Where did the time go?
It's been just over a decade since I first saw mention of cannabis in my favorite horticultural periodical: Greenhouse Management magazine. Soon after, an insert appeared in the magazine stating that the publisher had acquired the digital media brand Cannabis Business Times (CBT) and was going to start a cannabis-focused print magazine.
In the last 10 years, the cannabis industry has rapidly moved forward and evolved with the inevitable changes. But in many ways, it is also the same industry that existed when I wrote my first “Tomorrow in Cannabis” column for CBT.
Ten years ago, I naively assumed that the cannabis industry would progress much further than it has. For starters, even though medical cannabis is legal in some form in 80% of U.S. states and an increasing number of lawmakers have a positive view on the industry, it still feels like the headwinds remain just as strong as ever.
Same Sh*t, Different Day
While some elected officials recommend that people over 65 consume CBD, others take a staunch position against all things cannabis.
Some states, including Texas and California, have aimed to ban any hemp-derived THC products, such as those containing delta-8-THC and delta-10-THC. Other markets, such as Maine and Massachusetts, are attempting to roll back recreational cannabis laws. (Thailand has already done so.)
Other states have begun to simply increase regulation and taxation in an attempt to stifle the implementation of legal cannabis production and distribution. Cities in many states, including California, still can “opt out” and not allow any cultivation or sales in their jurisdictions. In the state of Hawaii, legislators from the “Old Boys Club” have prevented the enactment of recreational cannabis sales despite 70% of Hawaii voters supporting the legalization of cannabis for adult use, according to a 2023 poll.
I am also taken aback by the personal opinions of politicians and the cannabis-opposing general public.
For instance, one politician advocating that the Department of Justice (DOJ) kill a cannabis rescheduling proposal stated that rescheduling marijuana would send a message to children that marijuana is not harmful and allow “‘Big Marijuana’ and foreign drug cartels to get billions per year in federal tax breaks.”
In fact, nine GOP letter writers suggested that moving cannabis to Schedule III would provide tax breaks to “illegal cannabis dispensaries and drug cartels” to the tune of $2 billion per year. “If marijuana is made Schedule III, these still-illegal actors will get billions in tax write-offs for marketing their addictive drugs,” they wrote.
To which I ask: to whom are they referring? Because, last I checked, the only people paying 280E-related cannabis taxes are state-legal cannabis businesses, not illegal cannabis dispensaries or foreign drug cartels. Legal entities paying 280E taxes contribute billions of tax dollars every year, and struggle to do so. And for that, they receive absolutely nothing except politicians seeing them as being nefarious in some way (yet they have absolutely no problem accepting their “drug money”).
The disdain shown to cannabis would not be as baffling if it were limited to politicians. Following the California governor's signing of legislation to roll back a tax hike on cannabis, I read a statement from an organization whose entire funding is from cannabis excise taxes that was very displeased, as it would not be receiving the state’s promised funding increase.
The organization does the honorable work of discouraging youth cannabis use, but it seems hypocritical that it is willing to accept cannabis-derived funds but is not clamoring for a piece of Philip Morris, Anheuser-Busch, or the state’s largest alcohol distilleries.
Proposed Advances and Progress Fall Short
Rescheduling cannabis from Schedule I to III will still not address one of the most pressing issues in the fractured American market: interstate commerce.
If cannabis products were allowed to be sold across state lines, it would transform the industry, allowing it to be produced in regions with an abundance of water, labor, low-cost electricity, and fair tax rates—i.e., locations that enable the lowest cost of production.
As long as interstate commerce is not allowed, the cannabis industry’s development will be stifled.
In the last decade, I expected and hoped that the detrimental stigma associated with all things cannabis would have further diminished than it has today. Unfortunately, law enforcement officials and politicians still refuse to believe the data showing the lack of widespread negative social consequences attributed to legalization. To name a few dispelled myths and fibs, cannabis does not:
- increase violence;
- increase traffic accidents or fatalities;
- cause mass psychosis or schizophrenia;
- cause male humans to develop breasts; or
- cause females to become sterile.
Sure, exceptions may be found, but as a whole, cannabis has been proven to be less harmful than cigarettes or alcohol.
So, the past 10 years have frankly been disappointing in many respects. But it’s not just the last 10 years—I still remember seeing reform advocates in California in the late 1970s gathering signatures in an attempt to legalize marijuana. And today, cannabis remains barely tolerated, let alone legalized.
What Keeps Us Going
Ten years ago, I started writing for Cannabis Business Times. Did I think we would be further along in the industry’s development by now? Yes, absolutely. Did I think societal beliefs would be improved beyond what they are today? Yes, absolutely. Did I think it would be easy? No, definitely not.
So, what keeps me going in a society that seemingly does not want an industry I care about to thrive? The community and friends who are helping shape and build a better industry. So in that vein, let me express some gratitude.
I must sincerely thank the group of former and current CBT editors, particularly Brian MacIver and Michelle Simakis, for their wonderful insight, contributions, and editing of every word I've written for CBT over the years. Thanks, you two, for helping shape my voice.
When I first heard of the launch of Cannabis Business Times as a magazine, I immediately called the publication and was nicely directed to contact the founder (and then editor, now editorial director) Noelle Skodzinski. My original intent was to request that the magazine be an innovative, informative resource focused on real-world commercial cannabis production, similar to what its sister magazine offered the traditional greenhouse market. Noelle exceeded my expectations and hopes by a mile, offering me the opportunity to write a regular column for the magazine, which I have done while never missing an issue.
In these 10 years, we have also become great friends with a shared vision for publishing high-caliber content that supports cannabis growers. I can never express the depth of my gratitude for that trust and friendship.
But I’ll try.
I must offer a truly heartfelt thank you to Noelle for her tenacity and her perseverance, and I must congratulate her for all her contributions to and accomplishments in the world of cannabis. The Cannabis Business Times brand has evolved into a global information source that Noelle should be very proud of, and I am immensely honored to have been allowed to participate in it since the beginning. Thank you so very much, Noelle, for giving me a voice and platform to share information.
I hope that the next 10 years are as fruitful for the cannabis industry as the last 10 years have been for our friendship.
