Legalizing marijuana is a “no-brainer” move to help ward off a “fiscal time bomb” in Iowa that could otherwise lead to cuts in funding for education and public safety in the state, the Democratic candidate for governor says.

“I think we should treat it the way we treat alcohol. That seems like a no-brainer to me, right?” Rob Sand, the Democratic gubernatorial nominee, said at a town hall event in Dallas County on Wednesday in response to a question from a voter who said Iowa is “losing money” to other states that have legalized cannabis.

“Alcohol is a dangerous drug. You shouldn’t abuse it. Also, we’re not going to throw you in prison for having a beer,” Sand said. “Why is it any different for marijuana? It is a dangerous drug. You shouldn’t abuse it. We shouldn’t be throwing people in prison just for using it.”

The Democratic candidate said that “when I say treat it like alcohol, I literally mean treat it like alcohol.”

He then went through a list of common objections to cannabis legalization and explained how he would respond to them.

“So when I hear people say, ‘Well, I don’t want to smell it.’ Same. You shouldn’t be allowed to smoke it in public. Simple rule: you can’t drink alcohol in public, right?

People say, ‘Well, I’m worried about kids. I’ve heard cases in Colorado where they got colorful gummies, and the kids find them, and then the kids get sick.’ I agree. You shouldn’t be able to market it to children. You shouldn’t be able to use colorful designs on your packages. And if you’re doing gummies, they can look like an eraser, right? They don’t need to be red and blue and green and look like gummy bears.

People say, ‘Well, I don’t know, Rob. It’s a lot stronger than the stuff that I was smoking in the 70s.’ To which I say, ‘I wasn’t there. Whatever you say, I believe you.’ I don’t have a basis for comparison then or now. I actually haven’t used it. But how do we handle that with alcohol? When you buy a beer, you can see what the alcohol content is on the beer, right? We treat hard liquor differently, but you can see when you buy hard liquor what the content is on that, and that way you know what you’re getting into. We can do that with marijuana as well.”

Sand, who is currently Iowa’s state auditor, said the state currently has a budget surplus, but that annual spending is overtaking revenue.

“I call this a fiscal time bomb. Our budget is nine and a half billion,” he said. “Imagine the cuts to public education and to public safety if we don’t take action to fix this.”

“So we need to do something now,” he said, arguing that legalizing marijuana is “one of the things that we should do.”

“We would have hundreds of millions of dollars every single year if we just treat marijuana the way we treat alcohol,” Sand said, adding that the thinks the state should also put an income limit on school vouchers and make data centers pay fair taxes.

“All three of those would save us hundreds of millions of dollars a year alone,” he said. “So if we do all three of them, we do them right away, all of a sudden, our time horizon on how long that surplus is going to last gets a lot longer, and we can think about other ways to help address that and get back to having a balanced budget.”

Sand also spoke about his support for legalizing marijuana at an earlier event last month, saying that he thinks cannabis should be legalized and treated like alcohol, even if he thinks it’s “dangerous.”

“Marijuana is a dangerous drug,” he said at the time. “You shouldn’t abuse it, but we also shouldn’t throw people in prison just for using it. We should treat it the way we treat alcohol. Alcohol is a dangerous drug. You shouldn’t abuse it, but we don’t throw you in prison just for having a beer when you get home.”

The Democratic gubernatorial candidate said that Iowa is “spending perfectly good tax dollars to lock people up” for marijuana while people who want to use it are driving across the border to purchase it in other states.

“They’re spending their money in Illinois, or they’re spending it in Missouri. And then they’re driving back without their money,” Sand said. “The money stays there, and the tax dollars stay there.”

Republican gubernatorial nominee Zach Lahn reportedly opposes legalizing cannabis but doesn’t appear to have spoken extensively about the issue.

Josh Turek, the Democratic nominee in a U.S. Senate race, said this month that cannabis’s longtime restrictive Schedule I status is “ridiculous.” Marijuana “should be legalized and regulated, and let’s tax it,” he said.

Meanwhile, Iowa regulators are circulating proposed rules changes to remove the residency requirement for patients in the state’s medical cannabis program while also ensuring that military veterans qualify for reduced registration fees.

The residency-focused part of the regulatory change from the state Department of Health and Human Services is meant to comply with provisions of a bill that Reynolds signed into law in June.

In addition to allowing out-of-state residents to register in the medical cannabis program if they have a certification from an Iowa healthcare provider legislation, that legislation also doubles the number of medical cannabis dispensaries that are allowed to operate in the state.

Regulators said in the new rule filing that removing the residency requirement is expected to “primarily impact qualified Nebraska residents since Nebraska is the only bordering state that does not currently have an operational medical or adult-use cannabis program.”

“Although Nebraska has taken steps to establish a medical cannabidiol program, implementation has experienced significant delays and setbacks,” the regulatory explanation says.

Beyond the residency change that is part of the bill the governor signed this year, the new rule change also restores regulatory language that was “inadvertently removed during the 2023 Red Tape Review process” that allowed proof of military veteran status to be used to qualify for a reduced patient application fee of $25 instead of the standard $100.

Under prior law, Iowa’s limited medical marijuana program allowed only five dispensaries. That has doubled to 10 under HF 990, which the governor signed.

—
Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments.

Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access.
—

The Iowa Medical Cannabidiol Board, which oversees the state’s medical marijuana program, recommended in a 2023 report that the state allow more licenses “in an effort to provide Iowans with greater geographical access to medical cannabis products.”

Under the program, patients with certain conditions can obtain cannabis products containing no more than at 4.5 grams of THC every 90 days. Flower and smoking are not allowed. Healthcare practitioners can allow greater amounts of THC for patients who are terminally ill or who have experience with the program and for whom the provider believes 4.5 grams is not enough.

Separately this session, Iowa lawmakers considered a bill to create a state-regulated therapeutic psilocybin program for patients with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Last year, the governor vetoed earlier legislation that would have allowed doctors in the state to immediately prescribe a synthetic form of psilocybin in the event of federal approval of the psychedelic substance by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), arguing that it “surrenders state authority to make an informed determination about classification to federal officials.”

Source link

North Carolinians strongly support legalizing medical marijuana, and a majority wants to go even further by legalizing cannabis for recreational use, according to a new poll.

The survey published on Thursday by Elon University also found that North Carolina adults support keeping THC-infused hemp products like seltzers and gummies legal in the state, although with age limits.

Medical cannabis legalization is supported by 75 percent of respondents, with only 11 percent in opposition.

While there is bipartisan support for the patient-focused reform, Democrats are much more likely to support it, at 89 percent, as compared to Republicans, only 57 percent of whom are on board.

Broader recreational marijuana legalization comes in at 55 percent in support overall and 30 percent opposed. While 74 percent of Democrats favor the reform, just 33 percent of Republicans do.

Meanwhile, as North Carolina lawmakers continue to debate how to handle the issue of hemp-derived THC products, the poll shows that most state residents want to keep them legal.

When asked whether North Carolina should “allow or prohibit the sale of hemp-derived products like seltzers and gummies with THC levels that can cause intoxication or a ‘high,’” 53 percent said they back keeping them legal, while 28 percent said they should be banned.

As with broader cannabis legalization, a majority of Democrats (62 percent) were on board with legal hemp THC products, and only a minority (35 percent) of Republicans were.

In a separate question, 82 percent of all respondents said they back banning sales of hemp-derived consumable products to people under the age of 21, including majorities across party lines.

Jason Husser, director of the Elon University Poll and professor of political science and public policy, noted that support for marijuana legalization has remained stable in the state in recent years.

“We found a significant increase in support for legalization between 2017 and 2021 as North Carolinians saw legalization occurring in other states,” he said in a press release. “Over the last five years, support for legalization has largely been stable with a large majority supporting medical legalization and a small majority favoring recreational legalization.”

“In turn, support for allowing hemp-based THC has similar levels of support and high correlation with support for recreational marijuana,” he said. “However, North Carolinians are largely unified in wanting hemp consumables restricted to those 21 or older.”

The poll involved interviews with 1,121 North Carolina adults between August 21-31 and has a margin of error of +/-5.09 percentage points.

The results come as Gov. Josh Stein (D) is continuing to pressure the GOP-controlled legislature for marijuana reform.

Last month, the governor called on lawmakers to legalize and regulate cannabis in a way that “protects kids” while lawmakers this week are considering a bill to restrict hemp THC products.

In a social media post he noted that lawmakers are considering legislation that “aims to eliminate the Wild West that is North Carolina’s THC market.”

The governor has repeatedly called on lawmakers to broadly legalize and regulate cannabis, though GOP legislative leaders have been more interested in focusing on the narrower hemp issue.

A bill to restrict hemp and kratom products that was recently approved by the Senate now awaits potential action in the House.

Meanwhile, lawmakers in North Carolina have been considering legislation to legalize medical cannabis for the last several sessions—with the Senate approving several proposals and the House refusing to follow suit.

North Carolina’s Senate president pro tempore recently said that lawmakers will take a more serious look at legalizing medical marijuana following the Trump administration’s move to reschedule cannabis at the federal level.

—
Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments.

Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access.
—

The governor-appointed cannabis commission in North Carolina issued a report in April recommending that the state move away from a criminalization-based approach to the plant and toward a system of “robust” regulations that provide for adults’ legal access to THC products.

The North Carolina Advisory Council on Cannabis, which Stein convened last year, says in the new document approved in April that the current “absence of regulation for North Carolina’s intoxicating cannabis market raises numerous concerns,” noting that hemp products are readily available yet largely unregulated and that marijuana remains prohibited altogether in the state, even for medical use.

“Compared to regulated marijuana frameworks in other states, this environment presents identifiable risks,” the interim report says. “While some operators voluntarily implement consumer protection protocols, these safeguards are not required under state law.”

Stein, for his part, thanked the group for its “expertise, hard work, and thoughtful deliberation” in a press release and reiterated his support for legalizing marijuana.

Members are tasked with developing and submitting initial recommendations on a “comprehensive cannabis policy, including any proposed legislation,” with a final report due by December 31 of this year.

During his time as the state’s attorney general, Stein led a separate task force under then-Gov. Roy Cooper (D) that examined racial injustice issues and ultimately recommended decriminalizing marijuana and studying broader legalization in response to racially disparate enforcement trends.

A tribe in North Carolina, the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, launched the state’s first marijuana dispensary in 2024—despite the protests of certain Republican congressional lawmakers.

Democratic lawmakers recently filed legislation to allow voters to decide whether to legalize marijuana for personal or medical use at the ballot box this November—though Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger (R) said the bill is unlikely to advance.

Meanwhile, bipartisan North Carolina lawmakers have been stepping up the push for psychedelics reform legislation.

Photo courtesy of Mike Latimer.

Source link

Source link

Legalizing marijuana for adult use is linked to gradual reductions in violent crime—while medical cannabis legalization is associated with lower rates of property crime—according to a new study.

As more states move to enact legalization, researchers at Jack Welch College of Business and Technology, Barnard College, National Chengchi University and Longwood University set out to investigate the relationship between different versions of the reform and crime trends.

The study, published in the journal Economic Modelling, identified a unique divide when looking at the impact of legalizing cannabis for recreational as compared to medical purposes, with analytic models revealing how different forms of regulated access seem to be associated with different patterns in criminal activity.

“Novel policies may generate unintended spillovers, particularly when legalizing one activity alters incentives for other forms of crime,” the study authors wrote. “Marijuana legalization provides a useful setting to examine such effects, given the staggered adoption of medical and recreational laws across all 50 U.S. states.”

“We find that medical legalization reduces property crime, while recreational legalization reduces violent crime.”

While initial analyses signaled that adult-use legalization might increase property crime, once state-specific time trends where incorporated into the researchers’ models with synthetic specification, “the effect becomes negative and statistically insignificant.”

“Overall, the findings indicate that estimated crime effects are highly sensitive to identification assumptions and do not provide robust evidence of an increase in property crime following legalization, underscoring the importance of careful empirical design in policy evaluation,” the study says.

Notably, the researchers found that the impact of cannabis reform on crime is gradual, with the effects manifesting “powerfully after several years.” For advocates pushing for legalization, the authors said, that means they should exercise caution in how they frame the issue, as crime rate declines don’t appear to happen overnight.

“What emerges from our multi-step analysis is a birds-eye view of legalization: medical and recreational legalization have different impacts and operate through diverse channels, with significant lag effects,” they said. “The overarching result from our main synthetic difference in differences model is that medical legalization reduces property crime, while recreational legalization reduces violent crime.”

“Such effects support the Becker hypothesis that legalization drives out crime. Building up to the synthetic difference in difference model, we discovered that there may also be important lag effects. The diverse and potentially time-varying impacts of medical and recreational legalization raise a cautionary note to policymakers: those considering legalization should wait a few years before pronouncing on the cost–benefit impact, focus on the specific type of legalization, and study closely the outcomes from similar states.”

It’s not immediately clear from the research why medical and recreational marijuana legalization would lead to diverging crime trends, but  the broader impact of the reform on crime has been studied before.

Last year, for example, a study looking at Atlanta’s move to decriminalize marijuana concluded that, contrary to warnings from some critics, the policy change in fact led to a decrease in violent crime as police turned their attention to more urgent matters.

A 2024 analysis of violence between intimate partners separately found that legalizing marijuana for adult use “results in a substantial decrease in rates of intimate partner violence.”

A 2021 study, meanwhile, found that reductions of crime generally after marijuana legalization was being significantly understated because the FBI data is inconsistent and comes from voluntary participation by local agencies.

In 2020, researchers looked at how adult-use marijuana legalization in Washington and Colorado affected crime rates in neighboring states, and the resulting study determined that passage of recreational cannabis laws may have actually reduced certain major crimes in nearby jurisdictions.

The previous year, a federally funded study found that legalizing marijuana has little to no impact on rates of violent or property crime. The policy change did seem connected to a long-term decline in burglaries in one state, however.

A 2018 study from the think tank RAND said county-level data from California suggested that there was “no relationship between county laws that legally permit dispensaries and reported violent crime,” the researchers wrote. What’s more, there was a “negative and significant relationship between dispensary allowances and property crime rates,” though it’s possible that’s the product of “pre-existing trends.”

That same year, researchers at Victoria University of Wellington and Harvard University found that medical marijuana laws essentially have a null effect of crime rates, with one big exception: A nearly 20 percent reduction in violent and property crimes in California following the legalization of medical cannabis there.

Source link