SPONSOR: Dogan
COMMITTEE ACTION: Voted "Do Pass with HCS" by the Special Committee on Criminal Justice by a vote of 7 to 2.
The following is a summary of the House Committee Substitute for HJR 83.
Upon voter approval, this proposed Constitutional amendment legalizes marijuana use for persons 21 years of age or older subject to state regulation, taxation, and local ordinances. The legal adult use of marijuana should be regulated so that only legitimate businesses conduct sales of marijuana; marijuana sold in this state shall be subject to testing, labeling, and regulation; employers retain their rights to maintain drug-and-alcohol-free places of employment; selling, transferring, or providing marijuana to individuals under 21 years of age remains illegal; and driving, flying, or boating while impaired by cannabis remains illegal.
This bill establishes the "Smarter and Safer Missouri Act", which requires that marijuana be removed from the state's list of controlled substances, no longer be listed among the state's drug schedules, and no longer be considered a controlled substance or drug. This bill shall not restrict the right of employers to maintain drug- and alchohol-free workplaces or enact workplace policies promoting the same; allow driving, flying, or boating while impaired by marijuana; allow individuals under the age of 21 to purchase, possess, transport, or consume marijuana; or restrict employers, businesses, schools, day care centers, care and health care facilities, and correctional facilities to prohibit or regulate conduct otherwise allowed under the provisions of this bill.
It shall be lawful to possess, consume, cultivate, harvest, process, manufacture, package, distribute, transfer, display, or possess marijuana, marijuana accessories, or marijuana products for commercial purposes, provided the person has current applicable licensing to operate a commercial establishment. No other special licensing shall be required.
State law enforcement and courts shall protect marijuana users and their property without discrimination. The use of marijuana by a person over the age of 21 shall not be grounds for issuing a driving under the influence stop, charge, arrest, or fine when riding as a passenger of a motor vehicle. No state funds or law enforcement personnel shall be used to assist or aid in the enforcement of federal marijuana laws involving acts no longer illegal under the provisions of this bill. All persons in prison or under supervision for non-violent marijuana offenses no longer illegal under the provisions of this bill shall be released, with the courts to provide for the expungement of civil and criminal records pertaining to such offenses.
All provisions of this section shall supersede any conflicting city, county, or state statutory, local charter, ordinance, or resolution.
The provisions of this bill shall take effect on January 31, 2024.
The following is a summary of the public testimony from the committee hearing. The testimony was based on the introduced version of the bill.
PROPONENTS: Supporters say that 65% of Missouri voters voted to legalize marijuana in 2018, but the reality is that legalizing it for medicinal purposes only is not sustainable long term. People who are using and selling it in that system are not penalized for it, but the people doing it outside that system are facing serious consequences. It is important that the legislature take the lead on this so it can be done the right way, so that it does not end up like the medical marijuana program, which was done by the initiative petition process that was initiated by out-of-state interests. The money would go to funding infrastructure and to veterans treatment programs. There should be automatic release from incarceration for those convicted of non-violent marijuana offenses and automatic expungement for such offenses. This does not affect laws related to impaired driving. It respects free markets by not placing limits on how many licenses can be issued. This differs from the initiative that will probably be put on the ballot in November at the same time as this because that one puts caps on the number of licenses that can be issued, and the industry ought to naturally grow based on the market and the size of the industry should not be placed in the Constitution. Testing and specifics will be left to the legislature. If you put caps on licenses, by and large, minorities and women get shut out of the industry because they do not have the same kind of money that large interest groups have, it is not intentional, but that is often the effect, holding down a whole section of society that could contribute to the marijuana industry because they did time and do not have a ton of money to get into the industry. It is forcing people to do things that are illegal to feed their kids because they cannot get jobs because of their record. It is ridiculous to put caps on the licenses because if you are doing the right thing, your business will thrive; if you are doing the wrong thing or things the wrong way, your business will fail so the industry will regulate itself. There is a black market out there and they are lacing marijuana with illicit drugs, so it makes sense to test the marijuana that is in the market, so they can shut down the black market. There are some issues here in the state as we move forward that cannot be addressed without federal action. It looks like Congress is going to act but that remains to be seen. With the legalization of hemp in the US, we have seen the rise of industries but there are also certain products with Delta 8 and Delta 10 THC products that are not regulated by the federal government and the industry is mostly uncontroversial. This bill is really to legalize the Delta 9, which is only one piece in a big industry that is largely federally legal. There is no possession limit in the bill, and that makes sense because we also do not limit how much alcohol or how many guns a person can possess. That would be akin to limiting the amount of personal property a person could have. The body should work up some sort of licensing framework for regulation of marijuana.
Testifying for the bill were Representative Dogan; Arnie C. Dienoff; Jax, National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML); Mallory Rusch, Empower Missouri; Pamela Christopher; Jeff Mizanskey; Eapen Thampy, Canamo Solutions; Dan Viets, and MO NORML.
OPPONENTS: Those who oppose the bill submitted their testimony in writing, which can be found online.
Testifying against the bill were Missouri Association of Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons (MAOPS); Missouri Catholic Conference; and the Missouri State Medical Association.
OTHERS: Others testifying on the bill say Cannabis contains 540 chemical compounds, two of which are medicinal in purpose. Medical marijuana has been shown to have significant effects on reducing pain. Forty-seven states have legalized cannabis in some form. Because cannabis is still a controlled substance on the federal level, studies for therapeutic and other purposes are limited. Legalization has little to no effect on crime or youth use in states that have legalized it. There could be an increase in cannabis use disorder with the decriminalization of marijuana, and this could be similar to alcoholism.
Testifying on the bill was Ramon Martinez, Most Policy Initiative.
Written testimony has been submitted for this bill. The full written testimony can be found under Testimony on the bill page on the House website.