more difficult time with equity. “I believe you’re seeing some states prioritizing equity applicants in the first round for adult-use licensing.”
She continued by saying that “licenses are not enough” and “wraparound service is really important” in order to ensure that equity-owned operators enter the market, but also stay for the entire lifecycle of their business.
Schauer explained that states have allocated money for technical assistance. You have to consider access to funding. The banking system has biases, so it may be difficult for small businesses and applicants to get the licenses they need.
Schauer explained that vertical integration is also a challenge. Craft businesses that are small and often owned by equity may want to become vertically integrated to grow, produce, and sell directly to customers. She added that “vertical integration at a large-scale can make it harder for equity applicants to succeed, as it requires lots of resources, knowledge, and capital to be successful.”
Frankel asked also about “the best way for states to oversee labs”, noting that there have been problems in some states with “lab shopping.”
Due to the federal prohibition on cannabis, Schauer said, “we have ended up with each state having a third-party laboratory system where the states license third-party laboratories that have the industry as their customer.” This can create incentives for the labs to inflate THC levels to earn customers, and for businesses to search out the labs who provide the numbers that they want.
Schauer explained that many states require that either the lab or the inspector be on site when the sample is taken. This is to ensure that the first sample is representative of the batch of cannabis being tested.
She noted that having a DEA licensed state reference laboratory capable of testing cannabis was one of the best methods to ensure accuracy. There are very few state reference laboratories, but more and more states are figuring out how to set one up and going through the process.
Frankel said that the state-run store option is “definitely” an option in Pennsylvania. This is similar to what New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu recommended for this state earlier this year. Chris Sununu had recommended that the state implement this plan earlier in the year . However, a state commission later rejected that proposal.
Krajewski raised the issue again at Wednesday’s hearing.
He asked, “Have You Seen That Model In Other States?” What do you think the pros and cons are of a private point of sale structure as opposed to a public one?
After reminding the legislator that she spoke for herself and not CANNRA, Schauer said that although there are many different ways to legalize marijuana, “the model we have chosen across all states so far is one that sometimes puts public health and safety in a challenging light.”
She continued: “I’d love to see more experiments across the policy landscape,” such as nonprofit systems, state-run system and others. She added that New Hampshire requires medical marijuana providers be run as non-profits. However, this is the only example of such a requirement in the U.S.
She pointed out that in Uruguay, cannabis can be purchased through pharmacies, “without any marketing or advertising, so it’s also worth studying and looking into.”
“Unfortunately,” concluded Schauer, “we haven’t seen the policy landscape for me to be able to comment on the effects.”
Frankel then pointed out that certain provinces had tried a state-run system, including Quebec which continues to only sell marijuana through government-owned shops.
She said that while he was right, she didn’t know enough about the system to make a comment.
Marijuana Moment tracks more than 1,000 cannabis and drug policy bills that have been introduced in state legislatures, and Congress. Patreon supporters who pledge at least $25/month gain access to our interactive charts, maps and hearing calendar.
Discover more about our marijuana bills tracker. Become a Patreon supporter to gain access.
—
The prospects for legalization have improved in Pennsylvania with the new, narrow Democratic majority and the support of the Governor . But there is still a question as to how the GOP controlled Senate would approach reform, if it received a bill from the House.
This is not to say that all Republicans are on board. , a bipartisan measure of legalization, has already been submitted in this session’s body by Sens. Dan Laughlin and Sharif Street.
Street and Republican Senator. Camera Bartolotta recently circulated a legislative alternative that would decriminalize cannabis and downgrade simple possession from a misdemeanor to a civil offence.
House members have filed separate bills that would legalize the sale of marijuana through state-run shops, and provide permits to farmers and small agricultural businesses to grow cannabis after adult-use sales become legal.
In October, the House passed a tax reform bill that included language to provide relief at state level to medical marijuana businesses who continue to struggle with federal financial barriers. Republicans, who normally support tax cuts, were outraged by the reform. They viewed it as a Democratic giveaway of money to the cannabis industry.
The Senate passed a measure in September that would allow licensed medical marijuana grower/processors to directly sell their products to patients. The House Health Committee advanced the bill the following month. This week, lawmakers sent the bill to Governor. Shapiro after the approval of changes which would allow dispensaries apply to grow their own marijuana and process it, further vertical integration in the industry.
The Senate Law and Justice Committee conducted a series hearings last year on marijuana legalization. These hearings were intended to inform the legislation being drafted by the Republican Chairman of the committee, Sen. Mike Regan.
Former Gov. Former Gov.
A federal official says that the legalization of marijuana in some states has not really affected teen use, despite a new youth survey showing stable trends
The first time Marijuana Moment featured the post Pennsylvania Marijuana Legalization hearing features testimony from an expert on regulatory systems in other states.
