Ohio Republicans want to make major changes to marijuana law approved by voters
Ohio would impose a higher tax on recreational marijuana and limit home grow under a new bill that marks a major departure from the law approved by voters in 2023.
Senate Bill 56, introduced Tuesday by Sen. Steve Huffman, R-Tipp City, increases the excise tax on adult-use cannabis products from 10% to 15%, with all revenue going into the state general fund. Ohio currently directs marijuana dollars to several different pots, including one to support municipalities with dispensaries.
The proposal also:
Reduces the maximum number of plants people can grow at home from 12 to six.
Eliminates the social equity and jobs program, which aims to promote diversity in the marijuana industry and support those who were disenfranchised by prohibition.
Requires anyone transporting adult-use marijuana and paraphernalia to store it in the trunk of their car.
Decreases the THC product cap from from 90% to 70%.
Permits smoking and vaping only in private residences. Current law already prohibits smoking in public areas, similar to the tobacco ban.
Caps the number of active dispensaries to 350 and requires them to sell both adult-use and medical marijuana.
Does not require the Division of Cannabis Control to set rules for delivery and online ordering.
"I wouldn't say we're gutting everything," Huffman told a Senate committee Wednesday. "We're trying to improve it."
Recreational marijuana sales in Ohio began last summer, months after voters legalized it for adults 21 and older. Total sales were nearing $300 million as of Saturday, according to data from the Division of Cannabis Control, and the average price of flower sat around $192 per ounce.
The voter-approved measure was an initiated statute, not a constitutional amendment, which means lawmakers can tweak as much or as little as they want. Potential changes stalled last year because of Republican infighting, but the Legislature's new GOP leaders generally support overhauling the marijuana law.
"Are we telling (voters), 'Screw you, you don't know what you're talking about. You passed it with an overwhelming majority in the state, but we know better than they did what they were voting on?'" Sen. Bill DeMora, D-Columbus, said.
Spokespeople for the Division of Cannabis Control and Ohio Cannabis Coalition did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
(This story was updated with additional information.)
Haley BeMiller covers state government and politics for the USA TODAY Network Ohio Bureau, which serves the Columbus Dispatch, Cincinnati Enquirer, Akron Beacon Journal and 18 other affiliated news organizations across Ohio.
This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: Ohio bill would increase recreational marijuana tax, limit home grow
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Buzz Feed
15 minutes ago
- Buzz Feed
18 People Reacted To Trump Possibly Pardoning Diddy
As you probably know by now, Sean 'Diddy' Combs was indicted in 2024 on federal charges including sex trafficking and racketeering. Recently, HuffPost and BuzzFeed wrote about how Fox News reporter Peter Doocy asked the president if he would consider pardoning Diddy. Trump told Doocy, "I haven't spoken to him in years. He used to really like me a lot, but I think when I ran for politics, that relationship busted up, from what I read." "I don't know, he didn't tell me that. But I'd read some … nasty statements in the paper all of a sudden." Trump, who once ran in the same wealthy social circles as Diddy, continued, "You know, it's different. You become a much different person when you run for politics, and you do what's right. I could do other things, and I'm sure he'd like me, and I'm sure other people would like me, but it wouldn't be as good for our country." In other words, Trump didn't give a definitive answer on whether he would pardon Diddy. People in the comments had a lot to say on the topic. Here are some of the best replies: "If Diddy is found guilty, he should not be pardoned. Stop pardoning people who were found or plead guilty." —cole Melton "When considering whether to pardon someone, Trump couldn't care less about whether a person is guilty. As long as the person has some kind words for Trump and/or helped Trump get even richer, the person has a good chance of getting a pardon." "Ask Trump voters if they voted for this corruption of the pardon system."—Carl Hayman "The fact that Trump commented on pardoning Diddy during an active, ongoing trial…I am just speechless. It completely undermines the entire justice system." "Always follow the money. Trump is using the power to pardon as an ATM. He only cares about the next money making opportunity, not law and order, justice, the Constitution, or keeping the guilty in jail. And most assuredly not you and me." —d icard "Even MAGA people on Fox and Breitbart are exploding over this. They hate this idea. Democrats need to keep the topic of Trump possibly pardoning Diddy front and center. Talk about it whenever they can. Keep it in the headlines." —TACO Trump "He says, 'I would certainly look at the facts.' And then what? Ignore them like he did with the results of the 2020 election? It used to be that if you wanted to win a high political office, you had to have character. Now all it takes (at least if you're a Republican) is to be a character." —Carl Olson "'You are the company you keep' has never been more true than as it relates to these two." "There is no justice system if anyone can simply prove love to their president and get a pardon." —Cory Crete"Pardons are now for sale."—James Gettings "Well, being liked is obviously the most important factor in any pardon." —Les Vogt "This isn't just grotesque; it's the rot made visible. Trump floating a pardon for a man indicted for sex trafficking, while reminiscing about party invitations and wounded egos, is less a statement of justice than a confession of moral bankruptcy. It's not about innocence or guilt — it's about whether someone 'used to really like' him." "In Trump's world, the law isn't sacred; it's a velvet rope outside a nightclub, waved aside with the casual shrug of a man picking names from a guest list."—Miles West "If our Republic is still standing in a few years, a different Congress must amend the Constitution to limit presidential pardons." "No more presidential pardons. I would let them commute death sentences, but nothing more. Enough of this abuse. These people had their day in court and have had chances to appeal. I don't trust anyone with that power anymore. Get rid of it." —Charles James "It's so weird (but so typical) that Trump has to tell everyone that Diddy 'used to like me a lot,' as if that's the most relevant thing about the issue. What a terrible thing it must be to live a life actually believing inside that you're incapable of being loved. That's the overriding reality that has made Trump who he is — an immensely insecure, flawed man." —David Hardy "'When you're president you do what's right.' I can't believe he said that because he certainly doesn't abide by that whatsoever." —Jenny Tayla "Whenever he talks about anyone — and I mean anyone — he always comments on if that person likes him or not. Narcissistic dictator." "I pray that Trump does not pardon Diddy. He's just as bad as Jeffrey Epstein and R. Kelly." —smileyzombie492 "Trump is sans empathy. He is a woman-hating dumpster fire." —jamesnylan And finally, "At least he didn't say he would. I was relieved to not read even that. The bar is low. 😭" The article people commented on originally appeared on HuffPost.
Politico
28 minutes ago
- Politico
Florida plans for peak hurricane season amid storm of FEMA reforms
TALLAHASSEE, Florida — The Trump administration's talk about drastically altering FEMA's role in disaster recovery has generated heavy uncertainty. But hurricane season is now in full-swing, and with more experience in storm recovery than any other state, Florida's local emergency management officials are trying to stay focused on staying prepared. Florida's storm season began June 1. With the most active, historically volatile stretch a couple months away, county emergency managers have no time to plan for changes that FEMA, the White House and conservative allies have been discussing for some time. Instead, the state's disaster recovery network has decided to rely on itself — even if they may need federal assistance down the road. Jonathan Lord, president of the Florida Emergency Preparedness Association, said most county managers determined the risk of a powerful storm is greater than six months of talk about ways to cut federal disaster funding. 'Emergency managers can't let that noise blur what they need to do for their community,' Lord said. 'Whatever our federal government decides to do, we at the local level will just morph or evolve our programs to adjust to that new reality.' Florida has the history to back up their prep work: The devastation from Category 5 Hurricane Andrew in 1992 prompted officials to create a statewide emergency network that became a model for other states to follow. This safety net is fine-tuned after every hurricane season, from evacuation and sheltering plans managed by counties, to new training and education requirements for county emergency managers recently finalized by the state Legislature. But despite Florida's experience and expertise, the state historically has also relied on tens of billions of recovery dollars provided by FEMA. In most cases, the agency will agree to reimburse 75 percent of recovery costs incurred by the state, counties and municipalities impacted by a hurricane. But in many cases, FEMA has also agreed to cover 100 percent of the costs if the loss was deemed catastrophic, or if the community had no other means to cover repair bills. In 2022, Category 4 Hurricane Ian left Lee County with the largest cleanup bill in state history. A FEMA database of the $2.2 billion in funding requests awarded to Ian-impacted communities shows the agency agreed to cover 100 percent of Lee County's bills from the first several weeks after landfall. The days of 100 percent coverage from FEMA are expected to be far less frequent as the White House continues to review wasteful government spending. Florida Division of Emergency Management Director Kevin Guthrie told a joint-legislative budget committee meeting in June a similar message. 'Instead of us getting 100 percent disaster declarations for a period of time, those days are probably over,' Guthrie said as he defended his request for $850 million to cover costs from the hurricanes, flooding and tornadoes that hit the state last year. FEMA's case-by-case decision to award 100 percent funding has been a lifesaver for Florida's rural counties. After Category 5 Hurricane Michael tore through the Panhandle in 2018, FEMA had initially only agreed to cover 75 percent of the recovery costs incurred by counties impacted by the storm. Calhoun County was faced with millions in critical cleanup costs, but the county only had about $3 million on hand to front the millions more in cleanup costs that FEMA had agreed to pay. Those terms changed after Gov. Ron DeSantis took office three months after Michael made landfall and negotiated with the then-Trump White House to cover 100 percent of the costs that came up in the first several weeks after landfall. Guthrie's prediction on future federal disaster funding mirrors an April memo drafted by then-acting FEMA Administrator Cameron Hamilton. The memo, which Hamilton sent to the White House Office of Management and Budget, summarizes options to cut federal disaster spending, including increasing the share of the costs left to states and localities, and no longer agreeing to cover more than 75 percent. 'This is an action the President has already taken and can continue to take to reduce disaster costs,' Hamilton wrote in the memo, later adding, 'The President would retain authority to grant cost share exceptions.' President Donald Trump announced plans to eliminate FEMA shortly after he began his second White House term in January. Hamilton was fired by Trump in May after he told a House committee that FEMA should not be eliminated. He was replaced by now-acting FEMA Administrator David Richardson, who pushed forward with a reorganizational plan that sought to end FEMA's oversight of recovery projects meant to help shield communities from devastation left by future storms. Richardson walked back his plans ahead of the start of this year's hurricane season on June 1, and Trump has since said plans to wind down FEMA will not take place until the season ends at the end of November. Without any concrete decisions from Washington, Florida's county emergency managers have pressed ahead preparing for this year's hurricane season. Eric Poole, director for the Institute of County Government at the Florida Association of Counties, said most county managers are confident the terms of a disaster declaration, which dictate the amount of money FEMA is willing to pay for storm recovery costs, will still be left to the discretion of the president. 'There's always going to be the discretion of the president through FEMA to increase the cost of a disaster,' Poole said. 'It's all going to depend on the severity of the event and the community and its fiscal capacity, and someone in the executive saying we've got to help these guys out.' Plans to slash federal disaster funding are not new to the Trump administration. FEMA's initial offer to only reimburse 75 percent of the devastation left by Hurricane Michael left Bay County, where the storm made landfall, to take out a $50 million loan to cover critical costs such as removing debris from roads. Other impacted counties, which are deemed as 'fiscally constrained' by the state based on low property tax revenue, saw recovery efforts stall for several months. The limited cash assistance from FEMA was part of an effort led in coordination with then-Gov. Rick Scott to make counties and cities pay a larger share of the recovery costs. This tough love approach to cash assistance was reversed by DeSantis, who convinced Trump to cover a significant chunk of recovery costs in the first weeks after he became governor. 'There's definitely trepidation for not knowing what might happen, or concern for something that might have been reimbursable at some level but may not be available come year's end,' Lord, who is also the Flagler County director of emergency management, said. 'That impacts budgets and cash reserves, which there is concern about, but at this point we just don't know.' One chronic problem with FEMA's Public Assistance grant program: The agency sometimes takes months to approve recovery funding requests. To help mitigate the delay, the Legislature in 2022 created a new trust fund that allows the state Division of Emergency Management to front cash for critical cleanup projects on behalf of counties and cities, allowing the recovery work to continue as the state negotiates reimbursements with FEMA. 'That $1 billion allows us to actually respond without having to worry about the federal government,' Guthrie told lawmakers as he explained his recent request for $850 million to cover last year's storms. 'We go out the door, we're ready to do what we need to do without dependency on the federal government.' The state Division of Emergency Management is an offshoot of the governor's office. The new trust fund allows DeSantis' office to draw money to support all executive orders, which includes efforts to combat illegal immigration. But despite concerns from lawmakers, Guthrie said only $9 million of the $850 million he requested was to cover outstanding bills tied to immigration. The rest of the money, which the joint-legislative panel approved, will go toward unpaid bills from last year's flooding, tornadoes and hurricanes. 'We do have flooding and we do have tornadoes and then there's severe hurricanes,' Guthrie said, adding the unpaid immigration enforcement bills, 'came to a very small amount.' State lawmakers will soon present their budget to DeSantis for the next fiscal year, which begins July 1, and talks between the House and Senate included plans by Trump to eliminate FEMA. State Senate budget chair Ed Hooper (R-Palm Harbor) said the prospects of losing the federal agency scared him when considering how to control state spending. One option already under consideration for future state budgets, should FEMA reduce federal recovery spending, was to add more cash to the state budget stabilization fund. 'We just have to take into account how we're going to get things done,' Hooper said. Guthrie was once considered a candidate to become FEMA administrator, but he was instead appointed by Trump to the FEMA Review Council, which will advise the White House as it makes changes to the agency. State House Appropriations Chair Lawrence McClure said Guthrie's role could play to Florida's advantage, especially with freeing up chronic issues with the agency approving recovery funding requests made by the state. 'Although we look further to maybe a reconstruction or recalibration of FEMA, we also have the federal government — I mean this is the United States, right?' McClure said. 'We take care of each other.'
Politico
28 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump has a plan to remake the housing-finance system. It's baffling to many lawmakers and experts.
GOP lawmakers and the mortgage industry are raising questions about the Trump administration's plans to maintain government control over much of the nation's housing finance system, defying expectations that it would back off. President Donald Trump surprised the industry late last month by pledging to take public Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-controlled companies that stand behind half the $16 trillion residential mortgage market — while preserving an implicit federal guarantee for their solvency. His top housing regulator, Bill Pulte, who oversees the companies, added to the confusion by saying the administration is exploring ways to sell shares while keeping the companies under government authority. The insistence on preserving significant sway over the two mortgage giants, which were seized by the Bush administration during the financial crisis and placed in conservatorship, is setting up a potential rift with Republicans — and possibly even some administration aides who have long worked to reduce the government's footprint in the housing market. 'I want to get them out of conservatorship,' said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), chair of the Senate Banking subcommittee with oversight of Fannie and Freddie. 'But I want to be very careful about how we do it, because we need the secondary market, and we need it to work,' he added, referring to the market where mortgage loans are purchased and sold to investors. Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.), a member of the House Financial Services Committee, said 'we need to continue to investigate recapitalization and releasing' the companies from government control. The question of what to do with Fannie and Freddie has bedeviled policymakers for decades, with Republicans wanting the government to take its hands off housing finance and Democrats fearing that privatizing the firms would destabilize the market and push up mortgage rates. At stake is a potential windfall of hundreds of billions of dollars for an administration that is staring at massive fiscal deficits. The government holds a roughly $340 billion liquidation preference for the two companies, by one estimate — meaning the money would go to the Treasury Department before anyone else in the event of a sale. Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, will meet with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins on June 17 to discuss the future of Fannie and Freddie, underscoring the importance of the issue. Fannie and Freddie don't make loans themselves, but rather purchase them from mortgage companies and bundle them into securities to sell on the secondary market, freeing up the lenders to make more loans. That, plus the government guarantee, helps keep mortgage rates down, supporters say. Trump was widely expected to support privatization, after his first administration worked to prepare the companies for their eventual release. But his latest comments look more like what former President Joe Biden would do, according to Jim Parrott, a nonresident fellow at the Urban Institute and a former economic adviser in the Obama White House. 'In the Biden administration, you could imagine a version of this,' Parrott said. 'The fact that we're hearing about it in this administration, I think, is catching folks by surprise.' The FHFA responded in an email that it is 'studying how, if the President elects to take Fannie and Freddie public, it can be done in the safest and soundest manner which includes keeping them in conservatorship.' It added: 'In any scenario, we will ensure the [mortgage-backed securities] market is safe and sound and that there is no upward pressure on rates.' White House deputy press secretary Harrison Fields said the administration 'is committed to strengthening the Federal Housing Finance Agency to advance the President's mission of restoring the dream of homeownership for all Americans.' Keeping Fannie and Freddie in conservatorship, according to one shareholder, amounts to attaching 'training wheels' as the government figures out how to monetize its stake. 'I think Pulte has probably confused people more than anything with his message,' said Tim Pagliara, a shareholder and author of the book 'Another Big Lie: How the Government Stole Billions from the American Dream of Home Ownership and Got Caught!' 'So the idea, for example, of allowing these entities to operate in conservatorship is a strategy that they probably talked about with the investment bankers on their primary concern, which is mortgage rates going up,' he added. 'It's like putting training wheels on a bike.' The administration's pronouncements have perplexed housing finance analysts who are unsure of what a scheme to take the companies public while keeping them in conservatorship would look like — or whether there would be sufficient investor appetite to make it worthwhile. JPMorgan strategists wrote in a note that they were 'flummoxed' by the comments. 'It's just hard to imagine why anybody would think there would be strong investor interest in that kind of model, unless the government were to convey they were going to run the [government-sponsored enterprises] in a way that's investor-friendly, and I think we're a long way off from that,' Parrott said. David Dworkin, president and CEO of the National Housing Conference, a stakeholders' group, agreed. 'The most important element of a successful stock sale is a board that is truly independent and has a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders,' he said. 'Under conservatorship, that is actually not even allowed. So, without an independent board with a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders, there is no value to the stock.' Still, he said, 'there are far too many comments coming from major players, including the president of the United States, to avoid the conclusion that major action on conservatorship could be in the very near future.' Another housing finance analyst, granted anonymity to frankly discuss the nascent plans, also expressed skepticism about the idea that investors would bite on purchasing shares in conservatorship, with the federal government still owning the vast majority of the asset. 'The direction of that control can change at the next election,' the analyst said. 'Each administration has already demonstrated they want to use Fannie and Freddie in different ways, so what are you investing in?' For the most part, Republican lawmakers are keeping their powder dry as they wait for additional details about the administration's plans. '[Senate Banking Committee] Chairman [Tim] Scott looks forward to hearing more' from Trump and Pulte on their plans for Fannie and Freddie, spokesperson Ben Watson said. Asked if conservatorship should end, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a member of the Banking subcommittee with oversight of Fannie and Freddie, said, 'I don't know.' 'We're going to wait until the first quarter of 2026 to have that conversation,' said Rep. Mike Flood (R-Neb.), chair of the Financial Services housing subcommittee. 'Releasing them from conservatorship, that's one thing, but most of the folks I talked to still want the federal government on the hook.' The first Trump administration worked to build capital at the companies to prepare them for the end of conservatorship, an effort led by then-Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and former Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Mark Calabria. Calabria has returned for Trump 2.0, now in a position with the White House Office of Management and Budget. Two key Treasury officials — Jonathan McKernan and Luke Pettit — also hail from the school of thought that Fannie and Freddie should be released from conservatorship. 'The Treasury Department has not really engaged on this yet — so it does not appear to me that the administration is very far into the analysis of options phase,' Parrott said. 'Until the Treasury Department really engages in any of this meaningfully, it's hard to know where all this lands.'
