Pennsylvania Lawmakers Unveil Recreational Cannabis Legalization Plan
A bipartisan pair of lawmakers has announced plans to introduce a bill to legalize recreational ... More marijuana in Pennsylvania.
A bipartisan pair of Pennsylvania lawmakers this week unveiled a plan to legalize recreational marijuana, nine years after the Keystone State legalized cannabis for medical use. Democratic Rep. Emily Kinkead and Rep. Abby Major, a Republican, released highlights of the cannabis legalization plan on Monday in a memo seeking cosponsors for an upcoming bill.
'This bipartisan legislation reflects strong support for legalization across the Commonwealth and the input of stakeholders at every level,' the memo reads, online cannabis news source Marijuana Moment reported on Wednesday. 'Please join us in co-sponsoring this important legislation as we work to move cannabis legalization forward in Pennsylvania.'
In the memo, the lawmakers acknowledged Pennsylvania's 'robust' medical cannabis program. They added, however, that 'all but one of our neighboring states have legalized recreational adult-use cannabis.'
Kinkead and Major wrote that one of those neighboring states, Ohio, legalized recreational marijuana for adults via a ballot initiative that voters approved in 2023. After regulated sales of adult-use cannabis began last year, they added, the state collected $15.5 million in taxes on recreational marijuana in the first three months of regulated sales.
'It is well past time for Pennsylvania to move in a similar direction, and our proposed legislation represents a bipartisan path to legalize adult-use cannabis, establishing strong tenets for an adult-use market,' they said. 'And perhaps most importantly, this bill is not just about legalization, it's about setting up a stable, well-regulated market that prioritizes public safety and public health, protects children from exposure, promotes social justice, and fosters economic opportunity.'
The bipartisan pair of legislators offered key features of an upcoming bill, the text of which has not yet been released. The plan includes establishing an independent commission to regulate both recreational and medical cannabis in Pennsylvania. Stated goals of the program include inclusive economic growth, justice reform, consumer protection and support for law enforcement and local governments, among others.
Passing a cannabis legalization bill in Pennsylvania, they wrote, 'would not only boost local economies and create upwards of 30,000 new jobs, but also create a new revenue stream for our state, allowing us to reinvest in essential services like education, healthcare, and infrastructure.'
'Moreover, this bill ends the blanket criminalization of marijuana users, particularly in communities of color that have been disproportionately impacted by cannabis-related arrests, while providing a robust pathway for those individuals and communities to participate in and benefit from the legal market,' the memo continues.
'Legalizing marijuana within this framework allows the industry to be regulated, ensuring that products are tested for safety, purity, and potency,' Major and Kinkead wrote. 'Legalization provides an opportunity to implement public health education, prevent misuse through responsible marketing and regulation, and ensure that marketing efforts are designed to avoid targeting children, with strict age verification measures in place.'
Pennsylvania lawmakers legalized medical cannabis in 2016 with the passage of Senate Bill 3, which was signed into law by then-Gov. Tom Wolf in April of that year. Regulated sales of medical marijuana began in February 2018.
Legalizing recreational marijuana, however, has so far not been supported by the Pennsylvania legislature. Earlier this month, however, Democratic House Speaker Joanna McClinton said that legalizing recreational cannabis could give the state a new stream of tax revenue.
'Most House Democrats support [marijuana legalization], though we will need Republican support for passing a bill this massive,' McClinton said at an event sponsored by the progressive nonprofit group Represent PA. 'It's going to be a heavy lift.'
Late last year, a pair of Democratic lawmakers released their plan to legalize recreational marijuana, saying the state is an 'outlier' in its continued prohibition of cannabis. Pennsylvania state Reps. Rick Krajewski and Dan Frankel, who led several hearings on cannabis reform during the past legislative session, said they plan to introduce legislation to decriminalize cannabis and create a regulated market that focuses on public health, raises revenue for the state and supports those harmed by the criminalization of marijuana.
Also in December, Democratic state Rep. Danilo Burgos announced plans to introduce a bill to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana without legalizing recreational cannabis sales.
Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro has indicated his support for legalizing and regulating cannabis for adults. Last month, he said that Pennsylvania is 'losing out' by keeping recreational marijuana illegal.
'I think it's an issue of freedom and liberty. I mean, if folks want to smoke, they should be able to do so in a safe and legal way,' Shapiro said. 'We should shut down the black market—and, by the way, every state around us is doing it. Pennsylvanians are driving to those other states and paying taxes in those other states.'
If Pennsylvania legalizes recreational marijuana, it will join the 24 states that have legalized cannabis for adults.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's new approach to Russia's war in Ukraine might be his worst yet
Donald Trump and his team have spent a fair amount of time recently trying to convince the public that the president's policy toward Russia's war in Ukraine is having a positive impact. In mid-March, for example, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt boasted, 'I can say we are on the 10th yard line of peace, and we've never been closer to a peace deal than we are in this moment.' Two months later, Trump participated in a two-hour phone meeting with Vladimir Putin, and the Republican touted the discussion as a possible breakthrough. 'The tone and spirit of the conversation were excellent,' the American president declared, adding that his chat would 'immediately' lead to new diplomatic negotiations. Soon after, Kyiv came under a large-scale Russian drone and missile attack, described by Ukrainian officials as the largest aerial assault on the country since the war began. It was soon followed by Ukraine's surprise drone attack that proved disastrous for Russia, and that jolted global perceptions. This in turn led Russia to launch one of the largest barrages of missiles and drones of the war at targets across Ukraine. This does not look like 'the 10th yard line of peace.' It was against this backdrop that Trump has apparently come up with a new metaphor. The New York Times reported: As Germany's chancellor, Friedrich Merz, sat beside him watching in silence, President Trump compared Russia and Ukraine to two fighting children who needed to work out their differences for a while before anyone could intervene. 'Sometimes you see two young children fighting like crazy,' Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. 'They hate each other, and they're fighting in a park, and you try and pull them apart. They don't want to be pulled. Sometimes you're better off letting them fight for a while and then pulling them apart.' 'And I gave that analogy to Putin yesterday,' the Republican added. 'I said, 'President, maybe you have to keep fighting and suffering a lot, because both sides are suffering, before you pull them apart, before they're able to be pulled apart.'' So, a few things. First, comparing this conflict to a dispute among children on a playground is unhelpful, and Trump complaining about anyone engaging in juvenile behavior is unwise, given everything we know about his temperament and frequent tantrums. Second, the idea that the White House is prepared to let Russia and Ukraine 'fight for a while' overlooks the inconvenient fact that they've already been fighting for a while. Indeed, Russia invaded Ukraine back in February 2022 — more than three years ago — which Trump described at the time as 'genius' and part of a 'wonderful' strategy. But let's also not lose sight of the evolution of the American president's thinking. Trump's Plan A for the war in Ukraine was ending the conflict within 24 hours by way of a secret strategy he assured voters was real. When it became obvious that this strategy didn't actually exist, Trump moved on to Plan B: He told Russia that if it failed to end the conflict quickly, the White House 'would have no other choice' but to impose new economic sanctions. When Putin ignored those threats and Trump failed to follow through, the American president floated Plan C (international economic penalties designed to force a ceasefire), Plan D (Trump-backed bilateral talks between Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy) and Plan E (bilateral talks between Trump and Putin). Plan F — White House passivity — is now increasingly coming into focus. Trump's latest plan to end the conflict is apparently to stop trying to end the conflict. This post updates our related earlier coverage. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘MAGA Will Not Sell Out to Ketamine': In the Trump-Musk Breakup, the MAGA Faithful Is Sticking With Trump
People had a lot of worries at Butterworth's on Thursday night. In the hours after the near-apocalyptic online showdown between Elon Musk and Donald Trump, a palpable angst permeated the fashionable MAGA bistro on Capitol Hill. As the Velvet Underground crooned 'Oh! Sweet Nuthin'' over the sound system, patrons let loose with their anxieties: Was the gas station erectile dysfunction drug 'Rhino Dick' safe? Would the guy from The Heritage Foundation ever stop stealing their beef tallow-soaked french fries? These were the pressing concerns for this far-right crowd. But Elon Musk's online attacks on Donald Trump? Those were mere trifles at the Trumpist haunt where lamb tartare, not cheeseburgers, is on the menu. In the hours after the Musk-Trump feud blew up online, with the tech billionaire bashing the Republican spending bill, suggesting Trump should be impeached and tying him to notorious sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, those criticisms barely registered. As the denizens of Butterworth saw things, the kerfuffle was simply the temper tantrum of a disgruntled administration official who'd run afoul of a popular president. And Trump's counter attacks dismissing the world's richest man as 'going CRAZY'? Now that was gospel. At a night in which MAGA personalities congregated to greet the British Ambassador, Lord Mandelson for the unveiling of a plaque in his honor at the restaurant, the spat was little more than a sideshow. Still, the men and women bumping up to the bar all had their opinions. Raheem Kassam, the longtime ally of Nigel Farage, who is a part owner of the restaurant, waved off Musk's Twitter spree as the rantings of a mega donor disappointed that he could not bend the Republican Party to his will. 'The Tea Party sold out to Koch,' said Kassam. 'MAGA will not sell out to ketamine,' in a reference to first, the billionaire Koch brothers and second, Musk's admitted use of the anesthetic. Matt Boyle, the Washington bureau chief for Breitbart and longtime conservative media powerhouse, opined biblically, 'Pride cometh, before the fall. Elon Musk got too big for his britches. This was destined to happen. It's better now than later. President Trump is going to win, as he always does.' One key theme last night: For all his wealth, Elon Musk has never run for office. Donald Trump was on the ballot, not the billionaire. As conservative influencer C.J. Pearson noted, 'The reason I'm in this movement is because of President Trump. And the person that was on the ballot was President Trump. The American people voted overwhelmingly for him — not for Elon Musk.' Pearson added of those defending the tech mogul, 'I think it's unfortunate to see people who are so desperate for validation from someone like Elon Musk, they're betraying the very person who made them who they are.' As one Trump administration appointee, who asked not to be identified because they were there for drinks, not work, put it starkly, 'This is Elon's insurrection. He's disloyal.' Not everyone there was willing to go quite that far. Mandelson, the evening's honoree, had witnessed titanic personality clashes across the pond, notably, the decades-long drama between Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. He dismissed the Trump-Musk drama as 'a small earthquake.' He added as a careful diplomatic caveat, 'I don't really follow it because I'm not on social media. So I have no idea what they're saying to each other.' Natalie Winters, the hard right media personality on Steve Bannon's War Room, coyly responded 'I'll let the men handle that one.' Another administration appointee, who asked not to be identified so they could speak freely, noted that Musk represented a different libertarian element on the right than the more populist aspects of Trump's party. Both, the appointee said, have a place in the GOP. 'It was a very valid conversation.' However, the appointee noted that Trump had not run his campaign on what the billionaire wanted. Musk, they said, would have few defenders. 'People want careers in politics and when they see the writing on the wall,' the appointee said, 'they see the writing on the wall.' Outside the Capitol Hill restaurant, Musk did not find a sympathetic audience from other members of the right, either. After former top White House aide Steve Bannon suggested that the South African born billionaire should be deported, one administration official, who asked not to be identified so they could speak frankly, told POLITICO Magazine, 'Elon should be careful. Trump could easily drug test him based on erratic behavior and nationalize SpaceX.' Other Beltway Republicans merely groaned at the additional work that this online drama created. "A lot of staffers are having to explain what Ketamine is to their bosses this week," one said. But inside Butterworth's on Thursday, all of that was irrelevant. For the blazer-and-slacks crowd at the bar, all that really mattered was that the Guinness taps were flowing for a steady pour and a solid drink.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Federal judge approves Colorado law banning people under 21 from buying a gun
A federal judge upheld Colorado's restriction on firearms sales requiring buyers to be 21 or older after Rocky Mountain Gun Owners and two people looking to purchase firearms sued Democratic Gov. Jared Polis. Chief U.S. District Judge Philip A. Brimmer agreed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit's decision that age-based requirements for purchase do not fall under the Second Amendment's right to keep and bear arms. The 10th Circuit and Brimmer agree that the issue falls under a "safe harbor" exclusion, placing it outside the scope of the Constitution. The only exceptions to Colorado's firearm purchase age restriction are for those in the U.S. Military and for peace officers. In both cases, the person must be making the purchase while on duty and is "serving in conformance with the policies" of their respective agency. Supreme Court Declines To Examine Appeals Over Maryland, Rhode Island Gun Control Laws "Governor Polis is committed to making Colorado one of the ten safest states, and common-sense laws encourage responsible gun ownership and keep people safe. For decades in Colorado, you had to be 21 to purchase a handgun, per federal law. The requirement to be 21 was expanded to rifles and shotguns with the signing of SB23-169, and Governor Polis is glad to see the court affirm that Colorado's common sense law does not infringe on Second Amendment rights. Governor Polis is confident this law has and will help keep Coloradans and our communities safe," Polis' Communications Director Conor Cahill said in a statement to Fox News Digital. Brimmer acknowledged that Adrian Pineda and Matthew Newkirk — the two individuals under 21 who sued Polis together with Rocky Mountain Gun Owners — are part of "the people" as written in the Second Amendment. However, he referred to the 10th Circuit's decision, saying it had resolved the case back in 2023, according to Courthouse News Service (CNS). Read On The Fox News App Debate Over Whether To Ban Handgun Sales To Teens Could Soon Head To The Supreme Court The decision in Colorado comes in contrast to one issued by the Supreme Court in 2022 in which justices determined that New York issued unconstitutional requirements for carrying a concealed weapon in public. Then-President Joe Biden said he was "deeply disappointed" by the ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. He said that SCOTUS had "chosen to strike down New York's long-established authority to protect its citizens." "This ruling contradicts both common sense and the Constitution, and should deeply trouble us all," Biden said in a statement at the time. He went on to reaffirm his commitment to reducing gun violence and making communities safer. Brimmer is also going against a decision made by the New Orleans-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, which struck down a federal restriction banning the sale of firearms to anyone below the age of 21. That court held that those aged 18 to 20 are protected under the Second Amendment, according to The Trace, an organization of journalists who report on gun violence in the U.S. "The federal government has presented scant evidence that eighteen-to-twenty-year-olds' firearm rights during the founding-era were restricted in a similar manner to the contemporary federal handgun purchase ban," Judge Edith H. Jones wrote in the opinion. Several states, including New York, Massachusetts, California, Florida, Illinois, Delaware and Vermont have raised the age for purchasing firearms, according to the Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund. While some states have limited the age restrictions to handgun purchases, others have applied the restriction to any kind of article source: Federal judge approves Colorado law banning people under 21 from buying a gun
