Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Nice close.
***New Sponsors Added to H.R.525 - Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2015
Rep. Gibson, Christopher P. [R-NY-19]
Rep. DeSaulnier, Mark [D-CA-11]
This brings the total sponsors to 73, up from the original 47. The current sponsors indicate bipartisan support.
The verbiage of the bill is quite simple: 'To amend the Controlled Substances Act to exclude industrial hemp from the definition of marihuana'
Sen. McConnell, Mitch [R-KY] is the Senate Majority Leader, one of the original sponsors, and has historically shown support for hemp legalization (Hemp is legal in Kentucky).
President Barack Obama signed the 2013 Farm Bill, showing support for the movement, and has been outspoken that the Fed will not interfere with the emerging Cannabis markets.
Hemp commission receives funding, begins hiring search - http://www.technicianonline.com/news/article_0f4ded6e-1d79-11e6-8e4a-27f766b22d01.html?TNNoMobile
Governor who called legalization 'reckless' now says Colorado's pot industry is working - http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hickenlooper-marijuana-20160516-20160516-snap-story.html
Farming hemp could provide NC an economic boon in production - http://www.encorepub.com/live-local-live-small-farming-hemp-could-provide-nc-an-economic-boon-in-production/
Indiana could be the next leader in sustainability through hemp - http://www.nuvo.net/indianapolis/lets-get-hemp-notized/Content?oid=3937601
Hemp food and personal care US retail sales estimated at $283 million - http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Regulation/Hemp-food-and-personal-care-retail-sales-estimated-at-283-million
THE NC HEMP COMMISSION HAS BEEN FUNDED - http://www.nchemp.org/farmers-and-investors.html
DEA Plans To Decide Whether To Reschedule Marijuana By Mid-Year - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dea-marijuana-reschedule_us_5704567de4b0537661881644
New DEA Chief, Chuck Rosenberg, claims to focus less on Marijuana - see: http://www.theweedblog.com/new-dea-chief-claims-he-will-focus-less-on-marijuana/
Pot Money Changing Hearts in Washington - http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/10/us/washington-marijuana-70-million-tax-dollars/
Cannabis and Banking:
Colorado Pot Bank Sues the Fed - http://money.cnn.com/2015/07/31/news/marijuana-pot-bank-sues-fed/index.html?iid=hp-stack-dom
Colorado senators want cannabis cash in the banks - http://www.coloradoindependent.com/154400/colorado-senators-want-cannabis-cash-in-the-banks
Lawmakers seek to allow federal banking for marijuana industry - http://blog.sfgate.com/smellthetruth/2015/07/13/lawmakers-seek-to-allow-federal-banking-for-marijuana-industry/
More:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=123513255
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=123350823
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=122805633
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=122257993
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=121896983
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=121405515
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=118623795
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=117881160
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=117881006
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=116927249
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=116873285
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=115869829
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=115781841
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=115425657
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=114509093
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=114431268
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=112731410
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=114221759
Source: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/525/cosponsors?pageSort=lastToFirst
Does any cannabis operation currently own 100 green houses?
Just wondering if what you say is even plausible.
Trump, Clinton, Johnson Agree: Medical Marijuana Use Should Be Legal
Marijuana legalization continues to grow as a front-burner issue, and legalization for medical purposes is among the few stances that the two major presidential candidates share.
Presumptive Democratic and Republican nominees Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump believe that using marijuana to combat the symptoms of a range of ailments should be legal. Clinton has indicated that she might even be open to wider usage. Trump has called cannabis legalization a difficult one but has not been specific about how his administration might approach the issue.
The Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson, the former chief executive officer of Cannabis Sativa, which markets and brands marijuana and marijuana-based products, favors full legalization. Johnson has registered around 10% of the vote in some presidential polls. If he can build momentum, legalization could become a higher-profile campaign topic.
Marijuana polls have found that most of the public believes that medical marijuana usage should be legal. A Quinnipiac University poll released last month found that a whopping 90% of the public supports the legal use of marijuana for medical purposes. Ninety-four percent of Democrats and 84% of Republicans held this position.
A national poll released by the Pew Research Center found that 52% of Americans support pot legalization versus 45% who do not. Even the 33-year-old drug education and abuse prevention group D.A.R.E. has relaxed its stance about pot. Earlier this year, D.A.R.E. quietly removed pot from its list of gateway drugs, so-called because they lead to use of harder-core drugs.
The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) currently designates marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug. That means that it is unsuitable for medical usage and is likely to lead to addiction of more serious drugs.
The DEA is supposed to rule on a possible reclassification to a Schedule 2 substance later this year, perhaps as early as the summer. This would make it easier for scientists to research the effects of the plant and make it easier for fledgling cannabis companies to grow.
The DEA has already rejected petitions for reclassification three times, so many observers are pessimistic that the agency will decide differently this time. Such a decision would continue to open the industry to a more vigorous oversight, a potential impediment.
According to some estimates, the cannabis industry is supposed to generate more than $6.5 billion in revenue by the end of 2016.
According to a study conducted by the non-partisan Tax Foundation, legalizing marijuana would generate up to $28 billion in federal, state, and local tax revenue annually. That doesn't seem far-fetched, considering the business notched by some states that have already legalized usage in one form or another. A total of 25 states have legalized the use of pot for medical purposes and otherwise.
The Washington State Liquor Control Board reported having generated more than $257 million worth of marijuana revenue with another $70 million in taxes. In the first three months of 2016, Colorado pot shops sold more than $270 million in cannabis and related products, according to the state Department of Revenue.
A beneficiary of keeping the status quo could be Big Pharma, which would have time to develop or expand synthetic, legal alternatives to marijuana. For example, Marinol contains THC, the main psychoactive component as pot. But its results have been mixed. Some patients say it has helped lesson unpleasant symptoms such as nausea. But others have not found it as effective as marijuana.
Source: http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/trump-clinton-johnson-agree-medical-marijuana-use-should-be-legal/ar-BBufdYX
When will the DEA announce its marijuana rescheduling decision?
Federal government now says no deadline for announcement
By John Ingold | jingold@denverpost.com
PUBLISHED: July 11, 2016 at 12:51 pm
The Drug Enforcement Administration flaked on its self-imposed deadline to announce whether to reschedule marijuana, and now it’s not clear when a decision might come.
In April, the DEA told lawmakers in a letter that it was reviewing information on rescheduling and “hopes to release its determination in the first half of 2016.” That hope ended when June did, and a DEA spokesman in Washington, D.C., told The Denver Post late last week that there is no update on the administration’s contemplations of rescheduling.
Earlier this month, DEA spokesman Russell Baer told the tech news website a NewDomain, “We aren’t holding ourselves to any artificial time frame.” Even after the DEA announces a decision on rescheduling, that decision could still be subject to further review and litigation.
All of this counters a purported scoop touted by the Santa Monica Observer as “groundbreaking,” in which it quoted an unnamed, chardonnay-sipping “DEA lawyer” saying that the administration would move cannabis to Schedule II in August.
Marijuana is currently listed under Schedule I, which means the federal government considers it to have no accepted medicinal value and a high potential for abuse. As part of the most recent petition to reschedule cannabis, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has reconsidered marijuana’s medicinal value and abuse potential. That department has sent a recommendation to the DEA, which has not disclosed what the recommendation says.
There’s a recent history of the federal government taking longer than promised on marijuana issues. After voters in Colorado and Washington legalized cannabis possession and use in 2012, then-Attorney General Eric Holder said the federal government would announced its response, “relatively soon.” The response didn’t come for another eight months.
Whatever the time frame, some federal lawmakers appear to be getting restless.
On June 30 — the last day the DEA had to hold to its previously hoped-for deadline — U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York sent the DEA a letter asking, “that you take immediate action to remove ‘cannabis’ and ‘tetrahydrocannabinols’ from Schedule I.” The letter was co-signed by U.S. Rep. Jared Polis, a Democrat from Boulder.
Among other details, the letter mentions a proposed DEA rule in 2010 that would have placed drugs that mimic the FDA-approved drug dronabinol — a synthetic form of THC marketed as Marinol — into Schedule III. According to the proposed rule, that rescheduling would “include formulations having naturally-derived dronabinol” from cannabis plants.
According to the letter, drug companies that produced competing products objected and the proposed rule was never implemented.
“By proposing that natural generic equivalents be rescheduled to Schedule III, the DEA acknowledged that this substance has a medical use, regardless of whether it is synthetically made or natural,” the letter states.
Rescheduling purified components of the cannabis plant, though, is still a long way from rescheduling marijuana as a whole. And only time — an indeterminate amount of time — will tell whether that happens.
Source: http://www.denverpost.com/2016/07/11/dea-marijuana-rescheduling-decision/
This guys quick tour around the facility can not be construed as produced by or credited to hemp. More so, there is no way of knowing when this guy was at the plant (although fairly recent in appearance), or if the photo was altered or edited.
The guy seemed to be fascinated and/or curious as to the status of the plant and just swung on by along his travels. It appears he was excited to receive a hands-on tour, and did not have anything negative to say.
There is the possibility that he was told he was not allowed in some areas or couldn't share certain information, due to the strict nature of disclosing information to the public. Nothing wrong with that decision. We already know the SEC is watching, so playing it safe is wise. He sat down to eat with the team, and, again, nothing bad was mention about Hemp.
Actually, he said he was impressed, so...
Spinning
Moving equipment, bringing power, installing scale, harvesting crop, installing silo, equipment repairs, hemp now legal and commission funded in NC, AND NOTHING HAS CHANGED?
It's about observing change, or lack thereof
It's about observing change, or lack thereof
It's about observing change, or lack thereof
Stock prices have been known to go up and down. Very basic.
I remember the last run. 2000+% return. 80% down only if you sell low. I don't sell low.
Marijuana legalization amendment PASSES at DNC Platform Committee hearing after 81-80 vote!
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/trees/comments/4s2evc/marijuana_legalization_amendment_passes_at_dnc/?ref=share&ref_source=link
Feds Ready Decision on Reclassficiation of Marijuana
by Daniel Nussbaum 10 Jul 2016
The federal government is expected formally to announce a decision in July about whether to remove marijuana from its Schedule I drug status, where it has been grouped together with heroin and LSD for more than 40 years.
The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) announced in April that it would rule on marijuana’s classification in the first half of 2016, according to McClatchy. But the agency has apparently missed its own self-imposed July 30 deadline.
Now, a DEA spokesman tells the Orange County Register that the agency anticipates “something happening in the next month,” though the Obama administration nor the agency itself has given any indication as to how they might rule on the drug’s status.
Marijuana was classified as a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, putting it in the same category as powerful narcotics like heroin, peyote and mescaline. Drugs classified as Schedule I have no accepted medical benefits.
However, with marijuana now legal for medical purposes in 25 states — and for recreation in another four states and the District of Columbia — many legalization advocates say it is well past time for the drug to be rescheduled, or, in what would be the best possible scenario for pot-related businesses, completely “descheduled” off of the list of controlled substances.
Reclassification of marijuana to Schedule II — alongside cocaine, which the government says has some accepted medical value — or to Schedule III — alongside prescription narcotics like Tylenol with codeine — would still make the drug illegal under federal law and would therefore leave business owners in medical- and recreationally-legal states operating in a legal gray area.
A complete “descheduling” of the drug, which would put it on par with tobacco and alcohol, is far less likely, experts predict.
Even if marijuana is reclassified to a different Schedule, little would change in how businesses can operate in states where it legal. If it were reclassified to Schedule III, however, businesses like marijuana dispensaries would be allowed to deduct operating expenses, including rent and utilities, from their federal tax bill, which would make it easier for such businesses to operate.
However, these businesses would still face challenges, including an inability to use the U.S. banking system and other regulatory restrictions.
“Technically, it gets you closer to the finish line, but you still have a whole hell of a long way to go,” National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) deputy director Paul Armentano told the Register.
California could soon become the fifth state in the nation to legalize marijuana for recreational purposes, after a measure qualified for the state’s November ballot earlier this month.
Source: http://www.breitbart.com/california/2016/07/10/feds-ready-decision-rescheduling-marijuana/
Doesn't appear the video was meant to be a thorough review of the entire plant. For being nearly 12mins of video, about 60 seconds was devoted to a shoddy tour of the plant.
Unless the person who made that video cares to follow up with an AMA here, then I wouldn't waste time speculating. The guy toured and apparently sat down to dinner, so he probably got a close look at where things stand and what's ahead. Some info they would have to withhold.
They will have the machine ready in time for hemp. Amazing how they have the only hemp decorticator of this size, right as hemp will soon be descheduled.
LONG
Bears are running out
Is pot as dangerous as heroin? Feds’ decision on rescheduling marijuana coming soon
By Brooke Edwards Staggs, The Orange County Register
Posted: 07/09/16, 8:37 PM PDT
At the same time Californians are preparing to vote on the legalization of adult marijuana use, the federal government is weighing whether pot should continue to be classified as a top-tier narcotic on par with heroin.
Within a month, the Drug Enforcement Administration is expected to release a much-anticipated decision that could alter cannabis’ ranking in the hierarchy of controlled substances — a formal listing that affects everything from medical research to taxing policy.
Since the list was created in 1970, marijuana has been ranked in Schedule I — the most restrictive category alongside heroin, LSD and peyote. The designation is reserved for drugs the DEA says have no proven medical use and are highly addictive.
“We’re bound by the science,” said Melvin Patterson, spokesman for the DEA.
But many experts and advocates say the current classification is increasingly at odds with scientific studies on marijuana, which suggest the drug has medical value in treating chronic pain, seizures and a number of other conditions, with a lower addiction rate than alcohol.
The DEA ranking also lags behind a growing public consensus. Roughly 80 percent of Americans believe medical marijuana should be legal, according to recent polls, while some 60 percent support legalizing the drug for all adults.
“In 2016, this notion that cannabis possesses potential harms equal to that of heroin … simply doesn’t pass the smell test,” said Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, or NORML.
Medical marijuana is now legal in 25 states. Recreational use is allowed in four states plus Washington, D.C. If California green-lights recreational use this November, one in six Americans would live in a state where adults would be allowed to freely use cannabis.
The question of how cannabis should be ranked has been hotly debated since Congress placed it in the Schedule I group when it passed the Controlled Substances Act nearly 46 years ago. The drug’s classification has been reviewed periodically, with the latest reexamination prompted by a petition filed with the DEA five years ago by the then-governors of Rhode Island and Washington.
In April, the DEA advised Congress that it expected to announce a decision in the first half of 2016.
Patterson said officials now “clearly anticipate something happening in the next month.”
Options on the table
The agency has several options: keep cannabis as a Schedule I drug; reclassify some or all of its compounds to a lower schedule; or remove the plant from the controlled substances list altogether.
There is a greater chance than ever that marijuana will be rescheduled, said John Hudak, who studies the topic as a deputy director with the Brookings Institution. But he still expects pot to remain a Schedule I drug.
“It needs to cross a threshold that says it has an accepted medical value,” Hudak said. “While there are plenty of patients and doctors who do believe it has medical value, that’s not a universal belief in the medical community.”
Leslie Bocskor, president of Las Vegas-based cannabis advisory firm Electrum Partners, thinks the odds slightly favor a reclassification of marijuana to Schedule II. That category includes morphine and cocaine, which the DEA says are highly addictive but have some medical value. A form of cocaine, for example, is used by some dentists as a local anesthetic.
The least restrictive of the five schedule categories, Schedule V, includes cough syrup with a bit of codeine.
Alcohol and tobacco aren’t included on the DEA’s controlled substances list, even though federal studies have found both are associated with higher dependency rates than marijuana.
Patterson said the DEA frequently hears from people frustrated that marijuana hasn’t been rescheduled sooner.
“They have their mind made up on what marijuana does in the short term,” he said. “But what about different strains? What about 10 years from now or even 20 years from now? Long-term effects matter.”
What rescheduling would do
For the medical marijuana community, even reclassifying cannabis as a Schedule II drug would offer some vindication.
“At a minimum, it would bring an end to the federal government’s longstanding intellectual dishonesty that marijuana ‘lacks accepted medical use,’ ” Armentano said.
Such a shift by the DEA also might offer a small boost to at least half-a-dozen states with medical or recreational marijuana initiatives on the ballot this November.
That potential to give some credence to legalization efforts is one of the reasons a few members of Congress, including Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, and the organization Smart Approaches to Marijuana, or SAM, cite in arguing against reclassifying marijuana.
“Rescheduling would simply be a symbolic victory for advocates who want to legalize marijuana,” SAM wrote in a policy paper on the issue.
But both the California and American medical associations say rescheduling pot could lower the barriers a bit for federally sanctioned drug research.
The DEA has never turned down a marijuana research request that met federal criteria, Patterson said. But experts say red tape related to Schedule I drug research is so formidable that it discourages applications. So while there are tens of thousands of peer-reviewed studies on marijuana, there are few costly and rigorous double-blind, placebo-controlled trials involving cannabis.
Moreover, researchers say, marijuana studies are saddled with restrictions that don’t apply to other Schedule I drugs.
Since 1968, for example, the federal government has said only a tightly controlled stock of high-quality marijuana grown under contract by the University of Mississippi can be used for FDA-approved studies. Armentano said that restricts the supply available for research.
If marijuana were reclassified to at least Schedule III — alongside Tylenol with codeine and anabolic steroids — it would mean the nation’s rapidly growing number of cannabis-related businesses could begin deducting operating expenses from their federal taxes.
Under a tax rule imposed during the Reagan Administration’s 1980s anti-drug war, businesses dealing in Schedule I or II substances are prohibited from writing off common expenses such as rent, utilities or advertising.
Harborside Health Center, a large Oakland dispensary, has been battling the IRS over the rule for five years, after being assessed $2.4 million for illegal deductions. A decision in that case is expected soon.
What rescheduling wouldn’t do
Even if cannabis was moved down the controlled substances list to the least-restrictive category, the industry would still be likely to face business and regulatory hurdles.
Armentano likened such a change, should it come, to the first stride in a marathon.
“Technically, it gets you closer to the finish line,” he said. “But you still have a whole hell of a long way to go.”
Pot would remain an illegal substance under federal law. Reclassification wouldn’t necessarily open access to banking services, Hudak said. And doctors wouldn’t automatically switch to writing prescriptions, as opposed to “recommendations,” for medical marijuana, since that’s only allowed for FDA-approved drugs.
“There are certain people who play up rescheduling as an earth-shattering reform,” Hudak said. “It is not.”
He said sweeping changes would only come in the unlikely event that cannabis was completely descheduled, putting it on par with alcohol.
That would allow local governments to create cannabis policies free from federal interference, Armentano said, the way they can set their own hours for when bars stop serving alcohol or make entire counties “dry.”
Armentano isn’t optimistic the DEA will move marijuana to a less restrictive category, but he said there’s been one positive result from the current review.
“There’s attention being paid to how they handle this situation in a way that just wasn’t there before,” he said. “If the DEA goes down the same path as it has in the past, I think they’re going to have some explaining to do.”
What about Congress?
Even if the Drug Enforcement and Food And Drug administrations don’t recommend changing where marijuana falls on the controlled substances list, Congress could.
Elected officials are more likely to be influenced by growing public acceptance of marijuana — particularly if they represent one of 25 states with legal marijuana programs.
“I think that’s probably an easier sell than the decision coming from doctors and police,” said John Hudak, a deputy director with the Brookings Institution.
Some members of Congress support rescheduling marijuana, including Sen. Barbara Boxer. Some have even pitched descheduling it, including presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders. But none of those efforts gained traction, and Paul Armentano with the advocacy group NORML isn’t optimistic Congress will act on the issue anytime soon.
“I’m not aware of a single hearing much less a vote even in a subcommittee that has ever taken place at the Congressional level specific to the notion of reclassifying marijuana,” he said.
8 factors DEA considers in scheduling drugs
1: Its actual or relative potential for abuse
2: Scientific evidence of its pharmacological effects, if known
3: The state of current scientific knowledge regarding the drug or other substance
4: Its history and current pattern of abuse
5: The scope, duration and significance of abuse
6: What, if any, risks are there to the public health
7: Its psychic or physiological dependence liability
8: Whether the substance is an immediate precursor of a substance already controlled under this subchapter
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration
Source: http://www.dailynews.com/general-news/20160709/is-pot-as-dangerous-as-heroin-feds-decision-on-rescheduling-marijuana-coming-soon
I would like to point out one of the highlights in this article:
But the DEA has missed its own deadline to make a decision
To those harping on how Hemp has been missing on estimated completion dates due to lack competency, well, let's all give the DEA a round of applause for the hang up. They had promised us a statement by mid-year, and here we are, sans statement.
Now, back when the DEA released their target of 'mid-year', anyone who knows how the public service sector and governmental agencies work would know that 99% of the time deadlines are not met, which is why I figured 'mid-year' actually means 6 months + 30 days. Tooting my own horn, but not a fool. This is the way of the government: put it off until it cannot be put off.
The point being, if you believe Hemp is incompetent for not meeting their projected dates, well, you surely must feel the DEA, a federal agency to the United States of America, is equally, if not more incompetent.
I have every reason to believe they have their decision made, and their statements in ink.
News is going to hit any day. Very, very soon. Be prepared.
LONG.
Feds nearing a decision on whether pot has medical potential
WASHINGTON —
When President Richard Nixon signed the Controlled Substances Act in 1970, the federal government put marijuana in the category of the nation’s most dangerous drugs, along with LSD, heroin and mescaline.
In legal parlance, pot is a Schedule 1 drug, with a high potential for abuse and no medical purpose.
Forty-six years later, the law might soon change, as the Obama administration prepares to make what could be its biggest decision yet on marijuana.
Suspense is mounting after the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration missed its self-imposed June 30 deadline to decide whether to reschedule the drug and recognize its potential therapeutic value. Twenty-six states already have legalized its medical use.
For Christine Gregoire, the former Democratic governor of Washington state, a decision has been a long time coming.
In 2011, she and Republican Lincoln Chafee, who was then the governor of Rhode Island, filed a 106-page petition with the DEA, arguing that the categorization of marijuana was “fundamentally wrong and should be changed.”
In an interview, Gregoire said she “naively had such high expectations” that the DEA would act long before now, but she predicted the agency will approve the rescheduling.
“To be honest with you, I’d be shocked if they didn’t,” Gregoire said. “Frankly, in five years the entire world has changed in Washington state. Today we have recreational marijuana, and the Justice Department’s nowhere to be found.”
Voters in Washington state and Colorado became the first in the nation to legalize recreational marijuana in 2012, a year after the governors filed their petition.
With the Obama administration adopting a policy to “just look the other way” in states with recreational marijuana, Gregoire said it would be hard for the DEA to justify keeping marijuana on the Schedule 1 list.
Opinions differ on what exactly might happen when the DEA responds to the petition, but a move to reschedule marijuana would be a major milestone in the decades-long push to legalize pot.
Among other things, it could pave the way for pharmacies to fill marijuana prescriptions and allow universities and others to conduct more medical research.
Many pot entrepreneurs hope that Congress would respond by helping marijuana businesses, allowing them to deduct their expenses from their federal taxes and giving them access to banks so they can phase out their all-cash operations.
Some predict that rescheduling could even make it easier for marijuana users to challenge policies that allow employers to fire them for positive drug tests.
Allen St. Pierre, executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said the DEA’s decision would be “remarkably consequential,” adding: “It will really cast the direction one way or the other.”
To be sure, there are plenty of skeptics who doubt the DEA will change anything at all.
“I’ll believe it when I see it,” said Gregory Carter, medical director of St. Luke’s Rehabilitation Institute in Spokane, Washington, who helped write the petition.
The DEA has given no indication of how it might rule, and President Barack Obama has said that any decision to reschedule marijuana should be left to Congress.
Kevin Sabet, president of the anti-legalization group Smart Approaches to Marijuana, said the chances of the DEA rescheduling the drug were “close to zero,” adding that there’s no scientific basis for doing so.
“The effects would be almost purely symbolic, and legalizers would use the move to further obfuscate the facts,” Sabet said.
Even if marijuana gets demoted to Schedule 2, it would still be a highly controlled drug, in the same category as cocaine. And with marijuana still illegal under federal law, a decision to reschedule would leave pot businesses running in the same gray area they do now.
That would mean continued risk for anyone growing, selling or buying the drug in the four states – Washington, Colorado, Alaska and Oregon – that have legalized the drug and those that have approved its use for medical purposes.
The Obama administration decided to let the states sell marijuana as long as they do a good job of policing themselves, a policy that both major presidential candidates, Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump, have said they’d follow.
Under pressure from members of Congress to reschedule marijuana, the DEA promised in April that a decision would come “in the first half of 2016.” DEA acting Administrator Chuck Rosenberg and two other top administration officials, Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell and drug czar Michael Botticelli, made the promise in a letter to Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and other senators who have been pressing the issue. In the letter, administration officials said they had already consulted with the Food and Drug Administration, which would oversee any pharmaceutical sales of marijuana.
Many who use the drug as medicine and have come to rely on their local dispensaries fear that a move to reschedule the drug might allow big pharmaceutical companies to take over the industry.
“It’s kind of scary to think that you’re going to have to go to a pharmacy and purchase a pre-prepared compound that you don’t know if it’s going to work,” said Kari Boiter, 36, who uses medical marijuana to treat her Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, a genetic disorder that affects skin, joints and blood-vessel walls.
Boiter, the former Washington state coordinator for the pro-legalization group Americans for Safe Access and now a Montana resident, said she worried that pharmaceutical companies might not offer a wide variety of marijuana products, including the pot-infused lotions, salves and bath salts that she used.
“It’s not a one-size-fits-all approach. What works for my migraines doesn’t work for my nausea, doesn’t work for my joint pain,” she said.
In the long run, many say, the best solution is not to reschedule marijuana but to “deschedule” the drug, putting it in the same category as tobacco and alcohol.
In May, Washington state Democratic Rep. Denny Heck joined 13 other House members in urging Obama to consider descheduling the drug in the last few months of his presidency, telling Obama he has “a rare opportunity to move the country forward.”
Last month, Heck complained when the House rejected his plan to ban federal regulators from penalizing banks that work with state-approved marijuana dispensaries, saying they’ve become inviting targets for thieves. He said his “worst fears were realized” in June, when a security guard was killed during an armed robbery at a marijuana dispensary in Aurora, Colorado.
As the DEA prepares to act, the man in the hot seat is Rosenberg, who infuriated pot advocates last year by dismissing the idea that smoking marijuana has any medical value.
“We can have an intellectually honest debate about whether we should legalize something that is bad and dangerous, but don’t call it medicine. That is a joke,” he told reporters at a briefing.
But as more states vote to legalize medical or recreational marijuana, the issue is winning more support on Capitol Hill. Senators will debate the potential medical benefits and risks of marijuana Wednesday, when the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism takes up the issue.
When Rosenberg appeared before the full Senate Judiciary Committee last month, North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis urged him to back his bill that would make it easier to research the medical effectiveness and safety of marijuana. Tillis said he was particularly interested in more study of cannabidiol, or CBD, a form of cannabis oil that has been shown to reduce seizures.
“I’ve said over and over if it turns out that we find something in that plant that helps kids with epilepsy, I promise you, I will be at the front of the parade, leading the band,” Rosenberg replied.
Whenever Rosenberg announces the decision on rescheduling, pot activists plan to gather in front of the White House for a “smoke-in,” either to celebrate or protest. They’ll assemble at 4:20 p.m., in honor of 420, the popular code for marijuana.
It might be a big day for Gregoire, who laughed at the notion of playing a role in getting marijuana off the list of Schedule 1 drugs and helping to change a Nixon-era law. “You know I grew up in those times. I remember those times, the ’60s,” she said.
She said she first saw the value of medical marijuana in the late 1970s, when her legal secretary was diagnosed with cancer and found help by using marijuana.
Gregoire said rescheduling the drug would allow safe access to medical marijuana for more patients in states where it had not been approved, while clearing the way for more much-needed research.
“That was my whole intent,” Gregoire said. “Let’s not knee-jerk react to some yesterday’s ’60s proclivity against marijuana.”
Source: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article88529607.html#storylink=cpy
Laws?
You can't win.
He who?
Bruce is about to put an educational DEA news release up that A.
Every public company sells shares... private companies "sell" shares too.
What's your point?
You didn't answer the question.
Why has hemp been illegal to grow in America?
Go ahead, try... think very hard.
Yep supply and demand tends to create those problems in a country where the cost of seed exceeds the crops harvest value.
Most people know why hemp hasn't been grown for commercial use in America...
Go ahead and think about why hemp hasn't been grown in America, and when you find the answers you can come back to issue a report on why.
Do you know why?
Nonetheless, ACTUAL DATA PROVES THERE ARE ACTUAL US RETAIL SALES OF HEMP IN THE MAGNITUDE OF HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.... could be billions, potentially.
Yes, there is clearly a market, and Hemp clearly is making efforts to absorb the greater market share.
Duh.
If I received a dollar for every time that has been posted on this board I could retire today.
Hemp's still tick'n.
Zero market?
If everybody could grow hemp--the value Decreases, competition Increases for a product with ZERO market.
Hemp's role in this or benefit should be construed as a negative.
Mutually exclusive, and the timing is suspicious. Again, charges by the SEC are to be taken seriously, but they are only charges. No judgments. No sentencings. Hemp still trades. DEA news is coming, and that news directly impacts the industry, including Hemp. Even if they decide not to reschedule marijuana, hemp still has a chance. See bills HR 525 and S 134. That is the play.
Not many public companies can say they own the largest decorticator in America.
DEA should have something to say by then.
Presidential candidates may have something to say by then.
The allegations were announced mere days ahead of the DEA pending release. Now, I'm not saying the charges aren't serious, but they are just that - charges. 1-2 months seems like an open-and-shut case. If the evidence weighs so heavily against the defendants, wouldn't more action been taken by now?
The case could take about a year, or more.
How soon are people thinking?
I would go further and stress competence on all levels.
If what I'm gathering from you is correct, Hemp's lack of success, entirely, is propped against the estimated completion dates not being 100% accurate and fulfilled, WHEN THERE IS NO SPECIFIC DEADLINE? HEMP IS STILL CONSIDER A SCHEDULE I SUBSTANCE!!!! ARE YOU KIDDING ME? THERE ISN'T A PROJECT MANAGER IN THE WORLD COMPETENT ENOUGH TO FULLY LEGALIZE CANNABIS, LET ALONE HEMP.
Otherwise, it would appear the decorticator is still coming together. Hemp will be fully legal soon.
LONG
20-20 hindsight is irrelevant, don't you think?
There are unforeseen dilemmas in the majority of project coordinations; any real PM would agree. We've witnessed it here with the installation of a very massive decortication line. Meanwhile, the Hemp team is handling as best they can. They've installed the scale. They've installed the silo and harvested a crop. Virtually everything has been going according to plan, with the exception of debugging some vital issues to the line. To be honest, delays should be expected. Again, some of this (i.e. permitting, re/descheduling, etc.) is completely out of Hemp Inc's control.
I think it's a bit unreasonable to believe you know exactly what they are dealing with, or what obstacles need to be navigated.
FINALLY!
Even if that were true, no, not a problem.
"Forward-Looking Statements"
Forward-Looking Statements are included within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements regarding our expected future financial position, results of operations, cash flows, financing plans, business strategy, products and services, competitive positions, growth opportunities, plans and objectives of management for future operations, including words such as "anticipate," "if," "believe," "plan," "estimate," "expect," "intend," "may," "could," "should," "will," and other similar expressions are forward-looking statements and involve risks, uncertainties and contingencies, many of which are beyond our control, which may cause actual results, performance, or achievements to differ materially from anticipated results, performance, or achievements. We are under no obligation to (and expressly disclaim any such obligation to) update or alter our forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
It's reasonable to believe he cares about cannabis and its future.
I think he wants a successful, LEGAL operation. -hem- Implying he is careless enough to deliberately mislead shareholders would imply Bruce could face sitting behind bars again. I don't think Bruce willingly wants to go back to jail.
BTW, every public company sells shares, so not sure why you keep hammering that moot point.
Explaining the course of flow along the decortication line and implying the line is fully operational are two very, very different things. Don't try to confuse the two.
I don't see any implication the line was fully operational in Schmitt's statements which you have brought fourth, and you believe it was "strongly implied"? The idea it was "implied" is far off from reality.
Surely, we all can agree it takes time to assemble a facility of this magnitude, the largest decorticator in America. This isn't as simple as plugging into the nearest outlet. To remind everyone, it took running a dedicated public utility line to the plant, in order to service the power requirements for the machinery. The need for permitting, a common requirement which is known to take weeks, or in this case months to acquire. With whatever project management 'experience' you say you have, you would know that something as simple as permitting is a timely, out-of-your-hands process. Bruce can't control how fast he receives proper permitting, much the same as he can't control unforeseen bugs and delays in the setup. They have to take it as it comes, and find solutions, which is what they are doing.
I think it is implied some are just grasping for ideas, when it's clear AND publicly expressed that they are making progress as best they can.
You seem to think you can do better?
The DEA is the issue. Nothing else.
http://www.naturalnews.com/054534_marijuana_research_DEA_drug_war.html#
They sit on any thumbs if it means the department (and the livelihood of its administration) can remain.
The DEA needs to answer.
What?
supposedly was fully operational
From the SM Observer, again...
Not sure if the source is credible...
http://www.smobserved.com/story/2016/07/04/news/dea-source-confirms-that-schedule-ii-marijuana-is-in-the-works/1562.html
Yes... it is, hahahahaha.
We know.
Tell me more about what I understand.
In case anyone was wondering, I never sleep. Ever. And that is the same for cannabis. That's a fact, and you should fear. Hemp is coming.
Do you understand what lawyers are for?
I did not say hemp was pot. Hemp is cannabis. Marijuana is cannabis. Yes, I know what pot is. Get back to me when you find when I ever said one should be smoking hemp.