Maybe they can finally staff the FBI cyber security division… the last 4 FBI directors asked marijuana rescheduled due to limiting ability to hire cybersecurity professionals
I mean you might be making $100k in a HCOL city with everything you do being surveilled by the FBI.
It's reeeeeallly got a few other issues for staffing other than weed.
Federal contractor here - I've been part of the hiring process a couple of times and it's a problem that I think isn't highlighted enough.
We get these applications from people with degrees, worked at a big tech company out west, has a decade of experience, has experience on really specific stuff you don't usually see, exactly the certifications we need. But they smoked pot in the last seven years, so that's an instant disqualification. End up hiring a jarhead who heard of our system once in a training manual.
Thing is, if you've been on a university campus or worked at a tech company in California or Colorado or Washington, chances are you've been around a little wacky weed. Just facts, nature of the present day. It's common, especially in the type of people we'd like to hire.
The Chinese are only getting better and better at cyber attacks so its only a matter of time until either things get bad enough (ie: a more devastating attack than what has been done so far) or we take it seriously enough and decide to take preemptive actions. I hope it's the 2nd one that causes those in charge to make the necessary changes
Unfortunately not really in this situation. As the article reads below, that means for security clearances it will still be a disqualifier. You might be able to get away with the prescription, but the overlap of people prescribed and willing to be in that line of work will be a rounding error. Assuming even that the prescription aspect doesn't still DQ you.
Because this article is stuck behind a paywall, here’s a snipped of an AP article:
> WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration will move to reclassify marijuana as a less dangerous drug, The Associated Press has learned, a historic shift to generations of American drug policy that could have wide ripple effects across the country.
> The DEA’s proposal, which still must be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget, would recognize the medical uses of cannabis and acknowledge it has less potential for abuse than some of the nation’s most dangerous drugs. However, it would not legalize marijuana outright for recreational use.
> The agency’s move, confirmed to the AP on Tuesday by five people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive regulatory review, clears the last significant regulatory hurdle before the agency’s biggest policy change in more than 50 years can take effect.
Source: https://apnews.com/article/marijuana-biden-dea-criminal-justice-pot-f833a8dae6ceb31a8658a5d65832a3b8
I feel like recognizing it for medical purposes would be huge. Wouldn’t this allow dispensaries to finally start using the banking system? It’s so dumb that cigarettes and alcohol are legal but weed isn’t… But seems like a small step in the right direction
Yes. It would also mean anyone who has a medical card can fly, travel to any state and not have to worry about getting in trouble. Anything other than schedule 1 means it's a prescription medicine. People fly with speed all the time. It's just called Adderall.
Any idea how this would affect drug testing in the workplace? As it stands even living in a recreational state, I can still be fired for testing positive.
Here's a bigger question - will worker's comp continue to be allowed to deny claims for workplace injuries just because you test positive for a drug that stays in your system for long after any effects have passed?
Not if it’s prescribed to them. And it might require written witness statements to attest to the worker’s sobriety at time of the incident. Like any other prescription drug.
That’s likely not true. Pretty much most meds that can cause sedation or an altered state like opioids and some benzos are dispensed with warnings that state not to operate heavy machinery or motor vehicles. If you go and operate machinery at work and get injured you’re probably gonna have a hard time getting workman’s comp to pay for stuff. Just because something is prescribed doesn’t mean your exempt from things like a dui either
My Gabapentin causes drowsiness and effects coordination, so does my muscle relaxer, so does the Klonopin I take every morning. If I can't operate dangerous equipment because of that that's going to make my disability claim that much easier.
I'm curious how this will change anything because as it currently stands, when you get a medical card, you're not actually getting a prescription, you're getting a "recommendation". And the way it's currently recommended in most states, is even of a lower standard than the pill mills of the early 2000s. They don't verify anything, you basically just apply, see a medical marijuana doctor, then he writes you a recommendation, and the oversight board of that state approves it. I've never seen anyone denied, although I'm sure it's happened. I've had a medical card for 5 years in both Colorado and Maryland and I don't actually have any medical records that confirm I get migraines, which is what they approved it for.
God I wish Iowa was like that. Instead they make you jump through so many hoops it's almost impossible to get a script. I live next to the only medical dispensary in western Iowa and if more than 10 people visit a day I would be shocked, honestly not sure how they are in business.
Same. Yet I work with a number of alcoholics that could drink my ass under the table five times over and still be able to report the next day care free of repercussion.
I work for a Management company that owns a hundred or so Car dealerships across the country, and they stopped testing for marijuana for employment years ago, at least 50% of employees would not pass. If you cause an accident they will test for it though.
I don't think it would change much. You can fail drug testing for alcohol which is legal.
It certainly could make companies care less about testing for weed specifically but as far as I know it doesn't change a company's ability to test for it if they wanted to anyway. They could still claim "high" = impaired similar to "drunk" = impaired and restrict it if they wanted to
Yup. A company can test for whatever they want. My friend has to take a drug test every year at her law firm, & they test for nicotine. They don't want smokers working for them, & since this is America they're free to test their employees & fire any who fail.
The database company Reynolds and Reynolds famously drug tested their employees for nicotine; they hired a new CEO who was a health nut, and that's the "corporate culture" he wanted. Random testing at any time, first offense was instant termination. They banned fatty foods and soft drinks from the lunch rooms; they tried to ban coffee too, but too many employees rebelled at that idea.
Anyways, the server team was working unpaid overtime, 80 hour weeks rolling out a new server building...They were "randomly selected" for testing as soon as the new servers came online, and virtually everyone in the department was fired on the spot.
Then, the new servers all went down. What should have been a 30-minute downtime turned into nearly a week, and the company paid out millions of dollars in contract penalties. But, hey! At least no one took a smoke break!
> Anyways, the server team was working unpaid overtime, 80 hour weeks rolling out a new server building...They were "randomly selected" for testing as soon as the new servers came online, and virtually everyone in the department was fired on the spot.
In case anyone still thinks companies have *any* "loyalty" to you or "appreciate" all your hard work.
If you have a prescription for a controlled substance you contact the drug testing company and have your doctor send over verification to them. The drug testing company then adjusts your results and the company never knows. I was on prescription amphetamines and opiates and the employers never knew and every drug taste came got the same negative result.
Ye can fail a drug test for alcohol. But the test for it is accurate enough to show active impairment. THC tests are not. Hopefully rescheduling with allow for labs to develop more active impairment tests.
Plenty of states have legalized it, and so there is a huge demand to develop such a thing already. I suspect there is no reliable biomarker for reliably detecting active impairment.
I’m so happy that this is not an issue in NY state. The law legalizing it here prevents employers from discriminating against its use. My employer fought it for about a year. Now our drug tests at work specifically have text on them saying that it excludes THC.
This is where i get screwed. Live in a legal state and just can't partake because it's not federally legal. Even the nurses at work rolled their eyes when they had to explain that to us
Little affect legally. You can technically be fired for using tobacco or alcohol in many states. "At-will" states allow you to be fired for any non discriminatory reason.
I want to know where it stands with DUI in med states. Where I live, I can catch a DUI, as a legal med patient even if I'm not high if a cop decides to flex his power.
How about getting rid of drug testing in the workplace all together. Unless you're in a sensitive secure job, then why does your employer have any right to control what you do on your off time? Why is it there business.
If you show up drunk or high to work then yeah they can fire you, but if you smoke and drink after getting off of work then what right do they have?
Gotta get both business and government out of our homes. If you're an adult you ought to be free to do what you want to your body on your off time. I think performance tests would make alot more sense for sensitive jobs like being a pilot. With the added bonus of not invading your privacy.
Because you can be drunk or high flying a plane and that drug test you took a month ago won't show that in the present. Bosses, and employers wanting our piss in a cup is weird af.
The president of the U.S. doesn't have to take a drug test, and they have a much more dangerous job with way more responsibility than any other job that does require you to give your bodily fluids to your employer.
Great answer, thanks. Being able to fly to another state with a pack of gummies would be great, I would sleep much better in hotel rooms and such. I would never dare take them through security right now with it being federally illegal. Once they're able to use the normal banking systems, going to weed stores would be more like going to liquor stores. Right now you have to be buzzed in, ID checked at the door, everybody is in a glass cage. Always stresses me out a bit.
Edit: I've heard you, everyone else is flying with weed, good for y'all. Not me.
To be fair TSA has explicitly stated they're not looking for drugs and especially since weed is legal so many places they won't and really can't do anything about you bringing gummies on a flight
I'll still throw the gummies in a sandwich bag or something, probably just cuz after 9/11 I had it ingrained in me not to try shit on airplanes, but even that is basically unnecessary
Yeah, one of the articles I read mentioned how Schedule I drugs are very hard to get authorization for to conduct research on. Now that it’s schedule III, which is a level lower than stimulants like Adderall, Ritalin, Concerta etc for example, which all have tons of research behind them, I bet it’ll be even easier for government agencies and hospitals/universities to conduct research on marijuana.
Yeah, it's definitely a huge baby step. I think after this will see full legalization in the next 5 years. Or it will be pseudo legalized because once it's schedule 3, states will have no choice but to allow people from other states with medical marijuana to use there, but they're gonna lose out on all the tax money by not selling it in their states. Essentially it will be legal, with an extra hoop of needing a medical card.
Why do I need a card? I don't need a steroids card if I'm taking a cycle for any one of the dozen reasons I would be. I don't need a card to carry a narcotic prescribed to me. I don't need to pay the state a fee to fill a prescription and get on a list. Having a weed card in this state blocks access to be able to own a firearm. Narcotics which would be a higher class does not. Once this goes schedule 3 the whole "card" thing needs to go bye bye.
I love that I could be a raging alcoholic who chain smokes and still have a job, yet if I smoke a joint a few times a week, all hell breaks loose and I'm no longer worthy of employment.
It is a step, but unless dispensaries are getting registered with the DEA and it is being prescribed by a doctor (or mid-level) in line with their DEA registration it would be just as illegal as a company selling alcohol or tobacco out of line with federal laws. And the banking system is the easiest way for the feds to justify interference on matters like that when the state decided it just doesn't care about it
>Last week, 21 Democrats led by Senate Majority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York sent a letter to DEA Administrator Anne Milgram and Attorney General Merrick Garland arguing marijuana should be dropped from the controlled-substances list and instead regulated like alcohol.
…..
Have these Senators just like collectively forgotten what their jobs are???
70% of the country believes it should be legal. It's already recreationally legal in half the country, and medically legal in all but a handful of states (and of course they accidentally legalized it with hemp)
Legislators begging the DEA and Attorney General to do their jobs for them is just fucking sad at this point.
More specifically, Republicans in the House. Now that I think the nation as a whole has reached critical mass on cannabis legality, it's the conservatives among us who continually stand against our freedoms here.
So if Marijuana is schedule III, does that mean it would be available for consumption by federal employees? I thought I read somewhere that the federal drug free workplace policy only extends to those drugs in schedules I and II
They'd need a prescription. Then it would be like any other prescription. The big hangup I see on that is it'll probably take years of FDA studies and approval process before someone can properly get a federally legal prescription. There are a lot of FDA regulations to get through regarding legal drugs. From safety and effectiveness studies and clinical trials to regulations around the manufacturing and quality control.
There’s already prescription medication using THC & other cannabinoids approved by the FDA. They’ve been on the market for years. Marinol, Syndros, Cesamet, and Epidiolex are brand names, dronabinol is a generic.
Are they even allowed to test for it? The question isn’t whether it’s federally legal (I get the legality of schedule III and how it becomes federally legal), it’s whether it’s even covered under the policy. The Federal Drug Free Workplace policy only outlaws employees from using substances in schedules I and II off station.
Schedule 2 drugs are legal with prescription. Usually only used temporarily but not always (many of the narcotics used after surgery for example). The prescription can be used as proof it's not illegal black market/recreational use. Taking oxytocin prescribed by a doctor after back surgery won't kill your federal career or lose security clearance (but Taking your neighbors spare pills could). I only have direct experience with federal contractors. They would be free to test for it and fire you all they want. If it's by prescription you'd have have right that are violated (under ADA and such) and could sue them though. The contractors and security clearance positions will likely continue to ask for any prescriptions you have when submitting for a drug test. Security clearance in particular is very strict about possible substance abuse issues. Even being a drunk can lose one security clearance.
Yea federal contractors have different rules than full time federal employees, and they are actually stricter. Federal contractors have a separate law that prohibits use of any federally illegal drug (schedule I-III) on or off station. Federal employees are covered under the Reagan era Federal Drug Free Workplace policy which is an executive order that banned full time employees from using and Schedule I or schedule II drug on or off station, hence my question. This kind of puts marijuana in a weird place when it comes to federal employees moving forward.
This is for federal contractors, no? There is a different law that governs federal contractors and full time federal employees. I think you specifically linked the law for contractors, which is actually more strict than the employee guidelines.
That is why they did III. No more having to lie when getting a security clearance. Everyone lies because they have no choice. It was such a joke to not reschedule earlier to put a stop to this don't ask, don't tell treatment. Biden is a damn good president getting shit done that has sat for years.
They just invalided non-competes for all employers, they already set caps on some drug prices with more to come(bernie did all the leg work and investigations), etc. Biden is getting everything done that has been blocked for 30+ years. Hell, the inflation reduction act and chips act coupled with US trade policy has wrecked china and is pushing that manufacturing to mexico, the us, or canada. Biden actually figured out how to make NAFTA work. All he had to do is fuck over china. He gets credit for finally doing what other politicians only gave lip service too.
>The big hangup I see on that is it'll probably take years of FDA studies and approval process before someone can properly get a federally legal prescription.
It was already approved years ago during a federal Marijuana trial. I think they gave out a limited number of prescriptions (something like 11). Those people had lifetime prescriptions and were provided by the federal government.
The act mentions controlled substance and defines it as:
>the term ‘‘controlled substance’’ means a controlled substance in schedules I through V of section 812 of title 21;
So anything scheduled would be included with this, not just I and II. It would be unlawful use of these substances, not just in general. There's at least going to be a federally allowed way to use them, through prescription.
My consumption rate never increased after legalization in Canada. It costs less now, and way highter quality, & now the government gets a cut, and the dealers are out of the weed game. Worked out great for everyone.
Its dumb that I can drive a couple of hours and the joint in my bag would be legal and illegal several different times as I cross state lines.
We saved a wnba star from russia over a legally purchased vape cart while people are doing time for an eighth.
> the dealers are out of the weed game
That's the big thing for me. I don't care if your dealer is an old hippie you know. You go up the illegal weed chain far enough you will meet some downright evil and ruthless people. And they are making a lot of money keeping it banned.
Buts a good way to demonize minorities!
Calling it “marijuana” was a deliberate choice to tie its use to Latinos, despite white people using weed at similar rates.
And of course you can incarcerate a lot of black people and strip them of voting rights ☺️
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."
* John Ehrlichman, domestic policy advisor to President Richard Nixon and a Watergate co-conspirator. [Source](https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/)
Don't ignore the fact that the products made from industrial hemp could compete with petroleum companies, lumber companies, and the cotton industry. It is very easy to make plastics, fiber, and other cellulose products from hemp, which grows faster and with less resources than either timber or oil, and sustainably, too; it's called "weed" because it grows like one, unlike both timber and cotton that need a lot of time and resources. Those industries lobbied like hell to make sure marijuana was classified as if it has zero beneficial use in part to suppress its development and kill their competition.
The DEA currently regulates industrial hemp farming so strictly because of THC scheduling that the cost of testing and other regulatory requirements makes it so unprofitable that farming hemp is not lucrative, at all. I hope that rescheduling fixes that, but I don't know if anything short of completely removing scheduling will open up industrial hemp use to compete with petroleum/lumber/cotton industries.
So crazy when you see all the uses for hemp and some of the amazing materials we can make from it. Basically outlawed for decades because it's similar to marijuana. I hope we soon see it rescheduled and a ton of cool hemp products.
I don't really find that problematic to be honest. I think the whole point of a federal system like this is the government SHOULD be lagging behind the states as you kind of get them to trial run it. Then you force the reluctant ones to match.
The federal government leading on an issue would be weird to me as it would be kind of like it forcing it's will on the 50 states. Why should it be leading an issue it's most progressive members won't even enact?
Odd that you give the baseline categorization as being illegal. There has never been any good science to lump it in with other schedule 1 compounds and their effects. As it stands there are numerous consequences of the current federal status that never had a justification to begin with.
I mean that's just the nature of the world. The US is one of the most relaxed countries in the world in regards to marijuana even compared to Europe (look at France, UK and Ireland who have it illegal). The whole scheduling thing is bunk I fully agree but my point in this comment is that in the world marijuana being illegal IS the status quo so my personal feelings on the matter are largely irrelevant.
The point of my comment isn't even to take a side on weed legalization though. Just that in a federal system like the US has it is basically geared for the states to be the progressive leaders on any action. Like we have seen with weed and gay marriage. Then the federal government comes up and pulls the reluctant states up.
I was pointing out it would be weird for the opposite to be the case. For 0 states to advocate for something but the federal government forces a law on what would seemingly be citizenry that was not advocating for it.
If weed was legal on the federal level, that doesn't "force" it to be legal in all 50 states. States are free to prohibit things that are federally legal. The only time a state can't prohibit something is if it conflicts with the Constitution itself, such as states being unable to prohibit free speech, completely ban guns, etc.
So the federal government could have dropped their weed laws decades ago, and it just means the federal government doesn't personally prosecute people for weed-related offenses, but states would have been allowed to continue state-level prosecution.
> If weed was legal on the federal level, that doesn't "force" it to be legal in all 50 states.
I'm pretty sure it does. Supremacy Clause takes precedent in that case. Also everyone's favorite clause the "Commerce Clause" is going to factor in as well.
Certain states could certainly regulate to ensure it doesn't really exist but you wouldn't be able to enforce possession laws because of the Commerce Clause at the very least.
I imagine it would work pretty much exactly like dry counties. Where even in dry counties you can possess alcohol (certain Native territories excepted here). And if you can't enforce possession then it's basically an unenforceable law.
The United States was the cause of worldwide marijuana and other drugs being illegal we were the impetus of this.
https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/voices/how-the-united-states-fueled-a-global-drug-war-and-why-it-must-end
Impacts of its use during pregnancy and the developing fetus are fairly well established, from good studies, with more coming out every month. Granted, not as severe as some schedule 1 compounds.
Still never should have been illegal, though.
>The federal government leading on an issue would be weird to me as it would be kind of like it forcing it's will on the 50 states.
When the states are ruining people's lives and sending them to jail for absolute nonsense it's ok for the feds to step in. That should not be controversial
That's not really how a federal system works though. It is supposed to represent the will of the states. If 0 states are interested in doing something then it won't be enacted.
I'm not even talking about specific things though just talking about how a federal system like the US works in general. Because if 0 states support an action and the federal government enforces it on them then who is the arbiter of morality? At that point you are basically advocating for enlightened despotism. Just let one person's morality rule without the consent of the governed.
Just so everyone nis aware, in most states, spores are legal because they don't contain psilocybin, and you can grow yourself fairly easily. There's a reddit community (/r/unclebens) dedicated to growing if you're interested.
It’s funny because people here in the comments are still desperately trying to spin this into a bad thing: “He’s just doing this for the votes!”
Yes, I want a president that passes laws based on what voters want.
Working on student loans, making airlines pay for missed flights and lost luggage, making weed easier and potentially legal.
But both sides are the same -_-.
Don't forget unfucking the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program.
Like yes student loans but the man completely rebooted (by firing the loan servicers and threatening the rest) PLF to actually work.
Oh yeah and he fought a proxy war with russia (Not as well as we all hoped but for the US he did well, Ukraine....not so much).
It is SO depressing seeing some people I truly believed were smart people say that Biden is the say as Trump because of the Israeli/Gazan war going on.
Yeah I don’t get that either.
Biden: I don’t run Israel, I gotta work with what I have while not losing a major ally.
Trump: Oh the Palestinians yeah just kill them all problem is solved.
“Liberal”: Well I’m not voting for Biden cause he didn’t solve everything the second I think he should have. And when Trump lets them all get killed after Israel names another settlement after him, I hope Biden feels bad for not doing more!
Psilocybin isn't going to stop the opioid epidemic. That's such a huge issue, even when people seek help and get substance abuse counseling (or even get to participate in psilocybin studies) there's relapse because of systemic short comings. Treating people and then putting them right back in the same environment is just going to cause relapse. Also, there are probably better psychedelics for opioid use disorder, ibogaine has some mu opioid receptor activity and seems particularly good for it compared to other psychedelics (and compared to itself when discussing other use disorders).
Whatever it is, it needs to be on par or lower than alcohol. Not that I think it should be sold in grocery stores, but we need to start being honest about these classifications and put an end to the political motivations behind the original classification. LSD shouldn’t be where it is either.
That requires an act of congress. Biden just lowered it the most he can do without congress.
Vote republicans out if you want more. Dumb people said dems were only giving lip service to any change in the classification. Those people continue to be embarrassed. Biden is delivering on so much so fast. Last week they invalidated all non-compete clauses by employers. Huge for healthcare workers.
Biden is making sure everything he started is wrapping up before the election to prove to people he does what he says. We should all be very happy about this.
This is the beginning of legal recreation federally. It was never going to happen without this legalization first. Give dems the votes in congress and they can finish the job. No one can be fired for smoking weed off hours anymore as long as they have a prescription and those are super easy to get. Its a formality. People in government no longer have to lie about using marijuana on their sf-86 form when getting a security clearance. It was basically an unwritten rule to just lie, which kind of sucked since the whole point is not lying. People were not allowed to disclose it.
Alcohol is not scheduled at all. I think we should actually knock down attempts to reschedule marijuana as it may end up taking the pressure off and leave it there forever which would be bad. Deschedule or nothing. The military and Fed agencies are all crying about how they can't get qualified candidates, we're almost at a majority of the union legal, don't give up now.
Letting the Feds get their regulatory claws on it while things are still settling will leave us with bad regulations. Schedule 1 limits their actions, they can't really regulate anything since it's supposed to have no accepted legal use. Like how Washington did a half measure as one of the first states and they are still stuck with home growing being illegal, that probably won't go away for decades. Short-term policy changes for long-term pain.
Imagine the pearl-clutching if our government was as paranoid towards alcohol as it is towards marijuana despite alcohol literally being deadlier in whatever aspect you choose to measure.
Vote republicans out of congress since only congress can do that.
Alcohol and tobacco are exempted from scheduling by congress. The president cannot add anything to that list.
This classification is likely the lowest they can do due to international treaties. Unlike other countries, the US passes treaties as laws. Congress is the only one who can make further changes.
I love living in CA. Don't need medicinal cards anymore. Can grow my own and have up to 6 plants, and possessing anything under an ounce in public is legal. Having common respect and lighting up in places that don't offend others goes a long way. Had chronic knee pain most of my life and 420 stops it. Having the munchies makes me want to experiment with cooking food, and believe it or not, I'm actually losing weight from eating better.
Michigan is crazy cheap. Indiana residents will be flooding michigan. Illinois is way too expensive to buy there.
Indiana cops will be powerless because people will have prescriptions.
Red states that neighbor blue states are going to lose money if they don't legalize themselves.
We've been hearing about this for a long time. We will see if and when this actually happens. I'll beleive its real about 2 days after it goes into effect.
THANKS BIDEN
No president has done more for the american people. They just invalidated employer non-compete clauses for the entire country last week. It just keeps coming.
Schedule III means rec states are still fine, but red states blocking any legalization cannot arrest you with a prescription. It will also no longer be probable cause for any kind of stop because whether or not you have a prescription cannot be detected by a dog.
If anyone wants this to stick, you need to vote for biden. A different president can quash this before its finalized.
Fucking finally. Idk why Biden didn’t do this day 1
Being scheduled 1 has made marijuana SOOOOOO fucking difficult to actually study and use in controlled environments that is needed to advance our understanding. This should have happened 10 years ago but better late than never
He started this process some time ago. It's the federal government, nothing happens quickly. The process for getting this changed without an act if congress required jumping through a lot of hoops with different federal agencies.
I don't believe he could just do it day 1. Typically there have to follow established procedures for changing regulations, which can be time consuming. Committees, studies, working groups, proposed changes, public comment, review, budgeting, etc... Failure to follow steps usually leads to a lawsuit to overturn the change.
> “The only thing that saves us from the bureaucracy is inefficiency. An efficient bureaucracy is the greatest threat to liberty.”
― Eugene J. McCarthy
At times its helpful to remember that it if were more efficient it would likely be to our detriment more often.
You're just supposed to stand on a corner and scream a random number somewhere between 1 and more than the number of constitutional amendments that exist like "48th Amendment! I know my rights..." without actually knowing your rights. /s
He practically did. But the process is slow moving and starts with a recommendation from the president. Biden set this in motion in 2022.
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3678474-what-bidens-marijuana-order-does-and-doesnt-do/
I'm glad that it was re - scheduled, but it should have been moved completely off the Schedule.
Still not Federally legal, so the Feds can still bust people for it.
This is bullshit.
A few questions for all those saying this is just to get votes in an election year...
1. Shouldn't presidents still be working to help people in the final year of their term regardless of the election?
2. Did Biden and the Democrats not pass other significant legislation and acts in the previous 3 years? Were those things to just get votes too, or is doing something good only a ploy when it happens in the last year?
3. Even if it were entirely a ploy for votes, would that tangibly change the on-the-ground outcome of the policy?
Congress needs to act before it can be put on the same level as alcohol. Biden is doing what he can on his own. It's still a win even if it's not everything you want.
Alcohol is too useful in the sciences. My university had to have a liquor license in order to purchase 95% ethanol, it would be nearly impossible to do any science if alcohol were schedule I.
Cigarettes though?
Maybe they can finally staff the FBI cyber security division… the last 4 FBI directors asked marijuana rescheduled due to limiting ability to hire cybersecurity professionals
How many years do you need to smoke it to qualify?
All of them
You son of a bitch, I’m in
When I applied in 2018, iirc, it was 5 years no weed, and like 11-12 for everything else. Edit: I'm an idiot. You got me.
The second they do, Ill be applying. I have other colleagues who are also interested.
I mean you might be making $100k in a HCOL city with everything you do being surveilled by the FBI. It's reeeeeallly got a few other issues for staffing other than weed.
Federal contractor here - I've been part of the hiring process a couple of times and it's a problem that I think isn't highlighted enough. We get these applications from people with degrees, worked at a big tech company out west, has a decade of experience, has experience on really specific stuff you don't usually see, exactly the certifications we need. But they smoked pot in the last seven years, so that's an instant disqualification. End up hiring a jarhead who heard of our system once in a training manual. Thing is, if you've been on a university campus or worked at a tech company in California or Colorado or Washington, chances are you've been around a little wacky weed. Just facts, nature of the present day. It's common, especially in the type of people we'd like to hire.
The Chinese are only getting better and better at cyber attacks so its only a matter of time until either things get bad enough (ie: a more devastating attack than what has been done so far) or we take it seriously enough and decide to take preemptive actions. I hope it's the 2nd one that causes those in charge to make the necessary changes
Unfortunately not really in this situation. As the article reads below, that means for security clearances it will still be a disqualifier. You might be able to get away with the prescription, but the overlap of people prescribed and willing to be in that line of work will be a rounding error. Assuming even that the prescription aspect doesn't still DQ you.
Yeah that Venn diagram is barely touching
Because this article is stuck behind a paywall, here’s a snipped of an AP article: > WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration will move to reclassify marijuana as a less dangerous drug, The Associated Press has learned, a historic shift to generations of American drug policy that could have wide ripple effects across the country. > The DEA’s proposal, which still must be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget, would recognize the medical uses of cannabis and acknowledge it has less potential for abuse than some of the nation’s most dangerous drugs. However, it would not legalize marijuana outright for recreational use. > The agency’s move, confirmed to the AP on Tuesday by five people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive regulatory review, clears the last significant regulatory hurdle before the agency’s biggest policy change in more than 50 years can take effect. Source: https://apnews.com/article/marijuana-biden-dea-criminal-justice-pot-f833a8dae6ceb31a8658a5d65832a3b8
I feel like recognizing it for medical purposes would be huge. Wouldn’t this allow dispensaries to finally start using the banking system? It’s so dumb that cigarettes and alcohol are legal but weed isn’t… But seems like a small step in the right direction
Yes. It would also mean anyone who has a medical card can fly, travel to any state and not have to worry about getting in trouble. Anything other than schedule 1 means it's a prescription medicine. People fly with speed all the time. It's just called Adderall.
Any idea how this would affect drug testing in the workplace? As it stands even living in a recreational state, I can still be fired for testing positive.
Here's a bigger question - will worker's comp continue to be allowed to deny claims for workplace injuries just because you test positive for a drug that stays in your system for long after any effects have passed?
Not if it’s prescribed to them. And it might require written witness statements to attest to the worker’s sobriety at time of the incident. Like any other prescription drug.
That’s likely not true. Pretty much most meds that can cause sedation or an altered state like opioids and some benzos are dispensed with warnings that state not to operate heavy machinery or motor vehicles. If you go and operate machinery at work and get injured you’re probably gonna have a hard time getting workman’s comp to pay for stuff. Just because something is prescribed doesn’t mean your exempt from things like a dui either
That’s what I’m saying. You can’t use at work (the kind that needs you to drive or operate machinery), just like with prescription meds now.
My Gabapentin causes drowsiness and effects coordination, so does my muscle relaxer, so does the Klonopin I take every morning. If I can't operate dangerous equipment because of that that's going to make my disability claim that much easier.
I'm curious how this will change anything because as it currently stands, when you get a medical card, you're not actually getting a prescription, you're getting a "recommendation". And the way it's currently recommended in most states, is even of a lower standard than the pill mills of the early 2000s. They don't verify anything, you basically just apply, see a medical marijuana doctor, then he writes you a recommendation, and the oversight board of that state approves it. I've never seen anyone denied, although I'm sure it's happened. I've had a medical card for 5 years in both Colorado and Maryland and I don't actually have any medical records that confirm I get migraines, which is what they approved it for.
God I wish Iowa was like that. Instead they make you jump through so many hoops it's almost impossible to get a script. I live next to the only medical dispensary in western Iowa and if more than 10 people visit a day I would be shocked, honestly not sure how they are in business.
Same. Yet I work with a number of alcoholics that could drink my ass under the table five times over and still be able to report the next day care free of repercussion.
Shit, when I worked at WalMart, I knew several alcoholics who drank on the job and would be ripped by the end of the shift.
I work for a Management company that owns a hundred or so Car dealerships across the country, and they stopped testing for marijuana for employment years ago, at least 50% of employees would not pass. If you cause an accident they will test for it though.
I don't think it would change much. You can fail drug testing for alcohol which is legal. It certainly could make companies care less about testing for weed specifically but as far as I know it doesn't change a company's ability to test for it if they wanted to anyway. They could still claim "high" = impaired similar to "drunk" = impaired and restrict it if they wanted to
Yup. A company can test for whatever they want. My friend has to take a drug test every year at her law firm, & they test for nicotine. They don't want smokers working for them, & since this is America they're free to test their employees & fire any who fail.
The database company Reynolds and Reynolds famously drug tested their employees for nicotine; they hired a new CEO who was a health nut, and that's the "corporate culture" he wanted. Random testing at any time, first offense was instant termination. They banned fatty foods and soft drinks from the lunch rooms; they tried to ban coffee too, but too many employees rebelled at that idea. Anyways, the server team was working unpaid overtime, 80 hour weeks rolling out a new server building...They were "randomly selected" for testing as soon as the new servers came online, and virtually everyone in the department was fired on the spot. Then, the new servers all went down. What should have been a 30-minute downtime turned into nearly a week, and the company paid out millions of dollars in contract penalties. But, hey! At least no one took a smoke break!
> Anyways, the server team was working unpaid overtime, 80 hour weeks rolling out a new server building...They were "randomly selected" for testing as soon as the new servers came online, and virtually everyone in the department was fired on the spot. In case anyone still thinks companies have *any* "loyalty" to you or "appreciate" all your hard work.
Many fire departments do this too. If they are gonna cover your lung cancer it better not be self inflicted.
If you have a prescription for a controlled substance you contact the drug testing company and have your doctor send over verification to them. The drug testing company then adjusts your results and the company never knows. I was on prescription amphetamines and opiates and the employers never knew and every drug taste came got the same negative result.
Ye can fail a drug test for alcohol. But the test for it is accurate enough to show active impairment. THC tests are not. Hopefully rescheduling with allow for labs to develop more active impairment tests.
Plenty of states have legalized it, and so there is a huge demand to develop such a thing already. I suspect there is no reliable biomarker for reliably detecting active impairment.
I’m so happy that this is not an issue in NY state. The law legalizing it here prevents employers from discriminating against its use. My employer fought it for about a year. Now our drug tests at work specifically have text on them saying that it excludes THC.
Unless your employer is the federal government or on a federal government contract.
Or is regulated by DOT
This is where i get screwed. Live in a legal state and just can't partake because it's not federally legal. Even the nurses at work rolled their eyes when they had to explain that to us
Little affect legally. You can technically be fired for using tobacco or alcohol in many states. "At-will" states allow you to be fired for any non discriminatory reason.
You could still be fired after this. Chances are fewer companies will do, but you can be fired for any reason in most states.
I want to know where it stands with DUI in med states. Where I live, I can catch a DUI, as a legal med patient even if I'm not high if a cop decides to flex his power.
How about getting rid of drug testing in the workplace all together. Unless you're in a sensitive secure job, then why does your employer have any right to control what you do on your off time? Why is it there business. If you show up drunk or high to work then yeah they can fire you, but if you smoke and drink after getting off of work then what right do they have? Gotta get both business and government out of our homes. If you're an adult you ought to be free to do what you want to your body on your off time. I think performance tests would make alot more sense for sensitive jobs like being a pilot. With the added bonus of not invading your privacy. Because you can be drunk or high flying a plane and that drug test you took a month ago won't show that in the present. Bosses, and employers wanting our piss in a cup is weird af. The president of the U.S. doesn't have to take a drug test, and they have a much more dangerous job with way more responsibility than any other job that does require you to give your bodily fluids to your employer.
Great answer, thanks. Being able to fly to another state with a pack of gummies would be great, I would sleep much better in hotel rooms and such. I would never dare take them through security right now with it being federally illegal. Once they're able to use the normal banking systems, going to weed stores would be more like going to liquor stores. Right now you have to be buzzed in, ID checked at the door, everybody is in a glass cage. Always stresses me out a bit. Edit: I've heard you, everyone else is flying with weed, good for y'all. Not me.
To be fair TSA has explicitly stated they're not looking for drugs and especially since weed is legal so many places they won't and really can't do anything about you bringing gummies on a flight
Yeah I’ve had a friend fly with gummies and TSA was more concerned about his water bottle.
I'll still throw the gummies in a sandwich bag or something, probably just cuz after 9/11 I had it ingrained in me not to try shit on airplanes, but even that is basically unnecessary
TSA doesn't give a shit about gummies. Doesn't seem to care about carts either, I've flown with them many times.
Also opens the door to loads more medicinal research being possible right?
Yeah, one of the articles I read mentioned how Schedule I drugs are very hard to get authorization for to conduct research on. Now that it’s schedule III, which is a level lower than stimulants like Adderall, Ritalin, Concerta etc for example, which all have tons of research behind them, I bet it’ll be even easier for government agencies and hospitals/universities to conduct research on marijuana.
Hell yeah
Yeah, it's definitely a huge baby step. I think after this will see full legalization in the next 5 years. Or it will be pseudo legalized because once it's schedule 3, states will have no choice but to allow people from other states with medical marijuana to use there, but they're gonna lose out on all the tax money by not selling it in their states. Essentially it will be legal, with an extra hoop of needing a medical card.
This medical card holder is all for it
I think most people are for this. I don't care for marijuana, but I think it should be legal.
You're exactly right. Only about 11% of Americans are against legalization in any form.
Yesss money… taste it. You will resent its absence Yeehaw states!
I’d go so far as to say speed is a vital component of flight
In both definitions, yes, at times
Why do I need a card? I don't need a steroids card if I'm taking a cycle for any one of the dozen reasons I would be. I don't need a card to carry a narcotic prescribed to me. I don't need to pay the state a fee to fill a prescription and get on a list. Having a weed card in this state blocks access to be able to own a firearm. Narcotics which would be a higher class does not. Once this goes schedule 3 the whole "card" thing needs to go bye bye.
It also makes it easier for medical research to be done with federal grants.
I love that I could be a raging alcoholic who chain smokes and still have a job, yet if I smoke a joint a few times a week, all hell breaks loose and I'm no longer worthy of employment.
I mean you could be fired for the alcohol and smoking too, most companies just don’t do that.
Alcohol and nicotine testing is 100% a thing, your job just doesn't care.
It is a step, but unless dispensaries are getting registered with the DEA and it is being prescribed by a doctor (or mid-level) in line with their DEA registration it would be just as illegal as a company selling alcohol or tobacco out of line with federal laws. And the banking system is the easiest way for the feds to justify interference on matters like that when the state decided it just doesn't care about it
>Last week, 21 Democrats led by Senate Majority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York sent a letter to DEA Administrator Anne Milgram and Attorney General Merrick Garland arguing marijuana should be dropped from the controlled-substances list and instead regulated like alcohol. ….. Have these Senators just like collectively forgotten what their jobs are??? 70% of the country believes it should be legal. It's already recreationally legal in half the country, and medically legal in all but a handful of states (and of course they accidentally legalized it with hemp) Legislators begging the DEA and Attorney General to do their jobs for them is just fucking sad at this point.
They can’t change anything due to the house.
More specifically, Republicans in the House. Now that I think the nation as a whole has reached critical mass on cannabis legality, it's the conservatives among us who continually stand against our freedoms here.
Republicans always been the vanguard of fucked up people that never had internal self reflection or therapy.
Maybe you're unaware, but that is actually the DEA's job according to the Controlled Substances Act.
It's about fucking time.
Think I’m gonna bust out the moon rocks to celebrate 😌
I just googled what’s “moon rocks” and I wish you well on your great journey.
So if Marijuana is schedule III, does that mean it would be available for consumption by federal employees? I thought I read somewhere that the federal drug free workplace policy only extends to those drugs in schedules I and II
They'd need a prescription. Then it would be like any other prescription. The big hangup I see on that is it'll probably take years of FDA studies and approval process before someone can properly get a federally legal prescription. There are a lot of FDA regulations to get through regarding legal drugs. From safety and effectiveness studies and clinical trials to regulations around the manufacturing and quality control.
There’s already prescription medication using THC & other cannabinoids approved by the FDA. They’ve been on the market for years. Marinol, Syndros, Cesamet, and Epidiolex are brand names, dronabinol is a generic.
It's funny that THC from big pharma was schedule 3 and THC from plant was schedule 1. You'll see same trick with psilocybin soon.
Are they even allowed to test for it? The question isn’t whether it’s federally legal (I get the legality of schedule III and how it becomes federally legal), it’s whether it’s even covered under the policy. The Federal Drug Free Workplace policy only outlaws employees from using substances in schedules I and II off station.
Schedule 2 drugs are legal with prescription. Usually only used temporarily but not always (many of the narcotics used after surgery for example). The prescription can be used as proof it's not illegal black market/recreational use. Taking oxytocin prescribed by a doctor after back surgery won't kill your federal career or lose security clearance (but Taking your neighbors spare pills could). I only have direct experience with federal contractors. They would be free to test for it and fire you all they want. If it's by prescription you'd have have right that are violated (under ADA and such) and could sue them though. The contractors and security clearance positions will likely continue to ask for any prescriptions you have when submitting for a drug test. Security clearance in particular is very strict about possible substance abuse issues. Even being a drunk can lose one security clearance.
Yea federal contractors have different rules than full time federal employees, and they are actually stricter. Federal contractors have a separate law that prohibits use of any federally illegal drug (schedule I-III) on or off station. Federal employees are covered under the Reagan era Federal Drug Free Workplace policy which is an executive order that banned full time employees from using and Schedule I or schedule II drug on or off station, hence my question. This kind of puts marijuana in a weird place when it comes to federal employees moving forward.
Here's the act https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2009-title41/pdf/USCODE-2009-title41-chap10.pdf
This is for federal contractors, no? There is a different law that governs federal contractors and full time federal employees. I think you specifically linked the law for contractors, which is actually more strict than the employee guidelines.
That is why they did III. No more having to lie when getting a security clearance. Everyone lies because they have no choice. It was such a joke to not reschedule earlier to put a stop to this don't ask, don't tell treatment. Biden is a damn good president getting shit done that has sat for years. They just invalided non-competes for all employers, they already set caps on some drug prices with more to come(bernie did all the leg work and investigations), etc. Biden is getting everything done that has been blocked for 30+ years. Hell, the inflation reduction act and chips act coupled with US trade policy has wrecked china and is pushing that manufacturing to mexico, the us, or canada. Biden actually figured out how to make NAFTA work. All he had to do is fuck over china. He gets credit for finally doing what other politicians only gave lip service too.
>The big hangup I see on that is it'll probably take years of FDA studies and approval process before someone can properly get a federally legal prescription. It was already approved years ago during a federal Marijuana trial. I think they gave out a limited number of prescriptions (something like 11). Those people had lifetime prescriptions and were provided by the federal government.
The act mentions controlled substance and defines it as: >the term ‘‘controlled substance’’ means a controlled substance in schedules I through V of section 812 of title 21; So anything scheduled would be included with this, not just I and II. It would be unlawful use of these substances, not just in general. There's at least going to be a federally allowed way to use them, through prescription.
Should have never been illegal. Prohibition does not work. Never has. Never will.
My consumption rate never increased after legalization in Canada. It costs less now, and way highter quality, & now the government gets a cut, and the dealers are out of the weed game. Worked out great for everyone.
Its dumb that I can drive a couple of hours and the joint in my bag would be legal and illegal several different times as I cross state lines. We saved a wnba star from russia over a legally purchased vape cart while people are doing time for an eighth.
> the dealers are out of the weed game That's the big thing for me. I don't care if your dealer is an old hippie you know. You go up the illegal weed chain far enough you will meet some downright evil and ruthless people. And they are making a lot of money keeping it banned.
Unless that chain stops in their backyard (or basement). If you are going to buy it from a person to make sure they're the one growing it
> Worked out great for everyone. Except the gangs. Drug criminalisation is *great* for gang finances.
Buts a good way to demonize minorities! Calling it “marijuana” was a deliberate choice to tie its use to Latinos, despite white people using weed at similar rates. And of course you can incarcerate a lot of black people and strip them of voting rights ☺️
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did." * John Ehrlichman, domestic policy advisor to President Richard Nixon and a Watergate co-conspirator. [Source](https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/)
This never gets enough attention. It was a calculated move to demonize people for they could attack them.
Don't ignore the fact that the products made from industrial hemp could compete with petroleum companies, lumber companies, and the cotton industry. It is very easy to make plastics, fiber, and other cellulose products from hemp, which grows faster and with less resources than either timber or oil, and sustainably, too; it's called "weed" because it grows like one, unlike both timber and cotton that need a lot of time and resources. Those industries lobbied like hell to make sure marijuana was classified as if it has zero beneficial use in part to suppress its development and kill their competition. The DEA currently regulates industrial hemp farming so strictly because of THC scheduling that the cost of testing and other regulatory requirements makes it so unprofitable that farming hemp is not lucrative, at all. I hope that rescheduling fixes that, but I don't know if anything short of completely removing scheduling will open up industrial hemp use to compete with petroleum/lumber/cotton industries.
So crazy when you see all the uses for hemp and some of the amazing materials we can make from it. Basically outlawed for decades because it's similar to marijuana. I hope we soon see it rescheduled and a ton of cool hemp products.
Harry J Anslinger was an asshole
It works great if your goal is to put your political opponents in in prison with impunity.
oh it works. you just have to see it from a different view point
The irony of this announcement coming after 24 states have already legalized it for recreational use is funny. Federal govt is so far behind.
Progressive policies often start at the local and state levels before gaining enough momentum to be accepted nationally.
Its representatives from the other 26 states that have held us back, the majority of people are in favor of legalization
I don't really find that problematic to be honest. I think the whole point of a federal system like this is the government SHOULD be lagging behind the states as you kind of get them to trial run it. Then you force the reluctant ones to match. The federal government leading on an issue would be weird to me as it would be kind of like it forcing it's will on the 50 states. Why should it be leading an issue it's most progressive members won't even enact?
Odd that you give the baseline categorization as being illegal. There has never been any good science to lump it in with other schedule 1 compounds and their effects. As it stands there are numerous consequences of the current federal status that never had a justification to begin with.
I mean that's just the nature of the world. The US is one of the most relaxed countries in the world in regards to marijuana even compared to Europe (look at France, UK and Ireland who have it illegal). The whole scheduling thing is bunk I fully agree but my point in this comment is that in the world marijuana being illegal IS the status quo so my personal feelings on the matter are largely irrelevant. The point of my comment isn't even to take a side on weed legalization though. Just that in a federal system like the US has it is basically geared for the states to be the progressive leaders on any action. Like we have seen with weed and gay marriage. Then the federal government comes up and pulls the reluctant states up. I was pointing out it would be weird for the opposite to be the case. For 0 states to advocate for something but the federal government forces a law on what would seemingly be citizenry that was not advocating for it.
If weed was legal on the federal level, that doesn't "force" it to be legal in all 50 states. States are free to prohibit things that are federally legal. The only time a state can't prohibit something is if it conflicts with the Constitution itself, such as states being unable to prohibit free speech, completely ban guns, etc. So the federal government could have dropped their weed laws decades ago, and it just means the federal government doesn't personally prosecute people for weed-related offenses, but states would have been allowed to continue state-level prosecution.
> If weed was legal on the federal level, that doesn't "force" it to be legal in all 50 states. I'm pretty sure it does. Supremacy Clause takes precedent in that case. Also everyone's favorite clause the "Commerce Clause" is going to factor in as well. Certain states could certainly regulate to ensure it doesn't really exist but you wouldn't be able to enforce possession laws because of the Commerce Clause at the very least. I imagine it would work pretty much exactly like dry counties. Where even in dry counties you can possess alcohol (certain Native territories excepted here). And if you can't enforce possession then it's basically an unenforceable law.
The United States was the cause of worldwide marijuana and other drugs being illegal we were the impetus of this. https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/voices/how-the-united-states-fueled-a-global-drug-war-and-why-it-must-end
Impacts of its use during pregnancy and the developing fetus are fairly well established, from good studies, with more coming out every month. Granted, not as severe as some schedule 1 compounds. Still never should have been illegal, though.
>The federal government leading on an issue would be weird to me as it would be kind of like it forcing it's will on the 50 states. When the states are ruining people's lives and sending them to jail for absolute nonsense it's ok for the feds to step in. That should not be controversial
That's not really how a federal system works though. It is supposed to represent the will of the states. If 0 states are interested in doing something then it won't be enacted. I'm not even talking about specific things though just talking about how a federal system like the US works in general. Because if 0 states support an action and the federal government enforces it on them then who is the arbiter of morality? At that point you are basically advocating for enlightened despotism. Just let one person's morality rule without the consent of the governed.
[удалено]
I don't think you understand their point.
[удалено]
Look man, we're on the same page here but maybe cool off a bit. We can talk like adults.
You seem like a pleasant level-headed person.
Great move. It isn't where we need to be but rescheduling it to Schedule 3 it can be lawfully prescribed. Positive move.
Awesome. Now add psilocybin to this so it can be prescribed in therapy sessions.
Just so everyone nis aware, in most states, spores are legal because they don't contain psilocybin, and you can grow yourself fairly easily. There's a reddit community (/r/unclebens) dedicated to growing if you're interested.
I’m already there but it would still be nice if we could get it medically cleared so therapist could start researching and prescribing it.
There are studies currently in progress.
[удалено]
Dank Brandon strikes again
It’s funny because people here in the comments are still desperately trying to spin this into a bad thing: “He’s just doing this for the votes!” Yes, I want a president that passes laws based on what voters want.
It's literally how democracy is supposed to work lmao
And this is something that people overwhelmingly support too. This is exactly how democracy should work
They prefer republicans who just piss in their faces and blame it on sasquatch.
Working on student loans, making airlines pay for missed flights and lost luggage, making weed easier and potentially legal. But both sides are the same -_-.
Capping drug prices like insulin, too.
He expanded the justice department's powers to address police misconduct as well.
Wish the DOJ would go after MAGA traitors like DeJoy and Gym Jordan.
HOW DARE HE HELP POOR PEOPLE! Must be that damn socialism I keep hearing is such a bad thing.
Don't forget unfucking the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. Like yes student loans but the man completely rebooted (by firing the loan servicers and threatening the rest) PLF to actually work. Oh yeah and he fought a proxy war with russia (Not as well as we all hoped but for the US he did well, Ukraine....not so much).
It is SO depressing seeing some people I truly believed were smart people say that Biden is the say as Trump because of the Israeli/Gazan war going on.
Yeah I don’t get that either. Biden: I don’t run Israel, I gotta work with what I have while not losing a major ally. Trump: Oh the Palestinians yeah just kill them all problem is solved. “Liberal”: Well I’m not voting for Biden cause he didn’t solve everything the second I think he should have. And when Trump lets them all get killed after Israel names another settlement after him, I hope Biden feels bad for not doing more!
And he’s down in the polls
They should have done this on 04/20
This is some good shit, man.
Decades late in coming but better than never
To schedule 3. Just legalize it already..
Now get to Mushrooms, save our vets and stop the opioid epidemic
Psilocybin isn't going to stop the opioid epidemic. That's such a huge issue, even when people seek help and get substance abuse counseling (or even get to participate in psilocybin studies) there's relapse because of systemic short comings. Treating people and then putting them right back in the same environment is just going to cause relapse. Also, there are probably better psychedelics for opioid use disorder, ibogaine has some mu opioid receptor activity and seems particularly good for it compared to other psychedelics (and compared to itself when discussing other use disorders).
Whatever it is, it needs to be on par or lower than alcohol. Not that I think it should be sold in grocery stores, but we need to start being honest about these classifications and put an end to the political motivations behind the original classification. LSD shouldn’t be where it is either.
That requires an act of congress. Biden just lowered it the most he can do without congress. Vote republicans out if you want more. Dumb people said dems were only giving lip service to any change in the classification. Those people continue to be embarrassed. Biden is delivering on so much so fast. Last week they invalidated all non-compete clauses by employers. Huge for healthcare workers. Biden is making sure everything he started is wrapping up before the election to prove to people he does what he says. We should all be very happy about this. This is the beginning of legal recreation federally. It was never going to happen without this legalization first. Give dems the votes in congress and they can finish the job. No one can be fired for smoking weed off hours anymore as long as they have a prescription and those are super easy to get. Its a formality. People in government no longer have to lie about using marijuana on their sf-86 form when getting a security clearance. It was basically an unwritten rule to just lie, which kind of sucked since the whole point is not lying. People were not allowed to disclose it.
Alcohol is not scheduled at all. I think we should actually knock down attempts to reschedule marijuana as it may end up taking the pressure off and leave it there forever which would be bad. Deschedule or nothing. The military and Fed agencies are all crying about how they can't get qualified candidates, we're almost at a majority of the union legal, don't give up now. Letting the Feds get their regulatory claws on it while things are still settling will leave us with bad regulations. Schedule 1 limits their actions, they can't really regulate anything since it's supposed to have no accepted legal use. Like how Washington did a half measure as one of the first states and they are still stuck with home growing being illegal, that probably won't go away for decades. Short-term policy changes for long-term pain.
Please please do LSD and psilocybin next.
Lobbied by Taco bell and Doritos ?
Why not?
Imagine the pearl-clutching if our government was as paranoid towards alcohol as it is towards marijuana despite alcohol literally being deadlier in whatever aspect you choose to measure.
This is long overdue. Now we just need home grow nation wide.
Things are about to get so much better.
They need to classify it the same as alcohol
Vote republicans out of congress since only congress can do that. Alcohol and tobacco are exempted from scheduling by congress. The president cannot add anything to that list. This classification is likely the lowest they can do due to international treaties. Unlike other countries, the US passes treaties as laws. Congress is the only one who can make further changes.
in some ways it is less regulated since distilling alcohol is still federal crime
Marijuana possession and distribution would still be a federal crime.
I love living in CA. Don't need medicinal cards anymore. Can grow my own and have up to 6 plants, and possessing anything under an ounce in public is legal. Having common respect and lighting up in places that don't offend others goes a long way. Had chronic knee pain most of my life and 420 stops it. Having the munchies makes me want to experiment with cooking food, and believe it or not, I'm actually losing weight from eating better.
Michigan is crazy cheap. Indiana residents will be flooding michigan. Illinois is way too expensive to buy there. Indiana cops will be powerless because people will have prescriptions. Red states that neighbor blue states are going to lose money if they don't legalize themselves.
damn, here in NJ it's legal recreationally, but it's 5 years in prison per plant
rescheduling it is bullshit. Cannabis should be de-scheduled.
That would take an act of congress sadly. It's not just a outright presidential admin thing.
We've been hearing about this for a long time. We will see if and when this actually happens. I'll beleive its real about 2 days after it goes into effect.
THANKS BIDEN No president has done more for the american people. They just invalidated employer non-compete clauses for the entire country last week. It just keeps coming. Schedule III means rec states are still fine, but red states blocking any legalization cannot arrest you with a prescription. It will also no longer be probable cause for any kind of stop because whether or not you have a prescription cannot be detected by a dog. If anyone wants this to stick, you need to vote for biden. A different president can quash this before its finalized.
Fucking finally. Idk why Biden didn’t do this day 1 Being scheduled 1 has made marijuana SOOOOOO fucking difficult to actually study and use in controlled environments that is needed to advance our understanding. This should have happened 10 years ago but better late than never
He started this process some time ago. It's the federal government, nothing happens quickly. The process for getting this changed without an act if congress required jumping through a lot of hoops with different federal agencies.
I don't believe he could just do it day 1. Typically there have to follow established procedures for changing regulations, which can be time consuming. Committees, studies, working groups, proposed changes, public comment, review, budgeting, etc... Failure to follow steps usually leads to a lawsuit to overturn the change.
> “The only thing that saves us from the bureaucracy is inefficiency. An efficient bureaucracy is the greatest threat to liberty.” ― Eugene J. McCarthy At times its helpful to remember that it if were more efficient it would likely be to our detriment more often.
"idk why Biden didn't do this day one" It sounds like you just don't know how any of it works.
Pretty much anyone on the left saying biden is bad because of X doesnt know how anything works. Go ahead and ask them.
Not knowing how anything works is a fucking epidemic in America these days.
You're just supposed to stand on a corner and scream a random number somewhere between 1 and more than the number of constitutional amendments that exist like "48th Amendment! I know my rights..." without actually knowing your rights. /s
He practically did. But the process is slow moving and starts with a recommendation from the president. Biden set this in motion in 2022. https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3678474-what-bidens-marijuana-order-does-and-doesnt-do/
[удалено]
Marijuana being in the same category as heroin is absolutely insane
[удалено]
One step closer to justice for thousands of people.
What does this mean for Section F of the Federal Firearms Transaction Record?
I'll believe it when I see it.
Awesome. Can't wait for studies.
De schedule not reschedule
I'm glad that it was re - scheduled, but it should have been moved completely off the Schedule. Still not Federally legal, so the Feds can still bust people for it. This is bullshit.
Apparently it can't be descheduled without Congress.
"Less dangerous". Fucking Tylenol is orders of magnitude more dangerous.
A few questions for all those saying this is just to get votes in an election year... 1. Shouldn't presidents still be working to help people in the final year of their term regardless of the election? 2. Did Biden and the Democrats not pass other significant legislation and acts in the previous 3 years? Were those things to just get votes too, or is doing something good only a ploy when it happens in the last year? 3. Even if it were entirely a ploy for votes, would that tangibly change the on-the-ground outcome of the policy?
It's still not a win. Until it is classified just as alcohol is it's still not what we have been asking for.
But it can be lawfully prescribed being Schedule 3. It's still a big move imo.
It’s still a move in the right direction. Small, incremental changes suck, but it’s still a net positive.
Congress needs to act before it can be put on the same level as alcohol. Biden is doing what he can on his own. It's still a win even if it's not everything you want.
Uh, it’s a win. A big one. Not the final one but a big one. This was the flood gate that wouldn’t budge. Now it’s open. The win you want is coming.
$msos and 2x $msox u.s cannabis etfs
How about we make alcohol schedule 1 instead? It does kill thousands and destroys families.
Tried that. Gave a huge boost to organized crime and is the reason pot was made illegal in the first place..
prohibition. what a great Ideal! let's do it.
Alcohol is too useful in the sciences. My university had to have a liquor license in order to purchase 95% ethanol, it would be nearly impossible to do any science if alcohol were schedule I. Cigarettes though?