US Cannabis Bill Will Likely Fail Now, But Maybe Not Next Time

On Friday, the US House of Representatives passed a bill to legalize cannabis on the federal level. Following 47 US states which had already made changes to their own cannabis legislation, this move would put the federal sphere more in line with local changes.

Over recent years, a wave of cannabis decriminalization and legalization has spread throughout the US. By keeping the plant and its products illegal at the federal level, clashes have emerged over which set of laws will be enforced. Individual users and business owners were often caught in the crossfire amid these disputes.

With the vote on the current law divided mainly along the party lines (with only six Democrats and five Republicans ‘defecting’), it is unlikely to pass the Republican-controlled senate. However, this might only reflect political manoeuvring rather than genuine disagreements, as the reasoning and provisions included in the bill itself could satisfy concerns traditionally tied to either party.

In the bill, Congress finds that “according to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), enforcing cannabis prohibition laws costs taxpayers approximately $3.6 billion a year.” Simultaneously it stresses that the arrests and convictions tied to cannabis prohibition laws disproportionately impact people of colour.

Congress also reports that “applicants for cannabis licenses are limited by numerous laws, regulations, and exorbitant permit applications, licensing fees, and costs in these States, which can require more than $700,000”. At the same time, it is not clear how this legalization bill can address the repressive nature of states’ own cannabis laws.

Apart from the removal of cannabis from the list of ‘scheduled’ substances under federal drug prohibition laws, the bill also retroactively addresses criminal convictions and juvenile delinquency offences. It also sets up the Cannabis Justice Office, tasked with putting into action the Community Reinvestment Grant Program. This program aims to address “individuals most adversely impacted by the War on Drugs” by offering numerous services such as literacy or health education programs.

The Program is to be funded through a 5% tax imposed by the bill on all cannabis sales. For some, this represents a problematic part of the bill. Nevertheless, while being a critic of the tax himself, Congressman Justin Amash, for example, sees this as a worthy concession. While a 5% tax (which comes on top of state and federal VAT and state sin taxes) is still punitive, it is a major improvement over an ‘infinite tax’.

While at this point the bill is unlikely to be pushed through the Senate and the President, it creates a blueprint for what federal legalization of cannabis might look like in the near future. This could perhaps even be followed by other now-illegal substances, The reasoning for the legalization of cannabis in this bill is broad enough that it could, in theory, be gradually applied to other drugs as well. 

If Joe Biden becomes the next US President, there might be enough pressure placed on the Senate to allow for such reforms to go through. Rather than reforming the Controlled Substances Act itself, causing an all-at-once change in War on Drugs-related policies, we might see drugs being removed from the lists of ‘scheduled’ substances or reclassified to allow more lenient treatment of offenders. An idea of a sin tax on cannabis (and presumably other drugs in the future) has also been fairly widely accepted as a logical extension of the existence of alcohol and tobacco sin taxes.

The example of Portugal has become somewhat of a prototype of drug-related policy changes. Although when major change is on the table, the US will probably aim to go further, it is also likely that after legalization, the US government will still seek to maintain restrictions on the production, distribution and sale of the legalized drugs. The additional taxes introduced will likely be used to fund drug rehabilitation or recovery programs as well as some form of medical assistance. A change in the approach to drugs in the US would likely spell the gradual end of the almost-global prohibition, even despite the opposition of many non-Western states. This could create a situation where, rather than converging on very similar policy packages, increasingly diverse approaches are being tried and implemented across the world at the same time.