Rely on other states’ experience to craft workable marijuana laws
Few questions before Virginia lawmakers are more high profile than those surrounding how to regulate the sale of marijuana to those ages 21 and older. Fortunately, legislators can look to the real-world experiences of other states to inform and guide their decisions.
Most of America enjoys realworld experience with regulating cannabis. Thirty-six states, including Virginia, have legalized it for therapeutic purposes. Similarly, 18 states have also moved to regulate the adultuse market. Public support for these policies is at record highs, with some two-thirds of Americans — including majorities of Democrats, independents and Republicans — supporting them. That is because these laws are operating largely as voters and politicians intended and because the public prefers legalization to criminal prohibition.
Given this reality, lawmakers ought to heed the recommendation of the state’s Cannabis Oversight Commission and take appropriate steps to expedite the launch of cannabis sales ahead of the Jan. 1, 2024, timeline. It is unrealistic and counterproductive for legislators to leave Virginians — tens of thousands of whom are already buying and selling marijuana now — in limbo with little choice but to continue to obtain cannabis from unaccountable players who participate in the illicit, unregulated market.
The underground cannabis market is fraught with potential problems. Sellers have no incentive to check IDs to verify that consumers are of legal age. Consumers have no assurances concerning either the purity or potency of the products they purchase. Disputes that arise among buyers and sellers cannot be adjudicated in a court of law. Accordingly, lawmakers’ chief priority ought to be to disrupt this underground market as quickly and as efficiently as possible. Permitting this market to prosper and grow for two more years will only make it more difficult to accomplish this goal.
Furthermore, making it easier — not harder — for localities to impose municipal bans on retail sales is similarly counterproductive. Simply put, local moratoriums banning the establishment of licensed cannabis retailers do nothing to limit residents’ access to cannabis; they only limit their access to legal cannabis. In states such as California, where the majority of cities prohibit the operation of licensed cannabis businesses, illicit markets continue to flourish.
Solutions to these issues can be gleaned from other states’ experiences. For instance, several jurisdictions successfully expedited their transitions to a legal marketplace by allowing licensed medical cannabis retailers the ability to apply for dual licensure. These licensed proprietors have brickand-mortar infrastructure and they have already proven their ability to engage in marijuana dispensing in a safe and transparent manner.
That said, regulations should not be written in such a way that they unduly restrict the ability of others to eventually participate in the adult-use market. Rather, lawmakers and regulators should ultimately strive for an inclusive industry consisting of a sufficient number of licensed entities to adequately meet consumers’ demand and to keep prices affordable. Ideally, regulatory fees and other barriers to entry ought to be minimized to encourage industry participation from those of diverse backgrounds, including those who have historically been disproportionately impacted by marijuana prohibition. Specifically, those tens of thousands of Virginians who are among the millions of Americans with past marijuana violations on their records should not be barred from participation in the industry.
Finally, excise taxes on cannabis products should be kept low enough so that retail prices can be kept competitive with those in the unregulated market. The imposition of potency caps should also be discouraged so as to not drive producers and consumers of higher potency products to the illicit marketplace.
In short, enacting policies that will help to foster the rapid maturity of the commonwealth’s adult-use market will most effectively disrupt illicit supply chains, address existing consumers’ demands, and provide for an inclusive industry consisting of stakeholders and other Virginians who are committed to making this marketplace safe, transparent, and profitable for their communities.