Abbott vetoes Texas THC ban
In a dramatic last-minute move, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) vetoed a total ban on recreational cannabis that had been backed by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R), causing a rare rift between the state's top elected officials.
Abbott signed the veto of Senate Bill 3 on Sunday just one hour before its deadline, calling for a special legislative session in mid-July to address the state's wild-west cannabis market.
The move came one day after Abbott signed House Bill 46, which dramatically expanded the state's medical cannabis program to include a wide range of new conditions, put dispensaries across the state and allow the sale of new products such as vaporizers.
Senate Bill 3, which passed last month after a bitterly contested fight, represented what the Houston Chronicle has called a 'civil war' between medical and recreational cannabis, in which medical — until Sunday — appeared to have won.
In a Sunday statement, Patrick blasted the veto — and Abbott. 'His late-night veto, on an issue supported by 105 of 108 Republicans in the legislature, strongly backed by law enforcement, many in the medical and education communities, and the families who have seen their loved ones' lives destroyed by these very dangerous drugs, leaves them feeling abandoned,' Patrick said.
But in his veto statement, Abbott, while pointing to many of the same issues, argued that while the measure was 'well-intentioned,' it would set back the cause of controlling the state's booming hemp market.
The bill, he wrote, would not survive legal challenge, because the all-Republican 2018 Farm Bill — which legalized hemp and opened the door to the current thriving cannabis grey market cannabis — bans states from restricting the sale of hemp.
'It therefore criminalizes what Congress expressly realized and puts state and federal law on a collision course,' Abbott wrote. He noted that in the case of Arkansas, the only other state that has tried such a ban, a federal judge effectively blocked it.
That, he argued, means that a total ban would, ironically, lead to no control at all.
'If Senate Bill 3 is swiftly enjoined by a court, our children will be no safer than if no law had passed, and the problems will only grow,' Abbott wrote.
The legislature, he wrote, will get a chance to regulate the industry later this summer.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
11 minutes ago
- The Hill
Another GOP senator warns Medicaid cuts could boomerang on Republicans
West Virginia Sen. Jim Justice (R) says he is a 'no' on the amendment proposed by Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) to stop able-bodied adults without dependent children from receiving the 9-to-1 federal Medicaid matching share, a proposal that would reduce federal Medicaid spending by an additional $313 billion on top of what's already in the GOP megabill. Justice said he's worried about political repercussions if Republicans go much further in cutting Medicaid spending — revealing that Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) isn't the only Republican senator worried that Medicaid cuts could boomerang politically on the party. 'We got in a situation where really our hospitals were really worried,' he said. 'A lot of folks here don't know what a rural hospital really is, but I do know. And I know that in West Virginia, if we don't watch out, you could very well lose a bunch of rural hospitals.' 'It just seems like we've taken it as far as I'm comfortable taking it,' he said of Medicaid spending cuts. 'And now we're taking it to another level,' he said of Scott's proposal to bar new enrollees into Medicaid in states that expanded the program from getting the generous 90-percent federal match. 'Here's the thing I'm the most concerned about and that is I am hung up on keeping our majorities,' he said. 'At the end of all this, there is a name or a family, you know. And if you don't watch out, you're going to alienate them, and when you alienate them, we're going to go right back to the minority,' he warned. The Senate will vote on the amendment as part of its vote-a-rama, which is in its 12th hour. Scott has expressed confidence that his amendment will pass, but Justice's decision to vote 'no' strikes a significant blow to its chances of being adopted to President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
San Francisco Chronicle
20 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
California passes major overhaul of CEQA, hoping to kickstart housing production
SACRAMENTO — California lawmakers on Monday passed some of the most significant changes to the state's environmental review law since its inception that supporters say will lessen a major barrier to building housing. Reforming the state's landmark environmental law, the California Environmental Quality Act, has been discussed for years, but has proven to be particularly challenging because the law has staunch supporters among powerful environmental and labor groups. Despite many attempts by the Legislature to speed up housing construction, California home production remains stubbornly slow, something that has dogged Gov. Gavin Newsom. Facing the last two years of his governorship, Newsom threw his weight behind two major CEQA overhaul proposals in the Legislature and made his signature on the budget this year contingent on the passage of some of those provisions. That put immense pressure on Democrats in the Legislature to pass the bills to ensure the state will have a budget in effect on Tuesday when the 2025-26 fiscal year begins. The bills grant broad exemptions to CEQA for homes and other buildings in already developed areas. The lawmakers who crafted the original proposals argue that the law is regularly abused by people trying to block development and that building more in densely populated areas where people live and work is good for the environment. Cities and counties are already required to plan to build housing to meet their population's needs and conduct environmental assessments as part of that work. The legislation passed Monday will exempt housing in already developed areas in compliance with those housing plans from being subject to an additional environmental review. The bills also exempt from CEQA various individual types of projects, including childcare centers in nonresidential areas, farmworker housing, wildfire risk reduction projects, food banks in industrial areas, advanced manufacturing sites and health clinics less than 50,000 square feet. Republicans and Democrats alike raised concerns about the governor's move to push the policies through as part of the budget, arguing that the process was rushed and didn't allow for enough deliberation on controversial provisions of the bills. Initial versions of the bills drew swift backlash, especially from labor unions, last week. Many of labor unions' concerns were assuaged with amendments taken to one of the bills, but opposition from environmental groups has persisted. Many environmental groups opposed one of the bills, SB131, particularly because they said it will not protect habitats for endangered species and allow advanced manufacturing projects to proceed without environmental review. Natalie Brown of the Planning and Conservation League called it 'the worst anti-environmental bill in decades' during a Monday committee hearing. 'We're in a nature crisis, we're seeing unprecedented loss of wildlife, and that's to be made worse with this bill,' said Laura Deehan with the group Environment California. 'We're also very concerned about opening the floodgates for new development that could be really polluting … We also think it was ridiculous to do this type of action behind closed doors in a budget bill.' But supporters of the bills say CEQA needs to be reined in. Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, pointed to lawsuits against a food bank in Alameda and a housing development in San Francisco that were both blocked because people sued under CEQA to preserve parking lots. He said the bills passed Monday will make it 'easier and faster to build new housing.' 'If California is ever going to truly tackle our crisis of affordability, we need to build an abundance of housing, child care centers, transportation, water infrastructure, broadband, and all of the things that make life better and more affordable for people,' Wiener said. The bills passed Monday also contain funding for homeless aid, which Newsom had at first tried to prevent, saying cities and counties had already gotten enough money from the state and needed to start making progress in decreasing their homeless populations. The bill includes half a billion dollars for the state's homeless aid program. Bill Fulton, a planning expert and former Ventura mayor who has advocated for CEQA reform, said that the changes passed Monday are significant but are not a panacea. 'I don't think this alone is going to create a housing boom,' he said. 'I think this, together with other things, will gradually increase the amount of housing approved.'
The Hill
26 minutes ago
- The Hill
GOP leaders looking to expand enhanced Medicaid matching rate to woo Murkowski
Senate Republican leaders are discussing a proposal to expand an enhanced Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) matching rate to five states, including Alaska and Hawaii, to get the parliamentarian to sign off the proposal, which could be critical to locking down Sen. Lisa Murkowski's (R-Alaska) vote. GOP negotiators are floating a plan to expand the enhanced FMAP rate to North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming — in addition to Hawaii and Alaska — and recalculating the formula for higher federal assistance so that it is based on states' population density, according to a Senate source briefed on the discussion. Negotiators hope that by reworking the proposal it can pass muster with Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough. If the proposal is accepted, it could provide as much as an additional $3 billion in Medicaid funds to Alaska. The parliamentarian on Sunday rejected a section of the bill to provide for an enhanced federal matching rate for two states with the highest separate poverty guidelines: Alaska and Hawaii. Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), who has pushed to rework the FMAP formula for his state, says that current FMAP rates aren't fair to Alaska. 'The way in which the FMAP is calculated doesn't make any sense. It's a pure per-capita-income formula. That's it. So if your state has a high per-capita income, you have a very low FMAP, even if you have a super high costs of living, even if you have super duper high costs of health care delivery — which we have the highest in the country — none of that is reflected in the FMAP formulas,' Sullivan told The Hill. 'I've been working this one for 10 years.' The idea of further boosting federal Medicaid payments in some states may not sit well with conservatives such as Sens. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), who are pushing an amendment to find more Medicaid savings. Republican leaders have also presented arguments to the Senate parliamentarian to grant Alaska and Hawaii waivers for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) cost-sharing requirements if they show progress in reducing error rates in delivering food assistance.
