The General Assembly is considering legalizing psilocybin (aka magic mushrooms), which have proven medical utility in mitigating the effects of depression and PTSD. That bill has the support of veterans groups, and it's got the support of Senate Republican leader Tommy Norment.

People who are victims of a disinformation campaign think their doctors should treat COVID with hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. However, doctors who prescribe those would face potential disciplinary action from the Board of Medicine. A bill from Sen. Amanda Chase would prohibit those medical boards from disciplining those doctors who violate their hippocratic oath to do no harm. Should Virginia's legislature intervene?

JM Pedini is the development director for NORML and the executive director of Virginia NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. They are on the front lines of Virginia's legislative fight to legalize cannabis use, which requires a final vote from the General Assembly to implement. There are proposals to reinstitute a misdemeanor crime for marijuana possession in amounts 6 oz to 1 lb., and tweaks to creating a legal market without consideration for social equity, a priority for the Democratic caucus.

See more at https://linktr.ee/JacklegMedia.

Michael Pope

I'm Michael Pope.

Thomas Bowman

I'm Thomas Bowman.

Michael Pope

And this is Pod Virginia, the podcast that takes you inside Virginia politics.

Thomas Bowman

Later in the show, JM Pedini will help us understand the debate over marijuana. They're the Development Director for NORML and the Executive Director for Virginia NORML.

Michael Pope

Yeah, Thomas, I just don't see a way that Democrats and Republicans are ever going to come to an agreement on how these licenses work, because I just feel like the Democrats are going to put their foot down and insist on social equity licenses. And I feel like the Republicans are just going to put their foot down and reject the idea of social equity licenses. So I mean, I just I'm not seeing a way that they can come to a compromise on that issue, are you?

Thomas Bowman

Not based off the interview we had with JM. I'd be very curious to know, from people in the legislature, exactly what the nuances and considerations from their side are. And one reason for that is it doesn't really serve most Republican interests to keep marijuana illegal. Yes, there's the whole law and order like cop thing, but cops shouldn't be wasting their time on little things like this, first off, and two, out in Southwest Virginia, it's like the cash crop already. And so they would be able to legalize piece of the agricultural industry and legitimize what many of their constituents are already growing. And that would be very popular and a way to inject some much needed cash into the Southwest Virginia, Southside Virginia economy.

Michael Pope

Yeah, I hear you. The Republicans, clearly, have got a motivation, and they don't like the status quo. So like they want some kind of action. However, they're just diametrically opposed on this licensing issue. And I just- so they have a motivation to come out of this and have some sort of compromise. I'm just not seeing what that compromise would look like.

Thomas Bowman

Yeah, it's a really complex issue. And you're going to hear just how complex it is, when we interviewed JM Pedini in the second half of the show.

Michael Pope

So you're definitely gonna want to stick around for that. Alright, so this is the part of the show where we'd like to thank our new Patreons who support the show. Now, Thomas, last week, we teased our listeners a bit, because we said that we're going to talk about all the House of Delegates seats that have two or three members under those new Supreme Court drawn maps. Well, that's 21 House districts and 44 incumbents.

Thomas Bowman

Not complicated whatsoever. Chaz Nuttycombe had a lot to say about all those districts, and all those incumbents. And so, if you're an elected official, who's got drawn into one of these districts, you should probably listen to what Chaz Nuttycombe had to say about what he thought your chances might be in that new district. Our conversation went on for more than half an hour. So we put together a highlights reel, which is what you heard on Pod Virginia last week, but if you are a Patreon, you could get the whole interview.

Michael Pope

Yeah, we didn't tell you until the end of the episode, so it was kind of a twist end that if you want to become a patreon, you can hear our discussion of Dan Helmer versus David Bulevar or Bobby Orrock versus Margaret Ransone. So if you're interested in all of those many- 21 of those House districts with 44 incumbents, you should definitely become a patreon so you can hear the entire episode, which I am now referring to as the Director's Cut and Thomas, we know that at least a couple people listen to the entire regular episode.

Thomas Bowman

That's right. Shout out to our newest patrons, Sam Shirazi and Ami Shai Goodman Goldstein. And if I mispronounce your names, I'm very sorry. Let us know in the Patreon message feed. And thank you so much for being friends of the pod. We really appreciate it. And by the way, if you want to become a patron too, just click the link in the description of this episode.

Michael Pope

Okay, let's get to the news. Thomas, have you ever wanted to try magic mushrooms?

Thomas Bowman

Why do you have some? Michael, Nancy Reagan told me to just say no, but I've always been curious to try them, if I had an opportunity to do it safely. But why do you ask?

Michael Pope

Well, because all this might change soon because Magic Mushrooms are on the docket at the General Assembly. Yes, you heard that right. Members of the State Senate are debating a bill that would decriminalize psilocybin. The bill was introduced by Senator Ghazala Hashmi of Richmond, and it had a favorable review in the Senate Judiciary Committee last week. One of the people testifying in favor was Will Nelson, co founder of the group Decriminalize Nature Virginia. He said, "This is a drug that can help with depression, and post traumatic stress disorder, especially coming out of the pandemic."

Will Nelson

The reason we need to do this now, and pursue this now, is because people need to heal, Virginians need to heal. And if we want folks to come back from this, at full, productive capacity, ready to make a difference in the world, ready to meet up with their families, their friends, and go back to work, then this is a part of that.

Michael Pope

Now, lawmakers debate a lot of wacky bills, but this one has a twist because it has the support of veterans groups, because psilocybin helps with post traumatic stress disorder. So when you start bringing bills, where veterans are testifying, well, that gets the attention of Republicans. And one of the supporters of this bill is Republican Senate Leader Tommy Norment.

Tommy Norment

I have had a number of clients that have come back from Afghanistan, and other areas, suffering from PTSD. And they have only been able to get relief through medicinal dispersements that don't come out of the VA hospital. And so this is not the first time I've heard about this drug.

Michael Pope

So after Norment announced his support for this bill, it seemed pretty clear that this thing was going to go through the Judiciary Committee, and probably even get a, "yes vote," on the Senate floor. But Republican Senator Mark Peake said he didn't think it would get through the House in its current form. So he suggested that Senator Hashmi hit the pause button, and workshop this thing a bit, changing it from a straight up decriminalization, and making it available by prescription. So the committee did not end up voting on this yet, but Magic Mushrooms will be on the docket this week in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Thomas, is Virginia ready for psilocybin?

Thomas Bowman

Oh, Virginians are absolutely ready. But I don't think the 140 legislators are. Oregon was the first state to decriminalize it, and they did that just in November of 2020. D.C. also decriminalized shrooms last year, but Virginia's legislature, traditionally, keeps us in the middle of the pack, rather than at the leading edge of new policy. Now, it could very well pass in the Senate, and fail in the House, unless those veterans convince a panel of House Republican lawyers who often earn their money on drug cases. And the other thing I would say about this, Michael, is over complicating this policy by making it prescription only, seems really silly for something that you can cultivate naturally by going out into a pasture.

Michael Pope

Well, but so there's a twist on this whole prescription thing, because it is an additional guardrail, that the purpose of it is to make it more palatable to House Republicans. However, I'm not sure what it really gets you, because this is a substance that is illegal, and would remain illegal. So even if you decriminalized it, you would still get a civil penalty of $100 If you're in possession of it. So let's say you got a prescription. Well, guess what? You're you're not able to walk into the CVS and use your prescription to get psilocybin. They don't have it at the CVS. The only way you can get it as the black market, and if you're in possession of it, you can still be charged with a civil penalty, even if you have the prescription. So it's an additional guardrail that's designed to make it have more support among House Republicans, I'm not sure what it really gets you other than maybe, maybe some yes votes on the other side of the Capitol Building. So I mean, I guess the real hurdle here is on the House Republican side, you know, is it possible these veterans groups can pull them to be a yes vote? And and I don't know, I guess we'll have to see.

Thomas Bowman

Sounds like a pharmaceutical industry might want in. That's one cynical way to analyze what Senator Peake said. But yeah, you cannot make this prescription only for several reasons. One, like you just said, anybody in possession of it is technically breaking federal law, and a multi state company, like CVS or Walgreens, is not interested in breaking federal law. Now, you could, in theory, have a medicinal mushrooms and weed distributor and in state only pharmacy retail side of things, but that's a very specific business. And just from medical marijuana, we're gonna find out later, it's not that commonly prescribed even though it's legal. So just because there is an industry in the code, does not make it a real thriving industry in the Commonwealth.

Michael Pope

And also on top of that, you'd have to figure out some sort of way to give people licenses to sell psilocybin and we're right back in the same boat as we were when we started this episode.

Thomas Bowman

Yeah, I'm pretty laissez faire on drug policy. I like legalizing it so that we don't have people overdosing on fentanyl when they take an opiate. And we don't have people overdosing on fentanyl when they take something that isn't fentanyl, right? So we need better regulations, and legalize it, and to capture all that tax revenue, so that we can invest it into the services that Virginians need, especially things like schools, education, and health care. But we should not be over complicating a brand new industry. Let it grow and thrive and see which guardrails you actually need to put in place, rather than assume on an issue that, frankly, I know for a fact, that none of these legislators talking, actually know a damn thing about.

Michael Pope

Oh, come on now. A lot of these people were around in the 60s.

Thomas Bowman

If you can go out into a pasture, grab some mushrooms off a cow patty, how the hell...Like why the hell would you go and like, tell your doctor you want this, when there are so many ultra conservative doctors, who are reluctant to prescribe something so experimental? And we're going to find out that this translates not just to mushrooms, but to another issue the General Assembly is considering. Michael, what do you got for us?

Michael Pope

Yeah, so lawmakers have legalized weed, and they may even be on the verge of decriminalizing psilocybin. But guess what other drugs members of the General Assembly are considering?

Thomas Bowman

Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.

Michael Pope

Last week, the Senate Education and Health Committee considered a bill from everybody's favorite senator, Amanda Chase. It would prohibit the Board of Medicine from taking disciplinary action against doctors who prescribe Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19. Now, the bill had support from all the Republicans on the committee, including Republican Senator Siobhan Dunnavant, the only medical doctor in the General Assembly.

Siobhan Dunnavant

We have recently made medical marijuana available in Virginia, because we believe that there are decisions that can be made between doctors and patients about the risk and the value of medications and how they're used. And I really don't think that this state should be obstructing those conversations.

Michael Pope

The bill was rejected on a party line vote and then Chairwoman Louise Lucas had a heck of a time clearing the room from all those unmasked, expectorating supporters of Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine, who packed the committee room to support Amanda Chase's bill. Now check out the chaos that erupted after that party line vote.

Louise Lucas

At 906. The bill is passed by indefinitely. Thank you, Madam Chair. The next bill is Senate Bill 84. Senate a standard for those of you who aren't here for Senate Bill 73, I would ask that you will very politely leave the room, so that others might come in, so that their bill can be heard. Thank you very much.

Woman

My husband is in the hospital right now.

Louise Lucas

I'm sorry, ma'am. This bill is passed by indefinitely, for those of you who are here on that, please leave the room.

Woman

This is too important of a topic. Virginians are dying, people across this nation are dying as a result.

Louise Lucas

Can we please have the people who are here on 73 leave the room.

Woman

Speaker Lucas, you will repay you will pay for this one day, making a decision that we can't talk. I do not understand this. People are dying because Dr. Merrick could not treat his patients. I've had three friends who have died because the hospitals refused Ivermectin. they're given...

Louise Lucas

Please have your speakers leave the room.

Woman

They're given....

Louise Lucas

The speaker on 73 leave the room.

Michael Pope

What a way to begin the day, that was right at the beginning of the day, for the Senate Education and Health Committee. Well, the drama may not be over quite yet, because this week, the same committee will hear a similar bill to prohibit vaccine mandates and discrimination based on vaccination status. So Thomas, I know you work in this field of COVID research. What do you make of this effort to tell the Board of Medicine, "Hey, Board of Medicine, you cannot discipline doctors who prescribe this junk science for COVID."

Thomas Bowman

I don't think there's another policy on the books like that, whatsoever. And the legislature, who doesn't really know anything about medicine, and I'm disappointed that Siobhan Dunnavant, would vote on her ideology, rather than on her Hippocratic Oath. The legislature should leave medical discipline to, for the most part, at least, to medical boards. And I also want to say, that for that woman, who was clearly in distress over having been fed lies, and misinformation, and her husband is dying in the hospital. One, that's an incredibly heart wrenching position for her to be in, and lots of Americans, and people around the world, are in that situation. And the reason they're in that situation is not because the doctors cannot prescribe them Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine, it's because people around them, and maybe them themselves, are not wearing masks, and are not getting vaccinated, in numbers great enough to stop the proliferation of Coronavirus. And that is the great irony in this, is that they want to ban the thing that's going to help them, mandates on getting vaccinated, on wearing masks. And they want to allow junk science. And this very much reminds me of Carl Sagan, who had a great quote in like 1995 or so, that he had a vision of humanity in his children or grandchildren's time, slipping back into the Dark Ages, clutching their crystals, and consulting their horoscope charts. And, huh, yeah, and this is what that reminds me of, because in the age of industrialization, Michael, we fought our wars with bullets, and bombs, and sure we still do that to a degree, because we're still in an age of industrialization. But we're also in the Information Age, and that means we also fight wars with information, disinformation, and misinformation. And so when you come across somebody like this, whose mind has been poisoned by disinformation, it's like they're a casualty of war, because that's how we fight wars now.

Michael Pope

So what would you make of Senator Dunnavant's argument here? So she is a medical doctor, and her position is, "Hey, the General Assembly should not be making these decisions." So I think that you would agree with Senator Dunnavant there, in terms of the philosophy, but the outcomes, clearly, are different. Her position is, you know, the General Assembly should not be telling doctors what they can and cannot prescribe. And this is a law that would allow doctors to prescribe things that they want to prescribe, but might be in danger of being disciplined. You know, there are groups, Thomas, across this country, whose sole mission is to go after doctors who prescribe these drugs for COVID, and get boards of medicine to take disciplinary action for them. So this is not just like paranoid doctors out for- in support of Amanda Chase's bill, this is- these are doctors who actually, legitimately are worried about being disciplined by the Board of Medicine.

Thomas Bowman

Yeah, well, first off, Michael, doctors are allowed to prescribe things approved by the FDA for off label uses. They're very much allowed to do that in consultation with their patients. What doctors can't be doing is prescribing things where we have peer reviewed, scientific research, showing that it's ineffective. And just like you don't want doctors prescribing antibiotics when you don't need antibiotics, you don't want doctors prescribing Ivermectin when you don't have a parasite. You don't want doctors prescribing Hydroxychloroquine when you don't have malaria, and I think there's one other use, but it's not COVID. And the...and prescribing that to their patients, violates their Hippocratic Oath to do no harm, because that actually harms the person who takes it, especially in those concentrations in which they're taking it, and that person could very well die. So the doctor should absolutely be getting disciplined by their medical board.

Michael Pope

Well you say should be disciplined, but nobody is saying that the Board of Medicine should take disciplinary action. The people who oppose Amanda Chase's bill, say, "Let's let the Board of Medicine make that decision. The General Assembly doesn't need to make that decision. The Board of Medicine needs to make that decision." Amanda Chase and the Republicans are saying, "No, that Board of Medicine, your hands are tied, you cannot take disciplinary action on this issue."

Thomas Bowman

I, personally, believe that those doctors should be disciplined, but that decision should not be made at the level of the General Assembly, who are not medical professionals.

Michael Pope

Yeah, I mean, it is interesting that there is sort of a confluence of philosophy here, because that's that's, essentially what Senator Dunnavnt is saying, like, "Hey, General Assembly, don't make this decision. Let the doctors make this decision."

Thomas Bowman

Yeah, but she's perverting the issue, and trying to use words that everybody's going to agree with, to have an outcome that absolutely backward. But Michael, you don't want me to keep talking about this because I could talk about it forever. This is what I do professionally. So we should take a break. When we come back, we're gonna go deep in the weeds on the issue of marijuana licenses. Will Republicans and Democrats find some kind of common ground on social equity licenses? Or does it all go up in smoke? It's got a very hazy future. And we'll ask JM Pedini of NORML all about it. We'll be right back.

Michael Pope

And we're back on Pod Virginia. Let's talk pot.

Thomas Bowman

Pot Virginia. Last year, Governor Ralph Northam signed a law that legalized marijuana, at least in small amounts. Starting last summer, weed was totally legal to possess in public, as long as you're an adult, and as long as it's less than an ounce.

Michael Pope

So marijuana is legal, but nobody has a legal way to buy it, because nobody has a license to sell it. Before they lost control of the General Assembly, Democrats created a regulatory agency that was supposed to issue licenses, so that sales could start on New Year's Day 2024.

Thomas Bowman

But now the effort to create licenses to sell weed, is having a bit of a New Year's Eve hangover, because Democrats put a reenactment clause on the bill that set up a system for creating licenses. That means the new Republican majority in the House, has to sign off on the plan.

Michael Pope

And that seems like it's going to be a heavy lift, because there are a number of issues that Republicans and Democrats are just not agreeing on. Remember all those social equity licenses the Democrats created to help people who have been disproportionately harmed by the racist War on Drugs? Republicans don't like those. And then there's the issue of forcing localities to opt out of sales to conduct a referendum? Republicans want localities to have a referendum to opt in. And although Republicans don't want to make weed illegal again, for amounts under an ounce, there is talk of recriminalizing six ounces or more. Plus, there are all those labor issues with allowing the new workforce to engage in collective bargaining. Holy cow, all this stuff is so complicated, but don't worry, we've got the best guest to help us clear the smoke. They are Development Director for NORML, and they're the Executive Director for Virginia NORML. They're the Jedi Knight of Virginia lobbyists. JM Pedini, thanks for joining us.

JM Pedini

Thanks so much for having me.

Thomas Bowman

Thanks for being here, JM. Let's get to the burning question everybody's got. When will Virginians finally be allowed to buy legal weed, medical or otherwise?

JM Pedini

Well, the good news is, they can buy legal cannabis at medical dispensaries in the state right now, as long as there are a registered patient. And that's a pretty easy process. But when it comes to adult use, that's a lot harder of a question to answer. There are a number of different proposals, all with different dates, making their way through the General Assembly right now. We have Republicans coming out with a July 1, 2022 date for the existing medical dispensaries to begin selling to adult consumers who aren't registered patients. And then we have the recommendation from the Cannabis Oversight Commission, which takes the same approach with the medical dispensaries, but not until January of 2023. And then when we might see new businesses licensed, and those sales begin, well, that's a little bit further down the road.

Michael Pope

So this old date that everyone was talking about last year, New Year's Day 2024, we can throw that out the window? That's no longer a realistic situation?

JM Pedini

You know, for new businesses, it might not be until then. But really, nothing can happen unless we can reach an agreement between the Republican controlled House, and the Democratic controlled Senate, as to when any of this might actually take place.

Thomas Bowman

JM, marijuana is legal in small amounts, as long as you have less than an ounce. Is there any talk of recriminalizing it, also in small amounts?

JM Pedini

Well, there is talk about instituting a new marijuana misdemeanor. So, right now, adults aged 21 and older, may possess on their person, or in any public place, up to one ounce of marijuana. And that's completely legal. And then, anything over an ounce, and up to one pound, is subject to a $25 civil penalty. Once you hit the one pound threshold, then that's a felony. So the Virginia State Crime Commission proposed that there be a misdemeanor in between the $25 civil penalty and the felony threshold, because it isn't typical to have that big increase in penalties. Now, Virginia just got rid of marijuana misdemeanors, so Virginians, on the whole, aren't really supportive of this new crime, this new step in between the penalty and the felony. But there are bills that have been introduced that include this new marijuana misdemeanor.

Michael Pope

So just to be clear about this new step here, the issue that some people are concerned about, is that the spectrum goes from totally legal, to civil penalty, to felony, and there is no criminal misdemeanor in there. And so the thought is, well, the best sort of spectrum to have is legal, civil penalty, criminal misdemeanor, felony. So the thought here is they want to add a new category of six ounces to a pound, basically, just so that they've got a criminal misdemeanor in the spectrum? Is that kind of what people are saying?

JM Pedini

Yeah, some number of ounces before a pound, that would be proposes as a new misdemeanor.

Thomas Bowman

I have an amendment to that one, how about you take the felony and make that the misdemeanor?

JM Pedini

Well, here's I think what everyone is missing in this conversation, it doesn't take a particular amount for it to be possession with intent to distribute. And that was really what they were getting after with this proposed misdemeanor. They didn't want people to have large amounts of cannabis without a stiff penalty, because, presumably, they would be engaged in sales, but possession with intent to distribute, that could that could be demonstrated with an ounce, if an individual had, you know, scales and bags, and whatnot. So there is that in code right now, that possession of up to one ounce, there's a rebuttable presumption that it is for personal use. But you know, it could certainly be less than that.

Michael Pope

So I had an opportunity to ask Senator Adam Ebbin about this issue of creating a new criminal misdemeanor. And he said that he hadn't really made up his mind or not about that issue about creating a new criminal misdemeanor. He did acknowledge that he actually does believe it's worth discouraging having marijuana in large amounts, so that, I guess, people are not dealing and, you know, part of the black market or whatever. He had, he also had kind of a counter proposal, which is currently that civil penalty for the one ounce to one pound is $25. He said, "Well, what if you make it significantly more than $25?" He didn't he didn't have an amount that he was willing to talk to me about. But like, what if you have a larger dollar amount, and you don't have the criminal penalty, but you have a larger civil fine? Is that something that we're gonna hear discussion of the General Assembly?

JM Pedini

Sounds like we might.

Michael Pope

Yeah, so how would that work and what are your thoughts on that?

JM Pedini

The code for possession with intent to distribute already exists. What would, perhaps, be more appropriate would be to codify the amount that individuals are allowed to possess, in private, on their property, without penalty, that's really the portion of code that's missing right now. How much can one have in private, you know, not on their person and not in public? And that's really the area that we ought to focus on, not creating new ways to criminalize Virginians for a substance that the legislature has decided is legal, particularly when there exists ample ways within code to criminalize those who are selling outside of the legal, regulated marketplace.

Thomas Bowman

Yeah, it strikes me that what the state would really be mad about is distributing, or running a business without a license. And we already have bureaucratic processes for that.

JM Pedini

Mm hmm.

Thomas Bowman

All right. Well, let's talk briefly about the social equity licenses, speaking of. So Republicans seem to be really against that idea. But the Legislative Black Caucus would probably be against any compromise, that doesn't include them. Is there any way to find peace in the valley on this one?

JM Pedini

Yeah, that's really the million dollar question is what will that compromise be? And Virginia isn't in a place where it can continue to kick the can down the road, when it comes to enacting a regulated marketplace. The Commonwealth has the fourth largest illicit cannabis market in the nation. In 2020 alone, it was valued at $1.8 billion. So this isn't, this isn't something that we really have the luxury of time with which to continue debating who gets to make money first, or next, or when. We really need to enact some common sense measures, so that there's a legal framework in place and consumers can transition from the illicit market to the to the regulated one. But what that's going to look like, you know, really remains to be seen, because there is such heated debate, particularly when it comes to to social equity provisions. There probably is a way to massage that language and find that peace in the valley. But we haven't gotten into those substantial debates yet. So I don't know what- I don't know what the sweet spot is going to be. We have heard some proposals around existing programs, utilizing those instead, like SWAM.

Michael Pope

So just to be clear about what you just said, it's possible that we might end the marijuana negotiations, the marijuana legislation, without having built in social equity licenses? But the fallback there, the backstop, is that there actually may be existing Virginia code that's not part of marijuana legalization, that has built into it protections, or even incentives, for women and minority owned businesses? That's what you're talking about. Right?

JM Pedini

Yeah, absolutely.

Michael Pope

You mentioned SWAM, and that's what you're referring to there, right?

JM Pedini

That's exactly what I'm referring to. And and I think this is largely a framing conversation. There are certainly some social equity provisions that have been proposed that conservatives are adamantly opposed to, but I think there is room for agreement. And that agreement will probably be found by reframing how we talk about those provisions. "I found this on the web." Great. Siri is going to solve social equity in Virginia cannabis.

Michael Pope

God, I hope so. So on the issue of the black market, you mentioned that Virginia has a particularly prominent black market for marijuana. That's fascinating. I didn't know that. So I recently had an opportunity to talk to Garin Shipley, who's the Comms Director for the House Republicans. And he was saying the Speaker of the House views the current situation as extremely problematic, because it encourages the black market, which is bad. And the speaker does not like that. And this is actually, from the Republicans perspective, this is a top priority, fixing this problem of the fact that, here we've got this market, but no one can buy it legally, because no one has a license. Like it's encouraging to the black market. And that's a problem. That's a problem that Republicans want to fix. So like this is a something that was handed to them that they didn't campaign on. And this is I mean, otherwise, this would not be a priority for them. But now they've been presented with a problem, from their perspective, they need to fix. So do you think that that would be motivating force enough for the Republicans and the Democrats to come to some kind of peace in the valley- it's such a ridiculous phrase.

Thomas Bowman

Do we all hate ourselves now for saying it?

Michael Pope

For saying it several times. I know. But the- god there's got to be a separate- there's got to be another phrase for this? But is, is there any way, do you think, that Republicans and Democrats can find some kind of compromise that everybody can vote for on the social equity license issue?

JM Pedini

Oh, gosh, I hope so. And you know, I want to say that I agree with SpeakersGilbert. In fact, he and I had this conversation. This is an untenable situation that we're in. Democrats missed a real opportunity to pass a regulatory framework in 2021. They failed to do so. And here we are. And we're, we're left in a bad situation. And this is, now, even more difficult hill to climb, if you will, to try and get the House and the Senate to row the boat in the same direction. I sure hope we can find some sort of consensus here. Because I don't think Virginians want to spend any more time in this position.

Thomas Bowman

Yeah, and we've commented on this podcast before how it seems like the Dems really overcomplicated the legalization question in the bill. But I will say, thank goodness, the Black Caucus did put their foot down on this, because they did say that they would only vote for a bill that legalized marijuana. Because if we didn't have that right now, then it would be very easy for Gilbert to just sit on anything, and let the entire concept die.

JM Pedini

Yeah, I think that the I think the VLBC got sold a false bill of goods by Senate Dems in one regard, you know, just like Virginians did. This reenactment clause is, you know, it's like the big leaking hole in the hull of this ship. And there's, there's no reason for us to be where we are today. And this, this reenactment clause is creating all these issues. We could have legalized and regulated cannabis in a fair and equitable manner, in '21, but we didn't. So now we're, you know, now we're trying to right this ship that is, no one no one can agree as to what we need to be doing.

Thomas Bowman

Why did Democrats agree to the reenactment clause? Like shouldn't they have been more decisive?

JM Pedini

Yes, they should have and they, they shouldn't have have led a select few hold this, this legislation hostage with the reenactment clause. There is this idea, this notion that there was political value in a reenactment clause, and I know where where that, this seed of that idea comes from, in states where cannabis legalization is on the ballot. And this would be in a voter initiative, not in a non binding referendum. But where voters are turning out to say, "Yes, we're going to legalize cannabis." Voter turnout is very, very high. And we don't have that ballot initiative process here in Virginia. So it wasn't really a fair comparison to say, "Oh, well, we could we could run a non binding referendum." And then voters would turn out in droves for something that doesn't amount to a hill of beans, when we as, particularly, when we already know that a super majority of voters, including the majority in every major demographic, favors legalization in Virginia.

Michael Pope

I'm glad you brought up the referendum, because I wanted to ask about that. What about this issue of opt out versus opt in? The Democrats wanted all localities to automatically get licenses, but Republicans seem to want to force localities to hold a referendum to allow sales. What are we likely to see there?

JM Pedini

Some Republicans want to waste taxpayer dollars, allowing municipalities to agree with what the state legislature has already enacted. It's an entirely backwards approach. And I get it, I get it. The patron doesn't want to spend money in his district for policy that he doesn't agree with. But to say then to the majority of localities, which which will- would otherwise enact this, to say to tax payers around the state, "Well, we decided this is legal. And now if you want to do it, where you live, you have to pay for it, because I don't want to pay for it where I live." I mean, that's it's really a backwards approach.

Thomas Bowman

I want to ask you about something close to my heart, which is collective bargaining for the new workforce. So that's been a sticking point throughout the entire process of the marijuana regulations. Where are we now, and where do you think we're gonna land?

JM Pedini

Well, I'm glad we're referring to it accurately in this conversation as the option for collective bargaining as opposed to forced unionization.

Thomas Bowman

Former union lobbyist speaking.

JM Pedini

Will it stay or will it go? I mean, that's, you know, like so many other questions that are up in the air. It was, that was a last minute amendment that came down during veto session in Northam's package of amendments. So I don't think there'll be any love lost if that's on the chopping block to get this done. Because it wasn't something that the legislature was passionate about passionate about during the debate last year.

Michael Pope

That's really fascinating. I actually want to turn the tables here and ask Thomas a question here, as a federal labor lobbyist. Why did Northam add collective bargaining at the at the last minute here to the marijuana legalization?

Thomas Bowman

Oh, well, you'd have to ask Ralph Northam why he made that a priority. I can speculate, and I can speculate that, you know, that unions got stiffed under the entire Democratic reign, time, and power. I guess that's not entirely fair to say. But Ralph Northam was not the friendliest governor toward unions, as far as Democrats go, and so he had to give them something.

Michael Pope

That's exactly why I'm asking. It doesn't seem like a Ralph Northam thing to do. So like, why did he do it?

Thomas Bowman

It's an easy, "Okay, fine. I'll do this for you guys."

Michael Pope

So what did he get out of it, though?

Thomas Bowman

The ability to say that he was advancing the interests of unions and collective bargaining. I mean, but this is just my speculation. I couldn't tell you exactly what his rationale was. Perhaps it was a formal request from the farm workers, perhaps somebody else. Perhaps somebody in his office just thought it was the right thing to do, or a good thing to do. I couldn't know. I mean, maybe JM knows.

JM Pedini

It was- it was a request.

Thomas Bowman

Okay. Yeah. There you go.

JM Pedini

Ding ding ding.

Michael Pope

So we've talked about several issues here, the social equity licenses, the opt in versus the opt out, the recriminalization. It seems like this collective bargaining thing is probably the easiest issue to resolve, JM, am I right there?

JM Pedini

Yeah, absolutely.

Michael Pope

Okay, that's one down. All right. Well, thank you so much for joining us and helping us understand this issue, which, actually, is quite complicated and intense. It was great talking to you again, thanks for joining.

JM Pedini

Thanks so much for having me back.

Michael Pope

Thanks for listening to this episode of Pod Virginia. Like us on Twitter. Follow us on Facebook. Hey, give us a review on Apple Podcasts. It really helps people find the show. Transcriptions by Emily Cottrell and the voice of Mert Meadowmuffin is played by Steve Artley. Thanks for listening.

Steve Artley

Pod Virginia is a production of Jackleg Media LLC.