I’m gonna be honest, they really should have announced this 10 days ago. Maybe that was the plan and it got caught up in some bureaucracy? As someone in a state where it’s already fully legal this...
I’m gonna be honest, they really should have announced this 10 days ago. Maybe that was the plan and it got caught up in some bureaucracy?
As someone in a state where it’s already fully legal this news doesn’t have much of an impact. But it’s interesting to see how things have changed nationwide in the last 15 years.
I’m not sure it’ll be that much less. Banks are still going to loathe to take weed shop money. Moving to schedule III only means that medical marijuana is legal, and that’s only if the shop...
I’m not sure it’ll be that much less. Banks are still going to loathe to take weed shop money. Moving to schedule III only means that medical marijuana is legal, and that’s only if the shop actually acquires a license from the DEA - all medical marijuana sales now would still be illegal.
Let’s be honest, a majority of a dispensaries sales are not medical, not even close.
You'd be surprised. For $200 and just about any fairly common ailment you can get a doctor-issued card that takes about $5/g off the price. That adds up for even a light user. But also, putting it...
Let’s be honest, a majority of a dispensaries sales are not medical, not even close.
You'd be surprised. For $200 and just about any fairly common ailment you can get a doctor-issued card that takes about $5/g off the price. That adds up for even a light user.
But also, putting it in schedule III puts it alongside suboxone, rather than methadone (Schedule II), or Heroin.
That’s because of an Internal Revenue Services rule prevents businesses that “traffick” in Schedule I or II substances from deducting regular businesses expenses from their federal taxes. If marijuana moves to Schedule III, those businesses would be able to deduct expenses on federal taxes.
That doesn’t really change things. It’s not about 5% medical sales vs 20% vs 50%. If even 1% of your sales are illegal recreational cannabis your entire revenue stream is dirty and no back will...
That doesn’t really change things. It’s not about 5% medical sales vs 20% vs 50%. If even 1% of your sales are illegal recreational cannabis your entire revenue stream is dirty and no back will touch it with a 10 ft pole.
See an edit i made with more detail a moment ago. Schedule III is a lot less dirty than Schedule I. And some banks have been known to engage in far riskier behavior. Especially in states like PA...
See an edit i made with more detail a moment ago.
Schedule III is a lot less dirty than Schedule I. And some banks have been known to engage in far riskier behavior.
Especially in states like PA where there is only medical. That puts them on par with other drug companies in terms of risk.
And I’m concerned that the FDA is going to want to get involved too. I’m afraid that schedule III is going to make access harder for those who need it, not easier. They should treat it like...
And I’m concerned that the FDA is going to want to get involved too. I’m afraid that schedule III is going to make access harder for those who need it, not easier. They should treat it like alcohol, which causes more harm to both users and those around them.
I'm all for FDA rules. NJ mandates testing and labelling, and I can tell at a glance if a given strain is going to give me trouble or help. It'd be nice to have a consistent standard. That said, I...
I'm all for FDA rules. NJ mandates testing and labelling, and I can tell at a glance if a given strain is going to give me trouble or help. It'd be nice to have a consistent standard.
That said, I agree that for recreational use, it should be treated like alcohol and not pharma. Though then your talking purvue of ATF, and that's not better.
Yep. Going to be interesting because right now there's a lot of overhead as they, mostly, have to use either crypto (stables i'd assume) or physical vaults (that they secure). Being able to just...
Yep. Going to be interesting because right now there's a lot of overhead as they, mostly, have to use either crypto (stables i'd assume) or physical vaults (that they secure).
Being able to just integrate with the banking system is going to cut out so many frictions points. Prices might go down.
Hopefully this will lead to federal legalization, since some federal docs will still ask if you're a marijuana user as a disqualifier, and I believe lying on them is a criminal offense, if not a...
Hopefully this will lead to federal legalization, since some federal docs will still ask if you're a marijuana user as a disqualifier, and I believe lying on them is a criminal offense, if not a felony itself.
I hope so, but it'll probably be awhile since only Congress can remove marijuana from the schedule. I recently went through a federal background investigation. I admitted past usage, and they were...
I hope so, but it'll probably be awhile since only Congress can remove marijuana from the schedule.
I recently went through a federal background investigation. I admitted past usage, and they were fine with that, but it's still annoying that weed could get me fired and my clearance pulled if I did want to partake, even if it were for medical purposes. Weed is medically and recreationally legal in my state, but I can't have it. It's NBD, I'm not jonesing for it as it been like 3-4yrs since last consumption, but it's still annoying.
I don't know how much, but this is actually effecting the security of the country. Many technical security professionals (hackers) are unwilling to get a clearance because they either want or need...
I don't know how much, but this is actually effecting the security of the country. Many technical security professionals (hackers) are unwilling to get a clearance because they either want or need to use pot.
I doubt there will be a rush if it's changed, but it will make a viable option where it wasn't before for some people.
Hypothetically, if I held a clearance, and I followed the general best practices that are drilled into you when you get one and work in a place that uses them, I probably wouldn't go saying so on...
Hypothetically, if I held a clearance, and I followed the general best practices that are drilled into you when you get one and work in a place that uses them, I probably wouldn't go saying so on the internet.
Touché. I do limit my discussions on clearance-related topics to a small number of places, including here. I find that it can be illuminating for others having someone who has one explain the...
Touché. I do limit my discussions on clearance-related topics to a small number of places, including here. I find that it can be illuminating for others having someone who has one explain the process and the philosophy of classification.
Well, I have my clearance, but I'm not yet using it! I think I'm waiting on some kind of reciprocity thing. Like my clearance has to transfer to the dept/agency I'll be working for. And it's...
Well, I have my clearance, but I'm not yet using it! I think I'm waiting on some kind of reciprocity thing. Like my clearance has to transfer to the dept/agency I'll be working for. And it's taking forever. I got offered the job in June and did all the clearance stuff in the fall. First time working for the government. And already I'm seeing government inaction. Sorry, I meant government in action, haha.
About time. I have always felt one of the most damming indictments of the dems sincere effort towards policies has been weed. Sure go ahead and campaign on "i only inhaled, wink wink nudge nudge...
About time. I have always felt one of the most damming indictments of the dems sincere effort towards policies has been weed.
Sure go ahead and campaign on "i only inhaled, wink wink nudge nudge aren't i just one of you", and then always magically find excuses to not actually change the OBSCENE over classification of the drug and the horrible effects that's had on our legal/prison system.
Frankly I'm happy to see this happening now as I would've gladly bet money it wouldn't happen until biden was re-elected given how often they've held this hostage as a "you better vote for us" issue.
What perhaps annoys me the most out of all of this is that even after federal legalization employers will likely still have the right to discriminate based on drugs tests. Because of this, we...
What perhaps annoys me the most out of all of this is that even after federal legalization employers will likely still have the right to discriminate based on drugs tests. Because of this, we might see an increase in drug testing as a result of legalization.
There are definitely situations where I support testing (heavy machinery, surgeons, etc.) but I would love to see legal protections limiting the scope of testing to active metabolites instead of any cannabinoid.
While we're at it, what annoys me the second most is that it seems like black market weed is maintaining an advantage to legal weed in several states. In places like Chicago, the price difference is so extreme that it's much more economical to buy from the black market or even drive to Michigan to buy in bulk. At this point, these poorly implemented state level measures are what we'll be stuck with even if it's legalized federally.
They really need to determine another way to test. Some type of motor skills test would probably be best (assuming the individual does not have a disability that would interfere with).
They really need to determine another way to test. Some type of motor skills test would probably be best (assuming the individual does not have a disability that would interfere with).
Yeah it’s an endless pile of bs that they can just drug test someone whenever something goes wrong and then just hope they fail a drug test because they had weed 20 hours ago
Yeah it’s an endless pile of bs that they can just drug test someone whenever something goes wrong and then just hope they fail a drug test because they had weed 20 hours ago
on one hand: yay. this is good. on the other hand: from Biden campaign's website in 2020, emphasis added: (as far as I know, this campaign promise was only ever mentioned on the "Biden's plan for...
Biden will work with Congress to reform federal sentencing and provide incentives to state and local systems to do the same. He will end, once and for all, the federal crack and powder cocaine disparity, decriminalize the use of cannabis and automatically expunge all prior cannabis use convictions, and end all incarceration for drug use alone and instead divert individuals to drug courts and treatment. He will work to eliminate mandatory minimums and the death penalty.
(as far as I know, this campaign promise was only ever mentioned on the "Biden's plan for Black America" page...)
First, I am announcing a pardon of all prior Federal offenses of simple possession of marijuana.
...
Second, I am urging all Governors to do the same with regard to state offenses.
...
Third, I am asking the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Attorney General to initiate the administrative process to review expeditiously how marijuana is scheduled under federal law. Federal law currently classifies marijuana in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, the classification meant for the most dangerous substances. This is the same schedule as for heroin and LSD, and even higher than the classification of fentanyl and methamphetamine – the drugs that are driving our overdose epidemic.
As far as bold acts of mass clemency go, it won’t lead to many people getting out of prison. In fact, it will lead to none. According to the White House and a report this week from the U.S. Sentencing Commission (USSC) there is no one currently in federal custody for simple possession of marijuana.
Last month, Bloomberg reported that it had obtained a letter from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recommending that the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) reclassify cannabis from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) to Schedule III. The report includes confirmation from a DEA spokesperson that the letter with the recommendation was received, but as of the writing of this article, the letter has not been made public.
The letter comes some 10 months after President Biden called on the Secretary of HHS and the Attorney General to "expeditiously" review the scheduling of cannabis under federal law and, if adopted, would represent the biggest change in federal cannabis policy in 40 years.
a full, complete, and unconditional pardon to all current United States citizens and lawful permanent residents who, on or before the date of this proclamation, committed or were convicted of the offense of simple possession of marijuana, attempted simple possession of marijuana, or use of marijuana
the original pardon only covered simple possession, this expanded it to include "attempted simple possession" as well as "use of marijuana". that seemed to me like a pretty simple change, I don't know why they didn't just include it in the original. but congrats to the half-dozen people or whatever who had been convicted of federal charges for attempting to buy marijuana.
and apparently the criticism of the first pardon made an impact, because along with this second pardon, he also granted clemency to...11 people. though none of the reporting I saw mentioned if those 11 people were in jail for marijuana-related charges, or for other drug charges (such as the infamous crack vs. powder cocaine disparity) and the announcements were just made at the same time.
anyways, now you're caught up on the history. it's been a long road, but finally Biden is fulfilling his campaign promise from 4 years ago, and doing something which 8 months ago a leaked memo said his administration was ready to do.
well...not exactly. from today's article:
The proposal, which still must be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget...
...
Once OMB signs off, the DEA will take public comment on the plan to move marijuana from its current classification as a Schedule I drug, alongside heroin and LSD. It moves pot to Schedule III, alongside ketamine and some anabolic steroids, following a recommendation from the federal Health and Human Services Department. After the public comment period and a review by an administrative judge, the agency would eventually publish the final rule.
the comment period is most likely to be 60 days. add on the OMB review and administrative law judge review, this seems like it'll probably take 3-4 months before it actually goes into effect.
I'm sort of doubtful this rule will have any meaningful effect at all. marijuana will be in the same schedule as ketamine...if you think schedule III is the same as legalization, go try getting a small business loan to open up a recreational ketamine dispensary.
but to the extent that it does have an impact, it'll probably be smack in the middle of election season. which, maybe I'm too cynical, but that seems fairly likely to be deliberate:
The election year announcement could help Biden, a Democrat, boost flagging support, particularly among younger voters.
it's hard not to view this announcement in the context of Israel's genocide in Gaza, Biden's support for it, and the backlash that's caused especially among younger voters. there's a wave of protests across universities happening right now. Biden's disapproval rating is at 69% among 18-29 year olds.
back to today's article:
A Gallup poll last fall found 70% of adults support legalization, the highest level yet recorded by the polling firm and more than double the roughly 30% who backed it in 2000.
from that poll, the question they asked was a simple "Do you think the use of marijuana should be legal, or not?" - they're not asking "do you think marijuana should be moved from Schedule I to Schedule III", they're asking about actual legalization.
As of today, support for legal marijuana use is highest among self-identified liberals (91%) and Democrats (87%) and lowest among conservatives (52%) and Republicans (55%). Support is inversely correlated with age, reaching 79% among 18- to 34-year-olds. However, even among the oldest age group, nearly two-thirds (64%) are in favor.
I think it's important to reflect on just how incredibly low the bar is. 70% of Americans and 87% of Democrats support legalization. Biden campaigned in 2020 on decriminalization (there are important differences between legalization and decriminalization, but I think they're mostly irrelevant for the purposes of campaign promises & opinion polls)
4 years later, he is not delivering on that campaign promise of decriminalization, but instead on a lesser achievement of moving marijuana to a lower tier of controlled substance.
so Biden is doing something that is definitely a step in the right direction...but falling short of doing what he campaigned on and that 70% of all Americans support. and that...is supposedly going to boost his popularity among disaffected young people?
Legalization (or even decriminalization) can only be done with an act of Congress. Rescheduling can be done within the Executive Branch. As for timeframe, I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if he...
Legalization (or even decriminalization) can only be done with an act of Congress. Rescheduling can be done within the Executive Branch. As for timeframe, I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if he made sure when he started it that it would go into effect during election season, but I also believe his administration wants to cross its Ts and dot its Is to make prevent/minimize any challenges to the rescheduling.
you say this in a sort of authoritative tone, like it's a fact. but it's not. it's an opinion. it's never been actually tested in court, this is entirely based on memos from the White House Office...
Legalization (or even decriminalization) can only be done with an act of Congress. Rescheduling can be done within the Executive Branch.
you say this in a sort of authoritative tone, like it's a fact. but it's not. it's an opinion. it's never been actually tested in court, this is entirely based on memos from the White House Office of Legal Counsel and other lawyers about what they think the President can do that a court wouldn't issue an injunction against.
but for the moment, let's say it was true, that Biden can only reschedule marijuana, he can't deschedule it entirely.
if he actually wanted to decriminalize it, but his hands were tied because of Congress, wouldn't it make sense to schedule it into the lowest category available?
this is an example of one of my perennial problems with Democrats, especially at the national level - the pre-compromise. people are very broadly supportive of legalization/decriminalization. in the poll I linked above, it's supported by 87% of Democrats, 70% of everyone, and 55% of Republicans. this is the rare issue that energizes your base, converts "swing" voters, and drives a wedge into your opposition, all at the same time.
if Biden proposed moving marijuana into Schedule V, he'd definitely get pushback from Republicans. from Schedule I to Schedule V is way too big a jump, they'd say. so Biden pre-compromises and they propose Schedule III.
(I don't know what sort of nukeman you are...but in the cold war this strategy was referred to dismissively as "unilateral disarmament")
but anyways, that's a tangent, let's focus on the real point, which is that obviously Biden can't decriminalize marijuana himself (even though he listed it as a campaign promise). only Congress can do that, and when Biden said on his campaign website that he would do something, he just assumed everyone understood he meant he would pressure Congress to do it, and then Congress wouldn't do it because everyone knows Congress is completely dysfunctional.
(now is a good time for a reminder that if young people are dissatisfied with the political system in the US and think their vote doesn't matter, it is their fault for not understanding all the nuances of it, rather than the fault of the people who constructed the system for constructing a ridiculously broken and anti-democratic system)
as the article says, there is legislation in Congress that would go even further than Biden's executive action, and remove marijuana from the list of controlled substances entirely. emphasis added:
“While this rescheduling announcement is a historic step forward, I remain strongly committed to continuing to work on legislation like the SAFER Banking Act as well as the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act, which federally deschedules cannabis by removing it from the Controlled Substances Act,” Senate Majority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York said in a statement. “Congress must do everything we can to end the federal prohibition on cannabis and address longstanding harms caused by the War on Drugs.”
Sponsor: Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ] (Introduced 07/21/2022)
Committees: Senate - Finance
Latest Action: Senate - 07/21/2022 Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
so...it was introduced almost 2 years ago, they read it, referred it to a committee the same day, and it's sat there ever since? huh. that's interesting.
it was referred to the Senate Finance Committee, which is...chaired by a Democrat. and Democrats hold a majority of the seats in the committee.
again with the incredibly low bar - Democrats control the Senate, Presidency, and at the time this bill was introduced, the House. there's a bill that will do something that 87% of Democrats support. and they won't even vote it out of committee??? like, WTF is wrong with these dumbasses? a model UN delegation could out-maneuver them.
of course, if they passed it out of committee, it would just get filibustered on the Senate floor, right? OK, good. give me a news cycle that is "Democrats are trying to legalize weed, and Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to stop it". get Republicans on the record about their opposition to it. force them to give speeches on C-SPAN about the dangers of the devil's lettuce.
I’m gonna be honest, they really should have announced this 10 days ago. Maybe that was the plan and it got caught up in some bureaucracy?
As someone in a state where it’s already fully legal this news doesn’t have much of an impact. But it’s interesting to see how things have changed nationwide in the last 15 years.
One word: Banking.
Your local pot shop will have a lot less trouble interacting with regular banks now.
I’m not sure it’ll be that much less. Banks are still going to loathe to take weed shop money. Moving to schedule III only means that medical marijuana is legal, and that’s only if the shop actually acquires a license from the DEA - all medical marijuana sales now would still be illegal.
Let’s be honest, a majority of a dispensaries sales are not medical, not even close.
You'd be surprised. For $200 and just about any fairly common ailment you can get a doctor-issued card that takes about $5/g off the price. That adds up for even a light user.
But also, putting it in schedule III puts it alongside suboxone, rather than methadone (Schedule II), or Heroin.
Also, there's potential tax savings at play:
That doesn’t really change things. It’s not about 5% medical sales vs 20% vs 50%. If even 1% of your sales are illegal recreational cannabis your entire revenue stream is dirty and no back will touch it with a 10 ft pole.
See an edit i made with more detail a moment ago.
Schedule III is a lot less dirty than Schedule I. And some banks have been known to engage in far riskier behavior.
Especially in states like PA where there is only medical. That puts them on par with other drug companies in terms of risk.
And I’m concerned that the FDA is going to want to get involved too. I’m afraid that schedule III is going to make access harder for those who need it, not easier. They should treat it like alcohol, which causes more harm to both users and those around them.
I'm all for FDA rules. NJ mandates testing and labelling, and I can tell at a glance if a given strain is going to give me trouble or help. It'd be nice to have a consistent standard.
That said, I agree that for recreational use, it should be treated like alcohol and not pharma. Though then your talking purvue of ATF, and that's not better.
Yep. Going to be interesting because right now there's a lot of overhead as they, mostly, have to use either crypto (stables i'd assume) or physical vaults (that they secure).
Being able to just integrate with the banking system is going to cut out so many frictions points. Prices might go down.
Hopefully this will lead to federal legalization, since some federal docs will still ask if you're a marijuana user as a disqualifier, and I believe lying on them is a criminal offense, if not a felony itself.
I hope so, but it'll probably be awhile since only Congress can remove marijuana from the schedule.
I recently went through a federal background investigation. I admitted past usage, and they were fine with that, but it's still annoying that weed could get me fired and my clearance pulled if I did want to partake, even if it were for medical purposes. Weed is medically and recreationally legal in my state, but I can't have it. It's NBD, I'm not jonesing for it as it been like 3-4yrs since last consumption, but it's still annoying.
I don't know how much, but this is actually effecting the security of the country. Many technical security professionals (hackers) are unwilling to get a clearance because they either want or need to use pot.
I doubt there will be a rush if it's changed, but it will make a viable option where it wasn't before for some people.
Aside: I didn’t realize there was another active clearance-holder here. I thought I was the only one!
Hypothetically, if I held a clearance, and I followed the general best practices that are drilled into you when you get one and work in a place that uses them, I probably wouldn't go saying so on the internet.
Hypothetically.
Touché. I do limit my discussions on clearance-related topics to a small number of places, including here. I find that it can be illuminating for others having someone who has one explain the process and the philosophy of classification.
Perhaps some people just aren't as open about it...
Well, I have my clearance, but I'm not yet using it! I think I'm waiting on some kind of reciprocity thing. Like my clearance has to transfer to the dept/agency I'll be working for. And it's taking forever. I got offered the job in June and did all the clearance stuff in the fall. First time working for the government. And already I'm seeing government inaction. Sorry, I meant government in action, haha.
Great! LSD should be moved too but the politicians aren't ready for it.
About time. I have always felt one of the most damming indictments of the dems sincere effort towards policies has been weed.
Sure go ahead and campaign on "i only inhaled, wink wink nudge nudge aren't i just one of you", and then always magically find excuses to not actually change the OBSCENE over classification of the drug and the horrible effects that's had on our legal/prison system.
Frankly I'm happy to see this happening now as I would've gladly bet money it wouldn't happen until biden was re-elected given how often they've held this hostage as a "you better vote for us" issue.
What perhaps annoys me the most out of all of this is that even after federal legalization employers will likely still have the right to discriminate based on drugs tests. Because of this, we might see an increase in drug testing as a result of legalization.
There are definitely situations where I support testing (heavy machinery, surgeons, etc.) but I would love to see legal protections limiting the scope of testing to active metabolites instead of any cannabinoid.
While we're at it, what annoys me the second most is that it seems like black market weed is maintaining an advantage to legal weed in several states. In places like Chicago, the price difference is so extreme that it's much more economical to buy from the black market or even drive to Michigan to buy in bulk. At this point, these poorly implemented state level measures are what we'll be stuck with even if it's legalized federally.
They really need to determine another way to test. Some type of motor skills test would probably be best (assuming the individual does not have a disability that would interfere with).
Yeah it’s an endless pile of bs that they can just drug test someone whenever something goes wrong and then just hope they fail a drug test because they had weed 20 hours ago
Or 20 days ago
on one hand: yay. this is good.
on the other hand:
from Biden campaign's website in 2020, emphasis added:
(as far as I know, this campaign promise was only ever mentioned on the "Biden's plan for Black America" page...)
in October 2022 (in what I'm sure was a complete coincidence, one month before the midterms): Statement from President Biden on Marijuana Reform
as reported at the time, the pardon was an extremely symbolic act, because the number of people who get federal charges for simple possession of marijuana is essentially zero: Don’t Expect Mass Prison Releases From Biden’s Marijuana Clemency
almost a year later, September 2023: What rescheduling to Schedule III would mean for the cannabis industry
a few months later, December 2023: A Proclamation on Granting Pardon for the Offense of Simple Possession of Marijuana, Attempted Simple Possession of Marijuana, or Use of Marijuana
the original pardon only covered simple possession, this expanded it to include "attempted simple possession" as well as "use of marijuana". that seemed to me like a pretty simple change, I don't know why they didn't just include it in the original. but congrats to the half-dozen people or whatever who had been convicted of federal charges for attempting to buy marijuana.
and apparently the criticism of the first pardon made an impact, because along with this second pardon, he also granted clemency to...11 people. though none of the reporting I saw mentioned if those 11 people were in jail for marijuana-related charges, or for other drug charges (such as the infamous crack vs. powder cocaine disparity) and the announcements were just made at the same time.
anyways, now you're caught up on the history. it's been a long road, but finally Biden is fulfilling his campaign promise from 4 years ago, and doing something which 8 months ago a leaked memo said his administration was ready to do.
well...not exactly. from today's article:
the comment period is most likely to be 60 days. add on the OMB review and administrative law judge review, this seems like it'll probably take 3-4 months before it actually goes into effect.
I'm sort of doubtful this rule will have any meaningful effect at all. marijuana will be in the same schedule as ketamine...if you think schedule III is the same as legalization, go try getting a small business loan to open up a recreational ketamine dispensary.
but to the extent that it does have an impact, it'll probably be smack in the middle of election season. which, maybe I'm too cynical, but that seems fairly likely to be deliberate:
it's hard not to view this announcement in the context of Israel's genocide in Gaza, Biden's support for it, and the backlash that's caused especially among younger voters. there's a wave of protests across universities happening right now. Biden's disapproval rating is at 69% among 18-29 year olds.
back to today's article:
from that poll, the question they asked was a simple "Do you think the use of marijuana should be legal, or not?" - they're not asking "do you think marijuana should be moved from Schedule I to Schedule III", they're asking about actual legalization.
I think it's important to reflect on just how incredibly low the bar is. 70% of Americans and 87% of Democrats support legalization. Biden campaigned in 2020 on decriminalization (there are important differences between legalization and decriminalization, but I think they're mostly irrelevant for the purposes of campaign promises & opinion polls)
4 years later, he is not delivering on that campaign promise of decriminalization, but instead on a lesser achievement of moving marijuana to a lower tier of controlled substance.
so Biden is doing something that is definitely a step in the right direction...but falling short of doing what he campaigned on and that 70% of all Americans support. and that...is supposedly going to boost his popularity among disaffected young people?
Legalization (or even decriminalization) can only be done with an act of Congress. Rescheduling can be done within the Executive Branch. As for timeframe, I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if he made sure when he started it that it would go into effect during election season, but I also believe his administration wants to cross its Ts and dot its Is to make prevent/minimize any challenges to the rescheduling.
you say this in a sort of authoritative tone, like it's a fact. but it's not. it's an opinion. it's never been actually tested in court, this is entirely based on memos from the White House Office of Legal Counsel and other lawyers about what they think the President can do that a court wouldn't issue an injunction against.
but for the moment, let's say it was true, that Biden can only reschedule marijuana, he can't deschedule it entirely.
the Controlled Substances Act has 5 schedules.
Biden's rescheduling it into Schedule III, the middle of the pack. he's saying marijuana is more dangerous and prone to abuse than Xanax, Ambien, or Rohypnol aka "roofies" in Schedule IV, or cough syrup with codeine in Schedule V.
if he actually wanted to decriminalize it, but his hands were tied because of Congress, wouldn't it make sense to schedule it into the lowest category available?
this is an example of one of my perennial problems with Democrats, especially at the national level - the pre-compromise. people are very broadly supportive of legalization/decriminalization. in the poll I linked above, it's supported by 87% of Democrats, 70% of everyone, and 55% of Republicans. this is the rare issue that energizes your base, converts "swing" voters, and drives a wedge into your opposition, all at the same time.
if Biden proposed moving marijuana into Schedule V, he'd definitely get pushback from Republicans. from Schedule I to Schedule V is way too big a jump, they'd say. so Biden pre-compromises and they propose Schedule III.
(I don't know what sort of nukeman you are...but in the cold war this strategy was referred to dismissively as "unilateral disarmament")
but anyways, that's a tangent, let's focus on the real point, which is that obviously Biden can't decriminalize marijuana himself (even though he listed it as a campaign promise). only Congress can do that, and when Biden said on his campaign website that he would do something, he just assumed everyone understood he meant he would pressure Congress to do it, and then Congress wouldn't do it because everyone knows Congress is completely dysfunctional.
(now is a good time for a reminder that if young people are dissatisfied with the political system in the US and think their vote doesn't matter, it is their fault for not understanding all the nuances of it, rather than the fault of the people who constructed the system for constructing a ridiculously broken and anti-democratic system)
as the article says, there is legislation in Congress that would go even further than Biden's executive action, and remove marijuana from the list of controlled substances entirely. emphasis added:
Senator Schumer is referring to S. 4591, the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act.
so...it was introduced almost 2 years ago, they read it, referred it to a committee the same day, and it's sat there ever since? huh. that's interesting.
it was referred to the Senate Finance Committee, which is...chaired by a Democrat. and Democrats hold a majority of the seats in the committee.
again with the incredibly low bar - Democrats control the Senate, Presidency, and at the time this bill was introduced, the House. there's a bill that will do something that 87% of Democrats support. and they won't even vote it out of committee??? like, WTF is wrong with these dumbasses? a model UN delegation could out-maneuver them.
of course, if they passed it out of committee, it would just get filibustered on the Senate floor, right? OK, good. give me a news cycle that is "Democrats are trying to legalize weed, and Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to stop it". get Republicans on the record about their opposition to it. force them to give speeches on C-SPAN about the dangers of the devil's lettuce.