Cannabis News
California Inches Towards Interstate Cannabis Agreements
Published
2 years agoon
By
admin
It’s no secret that state cannabis markets across the nation are suffering badly. Because of I.R.C. 280E, lack of access to financial institutions, massive operational expenses, plunging prices, and just gluts of production, it’s not pretty out there. However, there’s a newish light at the end of the tunnel, at least for California and other states that are game: interstate cannabis agreements. If interstate cannabis agreements open up between cannabis states, then maybe just maybe the cannabis industry can be pulled back from the brink of its hard landing in 2023.
Interstate cannabis agreements
Recall in September of last year, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 1326 into law (and it became effective on January 1 of this year), introducing the possibility of interstate cannabis agreements. California wasn’t the first state to do this. Oregon actually did it in 2019. Under SB 1326:
MAUCRSA specifies that its provisions shall not be construed to authorize or permit a licensee to transport or distribute, or cause to be transported or distributed, cannabis or cannabis products outside the state, unless authorized by federal law. This bill would make an exception to the above-described prohibition and would authorize the Governor to enter into an agreement with another state or states authorizing medicinal or adult-use commercial cannabis activity, or both, between entities licensed under the laws of the other state or states and entities operating with a state license pursuant to MAUCRSA, provided that the commercial cannabis activities are lawful and subject to licensure under the laws of the other state or states.
Pursuant to SB 1326, these interstate cannabis agreements would be between states. Not licensees. Licensees would still need to engage in contracts with each other for the actual import, export, and distribution of cannabis across state borders. Governor Newsom would be able to enter into these interstate cannabis agreements with governors from other states so long as:
- The commercial cannabis activities are lawful and subject to licensure under the laws of the contracting state; and
- With respect to the interstate transportation of cannabis or cannabis products, the agreement prohibits both of the following: (a) The transportation of cannabis and cannabis products by any means other than those authorized under both the laws of the contracting state and the regulations of the [California Department of Cannabis Control (“DCC”)]. (b) The transportation of cannabis and cannabis products through the jurisdiction of a state, district, commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States that does not authorize that transportation.
Under SB 1326, the interstate cannabis agreement also requires that the contracting state agree that its cannabis licensees be bound by California’s requirements around public health and safety, track and trace, testing, inspection, packaging and labeling, and adulterated and misbranded cannabis. The contracting state must also impose “restrictions upon advertising, marketing, labeling, or sale within the contracting state that meet or exceed the restrictions” in California for the same. And all California taxes apply, too.
Further, out of state licensees (“foreign licensees”) cannot engage in commercial cannabis activity in California “without a state license, or engage in commercial cannabis activity within a local jurisdiction without a license, permit, or other authorization issued by the local jurisdiction.” So, foreign licensees will also be plagued by California’s local control issues if they seek to do business in one of our cities or counties that allows for commercial cannabis activity.
The federal contingency for interstate cannabis agreements
Interstate cannabis commerce would be a dream for many licensees, and especially this kind of interstate commerce which would only: (a) be between cannabis states; and (b) involve existing state licensees (and not, let’s say, Costco or Amazon (yet)). But the passage of SB 1326 didn’t automatically create interstate cannabis commerce for California licensees. In fact, it’s creation is dependent upon:
- Federal law changing to allow for the interstate transfer of cannabis or cannabis products between authorized commercial cannabis businesses, i.e., legalization.
- Federal law enacted that specifically prohibits the expenditure of federal funds to prevent the interstate transfer of cannabis or cannabis products between authorized commercial cannabis businesses.
- The Department of Justice (“DOJ”) issuing an opinion or memorandum allowing or tolerating the interstate transfer of cannabis or cannabis products between authorized commercial cannabis businesses.
- The California Attorney General issuing a written opinion through the process . . . that implementation of interstate cannabis agreements will not result in “significant legal risk” to the State of California based on review of federal judicial decisions and administrative actions.
DCC and the California Attorney General
As reported by Politico last week, the DCC is going for option 4, which is really the only realistic choice right now. In an eight-page request and de facto legal brief, the DCC asks the State Attorney General’s office for an opinion in regards to whether interstate cannabis agreements will result in “significant legal risk” to the state, given that cannabis remains an illegal Schedule I controlled substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”).
To assist the State A/G with this request, the DCC articulates three legal arguments as to why California won’t ever feel the heat from the feds if Governor Newsom starts signing interstate cannabis agreements:
- The feds can’t dragoon the states into adopting or enforcing federal laws. Invoking the “anti-commandeering principle“, Congress can’t interfere with a state’s right to pass its own laws where Congress has not already legislated directly– even if interstate commerce is triggered. While the federal government can regulate private individuals, it cannot do the same to states. The DCC then requests that the state A/G forego a preemption analysis since it’s not relevant here and where no “positive conflict” with federal law exists anyway. After all, the feds can still prosecute individuals (and cannabis businesses) that choose to engage in interstate commerce.
- The CSA doesn’t criminalize states legalizing cannabis, and state officials are accordingly immune if they enforce and/or administer state cannabis laws and rules. The DCC also tells the State A/G not to sweat issues like aiding, abetting, and conspiracy for state officials and employees in this context because they’re not actually engaged in cannabis trafficking that violates the CSA. Lastly, the DCC cites to Gonzalez v. Raich to point out that the CSA doesn’t distinguish between interstate and intrastate commerce: both are equally as illegal under the CSA. In any case, California won’t suffer any greater liability than what already exists if interstate cannabis agreements are a go.
- As a throwaway argument, in regards to medical cannabis interstate commerce agreements, the DCC states that California is also safe from “significant risk” of federal enforcement because of the 2014 Rohrabacher-Farr-Blumenauer Amendment. The power of that Amendment to stop the feds from criminally prosecuting medical cannabis businesses (even though it doesn’t change the CSA) was tested in real time in California in the MAMM case in 2015, and then confirmed again in the McIntosh case in 2016 (at least for states in the Ninth Circuit).
States rights and DOJ enforcement
As I see it, the DCC is really hanging its hat on states’ rights and dual sovereignty in pushing the State A/G to opine that there’s no “significant legal risk” to California because of SB 1326. The anti-commandeering doctrine is not actually present in the Constitution, itself, though. The U.S. Supreme Court created the doctrine based on the 10th Amendment in two cases, New York v. United States in 1992, and Printz v. United States in 1997. The most recent application of the doctrine came in the 2018 decision in Murphy v. NCAA regarding New Jersey’s commencement of legal sports betting despite federal prohibition of the same. The U.S. Supreme Court sided with Jersey, ruling that “Congress may not simply ‘commandeer the legislative process of the States by directly compelling them to enact and enforce a federal regulatory program.”
I think the DCC is right about the anti-commandeering principle. I think the weakness though is around interstate commerce, and the DCC can’t ignore the 2005 Raich case, which holds that Congress’ Commerce Clause authority includes the power to prohibit the local cultivation and use of cannabis in compliance with California law.
The DCC likely rightly points out, however, that the foregoing doesn’t matter for the State. The State and its officials are highly unlikely to be prosecuted for anything at all. At most, the federal government might sue California to try to overturn SB 1326 (although I don’t see that happening under President Biden’s DOJ). Private citizens are the ones who will be on the line for enforcement because California wouldn’t act if the feds started punishing people for moving inventory under SB 1326 (that’s also why no positive conflict exists).
I think even if the DCC is successful in getting a positive opinion from the State A/G, what really matters is what enforcement by the DOJ (which is essentially controlled by the U.S. Attorneys in each District) looks like for private cannabis enterprise. In all, interstate cannabis agreements may be a political win for California, they will mean nothing if the DOJ doesn’t also play ball when it comes to enforcement.
For more on cannabis interstate commerce legislation, check out the following posts:
You may like
Cannabis News
An Important Lesson from the 2024 Elections
Published
1 day agoon
January 26, 2025By
admin
Retrospect: An Important Lesson to learn from the 2024 Elections
Well folks, here we are again. Donald Trump is back in the White House, and if his previous term taught us anything, we’re strapping in for one hell of a rollercoaster ride. I can already feel my inbox filling up with requests to write about the latest Trump cannabis controversy or whatever inflammatory tweet is setting the internet ablaze.
But I’ll be honest with you – I’m going to try my damnedest to avoid turning this platform into yet another Trump commentary channel. Lord knows we’ve got enough of those already. Between the mainstream media’s obsession with every presidential syllable and the circus surrounding Elon Musk and RFK Jr.’s alliance with Trump, we’re already drowning in political theater. I mean, just look at the current media frenzy over “Did Elon Nazi Salute?” after Trump’s inauguration speech. If that’s any indication, we’re in for four years of non-stop sensationalism.
Here’s the thing though – as someone who prides himself on staying above the partisan fray (and believe me, that’s getting harder by the day), I feel obligated to share some hard-earned wisdom about navigating the cannabis landscape during these politically charged times. The last four years under Biden’s administration taught us some valuable lessons about political promises and cannabis reform, and those insights are more relevant than ever as we enter this new chapter.
So grab your favorite strain, settle into your comfy spot, and let old Reginald share some perspective on what we’ve learned and how to keep our heads straight during what’s sure to be an… interesting four years ahead.
If there’s one thing I’ve learned from years of covering cannabis politics, it’s that weed polls better than politicians – and boy, do they know it. It might sound like I’m hitting the bong too hard, but the numbers don’t lie. Election after election, cannabis legalization consistently polls higher than any candidate running for office. With pseudo-legalization spreading across the country like wildfire, there are more cannabis supporters than ever before, making us quite the tempting voting bloc.
This reality wasn’t lost on the Democrats during their four-year stint. They dangled cannabis reform like a carrot on a stick, making grand promises about prioritizing legalization. Remember Kamala Harris, suddenly becoming cannabis’s biggest cheerleader? The same Kamala who oversaw countless marijuana prosecutions as California’s Attorney General was now preaching about social justice and legalization. The irony was thicker than smoke in a hotboxed Volkswagen.
For the first few years of the Biden administration, we got nothing but lip service. Then, as election season approached – wouldn’t you know it – suddenly cannabis reform became urgent. Pot pardons! Rescheduling! It was like watching a dealer who ghosted you for months suddenly sliding into your DMs with “you up?”
And some folks ate it up. I saw countless posts from well-meaning stoners declaring their undying loyalty to Biden-Harris based solely on these eleventh-hour cannabis promises. But let’s get real – those pardons didn’t free a single soul from prison, and the rescheduling circus? Well, that’s still stuck in bureaucratic limbo, likely to face years of litigation if it ever materializes.
Here’s the kicker though – despite all this pot pandering, Trump still won. Why? Because while cannabis reform is important, Americans were more concerned about putting food on their tables, feeling safe in their communities, and managing the immigration crisis. The Democrats were so busy virtue signaling about helping marginalized communities that they forgot about the broader population’s immediate concerns. That’s like focusing on growing exotic strains while your basic crops are dying – it might sound cool, but it won’t feed the masses.
The result? Not only did they lose the election, but they strung along millions of cannabis supporters for absolutely nothing. No legalization, no meaningful reform, just empty promises and disappointed voters. And therein lies our lesson, my friends. Politicians will always love pot pandering because they know we’re passionate about legalization. But when their promises go up in smoke, we’re the ones left holding an empty bag.
Here’s a draft in Reginald Reefer’s voice:
Let me tell you why I stay away from political parties like they’re contaminated bathwater. It’s not because I don’t care about society or our collective rights – quite the opposite. It’s because these parties are like ill-fitting suits; they might look good on the rack, but once you try them on, nothing quite sits right.
Take me, for example. On some issues, I’m as “Republican” as they come. I believe in keeping government small (because let’s face it, they tend to mess up everything they touch), rewarding merit over handouts, cutting through red tape, and protecting individual liberties. You know, the whole “leave me alone to grow my plants in peace” mentality.
But flip the coin, and suddenly I’m singing from the Democratic hymnal. I believe in drug reform (obviously), holding big corporations accountable for their shenanigans, protecting Mother Earth, and letting people love whoever they damn well please. Some might say this makes me a libertarian, but I prefer to think of myself as an anarchist – not in the “chaos in the streets” sense, but in the “I don’t need a master telling me what to do” sense.
Now, if I were to play the political game (which I’m not, but let’s pretend), here’s how I’d approach it. During campaign season? Sure, I’d fight like hell to get my candidate in office. Wave the signs, spread the word, do the whole song and dance. But the moment they win? That’s when the real work begins.
See, this is where most people get it wrong. They treat their political party like a sports team, blindly cheering even when their players are dropping the ball. But that’s not how democracy should work. The minute your candidate takes office, you need to transform from their biggest cheerleader into their harshest critic.
Stop swooning over their tweets and start scrutinizing their actions. Forget what they promised on the campaign trail – what are they actually doing now? Are they following through, or are they just blowing smoke? If they’re not living up to their word, it’s time to make some noise. Call your representatives, flood their offices with emails, make your voice heard.
That’s the thing about political promises – they’re like rolling papers in the wind unless someone holds these politicians accountable. And who better to do that than the people who put them in office? Don’t let them get comfortable. Don’t let them forget who they work for.
So over these next four years, whether you’re a Trump supporter or just someone trying to navigate this political circus, remember: Your job isn’t to defend your candidate’s every move. Your job is to keep them honest, keep them working, and keep them afraid of disappointing their constituents. Because at the end of the day, politicians are like cannabis plants – they need constant attention and occasional pruning to produce anything worthwhile.
Let’s talk about the orange elephant in the room. Love him or hate him, Trump isn’t your typical politician – mainly because he isn’t one. He’s more like a chaos wizard who somehow got hold of the nuclear codes. But here’s the thing that makes covering Trump so interesting: unlike most politicians who make promises they never intend to keep, this guy actually follows through on some wild stuff.
Take his first few weeks back in office. While the media was having a meltdown about his latest tweet, Trump was busy declassifying JFK and MLK documents that have been gathering dust for decades. But the real head-turner? Pardoning Ross Ulbricht, aka the Dread Pirate Roberts. Here’s a guy who got two life sentences without parole for… what exactly? Creating a website? Sure, people sold drugs on the Silk Road, but by that logic, we should throw Mark Zuckerberg in prison every time someone sells weed through Facebook Messenger.
And he’s not done. RFK Jr. – the black sheep of the Kennedy family who’s been raising hell about pharmaceutical companies – is set to head Health and Human Services. Meanwhile, Trump’s already making good on his immigration promises faster than you can say “build the wall.” It’s clear this isn’t the same Trump from 2016. He’s got new allies, new strategies, and seemingly fewer fucks to give than ever before.
But here’s where things get murky, folks. While Trump’s making moves that have libertarians and anti-establishment types cheering, he’s also cozying up to some seriously sketchy characters. Take Larry Ellison, the Oracle overlord who’s got deeper CIA connections than my grow room has spider mites. For those who don’t know, Oracle started as a CIA project in 1977 with Ellison at the helm, though they’ll swear up and down it’s all ancient history. Yeah, and I’m just growing tomatoes in my basement.
What’s particularly concerning is all this talk about using AI to develop mRNA vaccines. I don’t know about you, but combining artificial intelligence, experimental vaccines, and a company with intelligence agency roots sounds like the plot of a dystopian novel I don’t want to live through.
So here we are, watching Trump do some genuinely positive things while simultaneously setting up what could be the infrastructure for a technocratic surveillance state. It’s like finding out your dealer is giving you great prices but also installing cameras in your house. Sure, the weed’s good, but at what cost?
This is why, my friends, we need to stay vigilant. Celebrate the wins when they come, but keep your eyes wide open and your bullshit detectors finely tuned. Because in Trump’s America 2.0, the only thing we can be certain of is uncertainty itself.
TRUMP ON MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION, READ ON…
Cannabis News
Oregon Cannabis 2025: Legislative Forecast and Report
Published
3 days agoon
January 24, 2025By
admin
The Oregon legislative session formally kicked off this week, on Tuesday, January 21st. It’s a regular session in 2025, meaning we’re in for a longer stretch — a 160-day calendar, versus the 35-day affair we see in even-numbered years.
If you read any of the news articles previewing the 2025 session, you won’t see cannabis as a legislative priority. Most likely, you won’t see it mentioned at all. Legislators seem both wary and weary of cannabis: the 2023 industry scandals implicating public officials are still fairly recent; and, after ten dynamic years and hundreds of adult use cannabis proposals, bills and laws, the program needs to breathe.
All of that said, the Cannabis Industry Association of Oregon (CIAO) and others have been working on their wish lists, and I do expect to see a few new cannabis laws in 2025. Most of it will be scaffolding and maintenance.
Below, I summarize the draft bills currently teed up in the 2025 session (with links), and give some cursory comments. But first I’ll add my usual caveat: a large majority of these introduced bills will not pass. Some contain overlapping concepts and will never go to committee, while others will fail after a hearing or two, or be consolidated into omnibus or placeholder bills.
This is one of the omnibus bills, and one to watch. Its drafter described it to me yesterday as “omnibus but not complete,” in fact. Here’s what’s in there as of today:
- Authorizes the destruction of hoop houses when executing a search warrant to investigate the unlawful production of marijuana.
- This strikes me as potentially problematic, as a due process issue.
- Requires the OLCC to make maps of licensed industrial hemp operations and marijuana production premises available to the Water Resources Department and the Department of Environmental Quality.
- An inter-agency communication issue. Been on the list for a while.
- Repeals the prohibition on a marijuana retailer locating within 1,000 feet of a building where a public prekindergarten or kindergarten program is provided.
- Something we’ve dealt with more than once, including with the Department of Justice way back when. Just a clarification needed.
- Allows the State Department of Agriculture to inspect biomass and processed industrial hemp stored at the location of a licensed industrial hemp operation.
Here are a few concepts that may be added:
- Grant OLCC authority to move from a one-year licensing cycle to a two-year cycle, as with alcohol.
- This could cut a lot of red tape for both OLCC and industry. The devil would be in the details as to marijuana retailer tax issues, but as a concept I really like it.
- Re-up the grant program targeting illegal grows in southwest Oregon, at current service levels.
- This grant has been around since 2018: the sheriffs and victim’s rights folks are the main proponents. If you’d like to see data, the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission program published a recent report here.
- Requires OHA to study the medical use of marijuana.
- This is a funny little bill and probably just a placeholder. We’ve only had a medical marijuana statute in Oregon for 27 years!
- Removes requirements that a registry identification cardholder who produces marijuana for personal medical use register with OHA.
- Requires a person responsible for a marijuana grow site that produces marijuana for medical use for three or more registry identification cardholders to apply for a designation from the OLCC.
- Directs OHA to issue electronic registration cards.
- Requires marijuana retailers to offer for sale medical grade cannabinoid items that contain not more than 20 percent total THC.
- Creates health care and employment protections for a person who is a registry identification cardholder.
This is an Oregon Cannabis Commission bill with some strong concepts, but it will need a lot of amending. OLCC has been slowly absorbing OHA’s medical marijuana program for years. At first that upset people, but a full windup is a fait accompli. SB 162 has a good chance to pass in some form.
- Requires OLCC to study cannabis.
- Directs OLCC to submit findings to the interim committees of the Legislative Assembly related to the judiciary not later than September 15, 2026.
Placeholder.
Same as SB 188. Placeholder.
- Ends special tax assessment for land, if the owner or the person in control of the land gets a civil penalty for growing marijuana on the land or is found guilty of growing it there.
- Makes an exception if the owner reasonably didn’t know about the pot or called the police as soon as they did know.
- Disqualifies land from farm use special assessments upon a final civil penalty or judgment of conviction for the illegal growing of marijuana against the landowner or person in possession and control of the land.
- Provides an exception for a landowner or other obligated taxpayer who reasonably lacked knowledge of the illegal growing of marijuana or promptly notified a law enforcement agency of the illegal growing of marijuana.
This bill appears to be poorly conceived and poorly structured at present. I’m guessing it doesn’t go anywhere for several reasons, not least of which will be the fiscal impact consideration.
- One-liner: establishes a division in the Department of State Police to enforce laws related to illegal marijuana cultivation.
I doubt it goes anywhere.
This one, along with SB 557 and 558 just below, are the CIAO bills. (You can view CIAO’s legislative priorities here.) Each of these bills are sponsored by Senator Floyd Prozanski, longtime industry supporter.
- Allows a marijuana producer, marijuana wholesaler, marijuana processor or marijuana retailer to use a motion detection camera system at a licensed premises.
- I was surprised this would be disallowed by OLCC.
- Directs OLCC to establish by rule an industrial hemp endorsement for marijuana producers.
- Prohibits OLCC from requiring physical tags or other identifiers on certain marijuana plants.
- This would be very useful and cut down on lots of pointless “compliance” and labor and waste.
- Allows a marijuana item transport vehicle to use a digital manifest and edit the manifest during transport.
- Let’s get with the times.
- Allows the State Department of Agriculture (ODA) to define “industrial hemp” by rule.
- Allows a marijuana licensee to engage in the interstate commerce of industrial hemp and marijuana. Becomes operative if federal law or the United States Department of Justice allow or tolerate the interstate commerce of industrial hemp or marijuana.
- I need to ask about this too. In 2019, we passed SB 582 which already allows export of marijuana when the federal environment changes. This proposal seems very similar.
- Requires at least one OLCC commissioner to hold a marijuana processor, marijuana producer, marijuana retailer or marijuana wholesaler license.
Creative, and probably going nowhere.
- Allows a marijuana licensee to provide samples of marijuana items to other marijuana licensees at temporary events registered with OLCC.
- Allows the commission to establish by rule a temporary events registration system. Allows a marijuana wholesaler to sell marijuana items to a marijuana retailer at a temporary event.
- Allows a marijuana producer to provide samples of seeds and immature marijuana plants to permitted workers.
- Allows a marijuana producer, marijuana processor and marijuana wholesaler to provide samples of marijuana items in specified amounts to permitted workers.
A bunch of rulemaking coming up for OLCC if this passes. But it all makes sense.
- Increases the maximum percentage of tax that the governing body of a city or county may impose on the sale of marijuana items. 20% of the proceeds go to the city or county at issue.
- Requires a percentage of a newly enacted or increased amount to be transferred to the county in which the collecting retail establishment is located, provided the county is eligible for Oregon Marijuana Account distributions.
This will get the cannabis industry’s hackles up, severely. Similar bills have been beaten back in prior years and I expect the same result here.
- Establishes a state public bank task force.
The Governor vetoed this bill last time around, citing “logistical challenges.” I haven’t had a chance to talk with the sponsors of SB 583, so I’m not sure what the plan is on reintroduction. As a guy from North Dakota — the only state in the union with a state-chartered bank; and as an equitable banking access proponent — I hope this one succeeds.
- Exempts from public records disclosure the residential address or personal phone number of an individual who holds a permit issued under ORS 475C.273.
The reference there is to marijuana worker permits. Good idea. The proposed law should probably sweep in ORS 475C.269 as well.
- States that the person must tell the OHA or the OLCC where the person plans to grow, process or produce the marijuana or psilocybin and who owns the site that the person plans to use. Specifies some cases when the OHA or the OLCC cannot give permission to the person.
- Requires an applicant for a license to manufacture psilocybin to submit to OHA information regarding the ownership and location of the premises to be licensed, and prohibits the authority from issuing a license in specified circumstances.
- Requires an applicant for a license to produce or process marijuana to submit to the OLCC information regarding the ownership and location of the premises to be licensed. Prohibits the commission from issuing a license in specified circumstances.
- Requires an applicant for a medical marijuana grow site or medical marijuana processing site registration to submit to the authority information regarding the ownership and location of the premises to be registered. Prohibits OHA from issuing a registration in specified circumstances.
This is a big and rangy bill with concepts overlapping some of the others. Expect it to be absorbed somewhere, in some form.
- Provides items that have cannabis in them must have a label that says a person has to be at least 21 years old to consume or use the item.
- Requires labels on marijuana items and inhalant delivery systems that contain industrial hemp-derived vapor items to include that the minimum age for consumption or use is 21 years of age.
Everyone would have to re-do their labels.
- Requires that marijuana items and stores warn people that the use of marijuana by a person who is pregnant might cause danger.
- Requires a marijuana retailer and a medical marijuana dispensary to post warning signs regarding the consumption or use of marijuana during pregnancy.
- Requires marijuana items and inhalant delivery systems that contain an industrial-hemp derived vapor item to include in labeling that consumption or use of marijuana during pregnancy may be dangerous.
Some speech and label issues here.
- Requires OLCC to study itself. Directs OLCC to submit findings to the interim committees of the Legislative Assembly related to economic development not later than September 15, 2026.
Placeholder. Same as 2276.
Similar to the two above.
- Directs OLCC to look at cannabis and report to the judiciary committees. Directs the commission to submit findings to the interim committees of the Legislative Assembly related to the judiciary not later than September 15, 2026.
I believe this one also comes via the Oregon Cannabis Commission, like SB 176. And like SB 176, it likely has legs but will also see some amendments along the way.
- Provides that organizations that provide hospice, palliative care or home health care services, as well as certain residential facilities, must write policies and teach their staff about the medical use of marijuana.
- Same requirement of any such organization or residential facility that is designated as an additional caregiver for a medical marijuana cardholder.
- Protects an organization or residential facility and its employees and contractors from certain criminal liability related to the medical use of marijuana.
- Prohibits the Oregon State Board of Nursing from taking disciplinary action against a nurse for discussing the medical use of marijuana with a patient. (Note: nurses are already allowed by statute to discuss medical marijuana use with patients, consistent with First Amendment protections)
- Expands the definition of “debilitating medical condition” for the medical use of marijuana. The specific add-on I’m seeing is “the need for hospice, palliative care, comfort care or other symptom management, including comprehensive pain management.”
______
That’s all she wrote for now. I’ll check in again at the end of the session, or before that with any significant developments.
Cannabis News
Why Does Cannabis Make Exercise So Much More Rewarding?
Published
3 days agoon
January 24, 2025By
admin
Why Cannabis makes exercise more rewarding
Ah, the “lazy stoner” stereotype – a relic of prohibition that’s aged about as well as “Reefer Madness.” As someone who’s been writing about cannabis for years, I’ve watched this tired cliché fade into obscurity, replaced by a much more nuanced understanding of who actually uses cannabis.
These days, you’re just as likely to find a joint in the gym bag of a professional athlete as you are in the purse of a suburban mom heading to yoga class. Cannabis consumers no longer fit neatly into the box that prohibitionists tried to stuff us in for decades. The plant has found its way into every corner of society, from high-powered executives to creative professionals, from extreme sports enthusiasts to retirees looking to stay active.
What’s particularly fascinating, and what many people might not realize, is that cannabis users tend to be more physically active than non-users. Yeah, you read that right – contrary to the old stereotype of the couch-locked stoner surrounded by empty chip bags, research shows that cannabis consumers generally move more than their non-consuming counterparts.
In fact, a new federally funded study has just confirmed what many of us in the cannabis community have known for years: people are significantly more physically active on days they use marijuana. This isn’t just anecdotal evidence anymore – we’re talking about hard data that directly challenges decades of anti-cannabis propaganda.
Today, we’re going to dive deep into the science behind this phenomenon, and I’ll throw in some personal insights from years of observing and writing about cannabis culture. Why does cannabis seem to enhance physical activity for so many users? Is it purely physiological, or is there something more complex at play?
Buckle up, fellow cannabis enthusiasts and curious minds – we’re about to explore why getting high might actually help you get moving!
Let’s dive into this fascinating federally funded study that’s challenging everything we thought we knew about cannabis and physical activity. The research team, comprised of experts from prestigious institutions including the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences and the University of Colorado Boulder, tracked 98 adult cannabis users over a four-week period, monitoring their physical activity levels and substance use patterns through smartphone-based surveys.
What makes this study particularly interesting is its real-time tracking methodology, known as ecological momentary assessment (EMA). Instead of relying on participants to remember their activities weeks or months later, researchers collected data about cannabis use, physical activity, and other behaviors as they happened. This approach provides a more accurate picture of how cannabis use relates to daily activities.
The results? They’re pretty eye-opening. The study found a clear positive association between cannabis use and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). In other words, people moved more on days they used cannabis. As the researchers noted, “Daily cannabis use was positively associated with daily physical activity.”
But why does this happen? The research team proposed several intriguing mechanisms. According to their findings, cannabis might increase exercise enjoyment and motivation, enhance recovery from physical activity, and activate the endocannabinoid system, which in turn triggers the dopaminergic system. This leads to increased feelings of psychological reward associated with physical activity. In simpler terms, cannabis might make exercise feel more rewarding, both physically and mentally.
However, like any good research, this study has its limitations. The sample size was relatively small at 98 participants, and the study only included people who already used cannabis at least once during the month. We still need more research to understand how these findings might apply to a broader population or to people who are just starting to use cannabis.
Here’s where things get really interesting though. Understanding the relationship between cannabis and exercise could have far-reaching implications for public health. As America grapples with an opioid epidemic and rising obesity rates, finding natural ways to make physical activity more appealing and rewarding could be game-changing. If cannabis can help people enjoy exercise more and recover better, it might offer a safer alternative to prescription painkillers for athletes and fitness enthusiasts.
This could tie perfectly into the growing “Make America Healthy Again” movement. Instead of viewing cannabis as a hindrance to health and wellness, we might start seeing it as a tool for promoting active lifestyles. Imagine if legal cannabis states started developing programs that combine cannabis education with fitness initiatives – we could be looking at a whole new approach to public health.
Of course, more research is needed. We need larger studies, longer-term follow-ups, and investigations into different populations and types of physical activity. But one thing’s clear: the old stereotype of the lazy stoner is going up in smoke, replaced by a more nuanced understanding of how cannabis might actually help people lead more active lives.
As someone who’s been both writing about cannabis and exercising regularly for years, I’ve noticed something fascinating about combining the two. Joe Rogan once described smoking weed before working out as enabling him to “feel every muscle” work individually, and I’ve got to say, he’s onto something. When you’re high during exercise, there’s an enhanced mind-body connection that’s hard to explain unless you’ve experienced it. It’s as if cannabis amplifies your proprioception – your awareness of your body’s position and movement in space.
But here’s where it gets really interesting. Most of us don’t work out in complete silence; we’ve got our carefully curated playlists pumping through our headphones. And this is where cannabis adds another layer to the experience. I recently wrote about what I call “Psychoactive Listening” – how cannabis seems to enhance our connection with music, making us more immersed in every beat and melody. When you combine this with exercise, something magical happens.
Think about it: cannabis, music, and movement create a perfect trinity for achieving what athletes call “the flow state.” You know that sweet spot where you’re not thinking about your workout anymore, you’re just… doing it? Cannabis seems to help quiet that chattering “monkey mind” that usually won’t shut up about how many reps you have left or whether you remembered to buy milk. Instead, you’re fully present in the moment, moving with the music, feeling every muscle engagement, completely immersed in the experience.
Speaking from personal experience, there’s definitely a difference between working out sober and working out with a little cannabis in your system. Don’t get me wrong – I’m not suggesting you get completely blazed before hitting the gym. But a light buzz can transform a mundane workout into an almost meditative experience. The post-workout euphoria? That’s on another level entirely. It’s like the natural runner’s high gets amplified, creating a sense of accomplishment and well-being that can last for hours.
Exercise already releases endorphins and activates our endocannabinoid system naturally – that’s why we feel so good after a workout. When you add cannabis to the mix, you’re essentially double-dipping into these feel-good mechanisms. The combination can make exercise feel less like a chore and more like an enjoyable activity you actually look forward to.
This trend of combining cannabis and fitness couldn’t have come at a better time. With obesity-related illnesses on the rise and many people struggling to maintain regular exercise habits, anything that makes physical activity more appealing is a win. If cannabis can help people find more joy in movement and make exercise feel less like a punishment and more like a reward, we might be looking at a powerful tool for promoting public health.
Who knows? Maybe the future of fitness isn’t just about counting reps and tracking macros – maybe it’s about finding that sweet spot where wellness meets wellness, where getting healthy and getting high go hand in hand.
As we wrap up our deep dive into cannabis and exercise, I can’t help but see a massive opportunity on the horizon. With fitness becoming an increasingly central focus in American culture and cannabis users proving to be more active than previously thought, we’re looking at the perfect storm for a new kind of wellness revolution.
Think about it: How many people would be interested in a “Stoned Yoga” class where the instructor understands how to guide slightly elevated participants through mindful movements? Or what about organized “High Runs” where like-minded individuals can experience that legendary runner’s high while actually being high? These aren’t just pipe dreams – they’re legitimate business opportunities waiting to be seized by enterprising cannabis enthusiasts.
The research backs up what many of us have known anecdotally: cannabis users like to move. We’re not just sitting around playing video games (though there’s nothing wrong with that either). We’re out there hiking, lifting, running, and yoga-ing our way to better health. The stereotype of the lazy stoner is dead, and in its place, a new archetype is emerging – the active, health-conscious cannabis consumer.
For those of you who’ve been looking to carve out your niche in the cannabis industry, this could be your moment. The intersection of cannabis and fitness is still relatively unexplored territory, ripe with possibilities. Whether you’re thinking about becoming a cannabis-friendly personal trainer, starting a stoner sports league, or launching a line of workout gear for the cannabis community, the time to act is now.
Remember, the future of wellness doesn’t have to choose between being healthy and being high. As this research shows, maybe the best path forward is one that embraces both. So grab your gym bag, pack your favorite strain, and get ready to be part of the green fitness revolution. The world of active stoners awaits!
Inspiration: https://www.marijuanamoment.net/people-are-more-physically-
active-on-days-they-use-marijuana-new-federally-funded-study-shows-smashing-lazy-stoner-stereotype/
WEED AND EXERCISE, READ ON…
THE LAZY STONER MYTH DEBUNKED, WHY PEOPLE ARE ACTIVE!
New Year’s finds to fuel your best year yet
An Important Lesson from the 2024 Elections
Fiji police concerned about the increasing number of marijuana plants uprooted from maritime islands
The unusual sacrament celebrated in this US church
New California Bill to Allow Limited Amount of THC in Hemp-Derived Products
Winter Romance Guide: Pairing Date Nights in Brooklyn with Infused Products
Windy City’s Weed Chef – GanjaVacations Jamaica
Weird cannabis strain delivers exceptional high
This Is New York Cannabis
PoliticsThese States Are The Most Likely To Legalize Marijuana In 2025, According To Top Advocacy Groups
Distressed Cannabis Business Takeaways – Canna Law Blog™
United States: Alex Malyshev And Melinda Fellner Discuss The Intersection Of Tax And Cannabis In New Video Series – Part VI: Licensing (Video)
What you Need to Know
Drug Testing for Marijuana – The Joint Blog
NCIA Write About Their Equity Scholarship Program
It has been a wild news week – here’s how CBD and weed can help you relax
Cannabis, alcohol firm SNDL loses CA$372.4 million in 2022
A new April 20 cannabis contest includes a $40,000 purse
Your Go-To Source for Cannabis Logos and Designs
UArizona launches online cannabis compliance online course
Trending
-
Cannabis News2 years ago
Distressed Cannabis Business Takeaways – Canna Law Blog™
-
One-Hit Wonders2 years ago
United States: Alex Malyshev And Melinda Fellner Discuss The Intersection Of Tax And Cannabis In New Video Series – Part VI: Licensing (Video)
-
Cannabis 1012 years ago
What you Need to Know
-
drug testing1 year ago
Drug Testing for Marijuana – The Joint Blog
-
Education2 years ago
NCIA Write About Their Equity Scholarship Program
-
Cannabis2 years ago
It has been a wild news week – here’s how CBD and weed can help you relax
-
Marijuana Business Daily2 years ago
Cannabis, alcohol firm SNDL loses CA$372.4 million in 2022
-
California2 years ago
A new April 20 cannabis contest includes a $40,000 purse