This: "Only like 30 voters will care about Schedule III. Thousands upon thousands, mostly in red states, will be pissed about hemp being banned. If the GOP wants both hemp banned and canna reform to translate into votes, it needs to be deschedule or bust."
Some points on hemp:
1. Nobody is bigger than the plant. The average consumer is most likely to support whichever market gives them the easiest access, which in many states (including many limited license med/rec states) is hemp.
2. Only like 30 voters will care about Schedule III. Thousands upon thousands, mostly in red states, will be pissed about hemp being banned. If the GOP wants both hemp banned and canna reform to translate into votes, it needs to be deschedule or bust.
3. Tweeting at Chuck Schumer and losing money on MSOS calls is not “fighting for reform”
4. For much of this year, many in hemp were pushing for descheduling as opposed to SIII, and they were chastised for it. So nah you can’t say they’ve never pushed for comprehensive reform.
5. Calling people whose products are sold in Target+Total Wine “narcoterrorists” etc is hilariously stupid. Just like some of the maniacally pro hemp people, most of the ardently anti-hemp people are a total embarrassment.
With all that being said I highly doubt the ban can be rescinded/heavily dialed back next year, whether hemp-specific change or descheduling. Now, how do we get that done…
I’d like to think the calls for harmonious collaboration between current large canna & hemp lobbying forces are realistic, but I don’t think they are. Will most MSOs support a true free market that’s likely to erode the limited license advantages their whole biz is built on? Not likely. Will large hempcos built on synthetics support banning those? Obviously not. There needs to be a new coalition created, and many of the preexisting disingenuous lobbying interests from both sides need to be excluded.