can anyone walk me through how amendment 3 is supposed to give trulieve a permanent monopoly in FL rec?
I don’t see any language about license caps, just
The legislature may provide for the licensure of entities that are not Medical Marijuana Treatment
Centers to acquire, cultivate, possess, process, transfer, transport, sell, and distribute marijuana products and
marijuana accessories for personal use by adults.
Its just the part where it says “may” instead of “shall” or “must”.
Saying may means that the legislature might decide to continue the existing limited license monopoly.
) Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers, and other entities licensed as provided below, are allowed to acquire, cultivate, process, manufacture, sell, and distribute marijuana products and marijuana accessories to adults for personal use upon the Effective Date provided below. A Medical Marijuana Treatment Center, or other state licensed entity, including its agents and employees, acting in accordance with this section as it relates to acquiring, cultivating, processing, manufacturing, selling, and distributing marijuana products and marijuana accessories to adults for personal use shall not be subject to criminal or civil liability or sanctions under Florida law.
so I guess it’s because the amendment doesn’t specify the rules for manufacturing and processing as far as contaminants go, but delegate that to the legislature? Are people advocating for those rules to be part of the amendment where they’ll be near impossible to change?
This is literally every single commercial weed farm I’ve ever worked in or walked through. This is also why I drive 3 hours to Steamboat Springs and 3 hours back to buy weed from Golden Leaf, since it is a mom and pop operation that focuses on quality.
You’re from Denver too?
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB11227
Congressional research service:
Legal Effect of Marijuana Rescheduling on FDA’s Regulation of Cannabis
“If DEA reschedules marijuana, any drug containing marijuana would need to be approved by FDA before
it could be legally marketed and sold in the United States. Even if DEA reschedules marijuana as a
Schedule III substance, it cannot be used recreationally in food, dietary supplements, tobacco products, or
cosmetics. Both Congress and the executive branch have the authority to reschedule marijuana, and
Congress recently has considered rescheduling marijuana or removing marijuana from control under the
CSA. If Congress considers the latter, Congress may consider whether to impose a new regulatory framework on marijuana and, if so, which agency should be tasked with such authority. When crafting
any such legislation, Congress might consider standards for safety, manufacturing, labeling, adverse event
reporting, inspection, testing, premarket review, enforcement authority, and any other relevant
considerations.
Companies are selling consumer products containing CBD and other cannabinoids despite their illegal
status under the FD&C Act. FDA has called on Congress to create a new pathway to regulate products
containing CBD. According to FDA, food and dietary supplements containing cannabinoids do not meet
the safety standards required of these products. Also, certain inhalable products that contain cannabinoids
and not tobacco or nicotine derived from any source may not be subject to regulation by FDA or any other
agency without further congressional action. Congress could consider passing legislation that provides a
framework for FDA to regulate these products. For example, Congress has recently considered passing
legislation (e.g., H.R. 4849, S. 2451, H.R. 1628, H.R. 1629) that would require FDA to regulate CBD in
dietary supplements.”
