It’s a common term used for statutory regulations. The legislature can pass a statute that sets out the general legal framework that governs a subject matter, and then put details into a schedule or schedules to the statute.
One use of a schedule is to avoid cluttering up the body of the statute with a lot of very specific details. Some statutes, for example may have schedules with a long list of defined terms, or geographic areas that are covered by the statute, and so on.
Another use of schedules is to give the agency that is charged with enforcing the statute the power to change the schedule without going back to the legislature, following an amendment process set out in the statute. That gives administrative flexibility to the agency, to respond to factual changes in the regulated area. If there’s a significant development in the area under regulation, the administrative agency can respond to it reasonably quickly, without having to go back to the legislature to get changes.
For example, if an entirely new drug is invented, the DEA has the power to assess it and determine where it best fits in the regulatory structure of the statute. It then follows the review process required by the statute to do so.
Or, if new scientific evidence comes out that a drug isn’t as dangerous as originally thought, the DEA can follow the process to move the drug to a less restrictive schedule, which is what this proposal will do.
Apparently the DEA, in a shocking scientific development, has uncovered new evidence that shows that cannabis is not as dangerous as heroin and meth. Who knew? But it is using its regulatory power to implement this new scientific evidence as quickly as possible.
Will this mean you can have it in your luggage (or purse, or pocket) when flying, or when driving across state borders?
It doesn’t matter in my case. I started on it again a couple of years after it was legalized here in California, but had to give it up as it was triggering full-on panic attacks. But it’s still good news.
When flying, the TSA has long been concerned about batteries. I’ve flown with a cartridge in the original medical dispensary packaging without a problem. I don’t carry a battery, I pick up a 510 at my destination.
Also dispensaries can take credit cards. It’s cash or debit cards only in my somewhat limited experience. I very rarely pay for flower since I have so many friends who grow for personal use and give me samples. I buy a vape cartridge a couple of times a year.
The TSA doesn’t care about cannabis. They are looking for explosives and weapons. They don’t care about small batteries either. I have openly had a cannabis vape cartridge with battery in my carry on many many times. I’ll only do this if I’m taking off and landing in legal states though. The airports won’t be a problem in Idaho or whatever but local cops could be.
Would be nice, but another AP article suggests it probably won’t change the position of the majority of banks:
“Any potential decision from the administration to reclassify cannabis has no bearing on the legal issues around banking cannabis,” said Blair Bernstein, a spokesperson for the American Bankers Association. “Cannabis would still be illegal under federal law, and that is a line many banks in this country will not cross.”
The whole thing is just so ridiculous. It all goes back to Prohibition-era fear-mongering and bigotry.
I dunno, i just booked a lot of flights and was reviewing the rules, because some of the flights are international. And at least one domestic airline told me not to carry cannabis, because it’s a violation of federal law and they have to act on it, yada yada. I’m sure it’s not actually something tsa cares about, but it will stop being illegal, and something that could land you in a lot of trouble.
And yes, i should have included that. Most of my background is from insurance industry seminars. The insurance industry would love to get a piece of the growing cannabis market, if they weren’t worried about violating drug laws. It’s all stuff the industry knows how to do. The industry already deals with crops, pharmaceuticals, retail, wholesale, manufacturing. It’s not scary new stuff like cyber, it’s solid traditional risks that the insurance industry would love to insure.
I am under the understanding that they can’t actually remove it entirely, so they had to pick a Schedule.
I think it would make more sense at Schedule IV. The anxiolytic effect seems to be at least partially mediated by the same receptors as used by benzodiazepines, as benzodiazepine antagonists largely block the anxiolytic effect.
That said, it does seem odd that you don’t tend to hear of the same horrible withdrawal effects like you can get with benzos, so maybe something about the stuff is actually safer, and Schedule V could make sense.
Still, Schedule III is a huge improvement. It should help facilitate studying its effects. Maybe it can be scheduled lower in the future.
The dispensaries around here stopped taking credit cards when Trump was inaugurated but that may have been out of caution. I don’t think that the banks mandated it at first anyway.
It should also mean that Fedeal cops in National Parks will stop writing tickets for it.
My only experiences with marijuana were recreational, so that’s the way I think of it. I am getting aches and pains now… Maybe I should try a joint for my joints. (Probably won’t.)
For many people (me especially) occasionally going without cannabis will reset the users tolerance. For a short time after a 1-4 week “fast” a small amount of cannabis has a huge effect.
During a cannabis tolerance break many people (me especially) report experiencing vivid, intense dreams, which are remembered on wakening. I really enjoy this. I usually “do not dream” while using, that is I awaken and have no memory of having dreamt. During a T-break I have these amazing dreams that I’ll actually sit around and contemplate after I wake up. One of those dreams happened a few years ago and I still think about it.
Our city has a schedule of one-way streets. There are also master schedules for stop signs and “through streets”, but those are no longer part of the municipal code. They’re kept by Public Works.
