Texas Governor Gregg Abbott vetoed a bill regulating THC one hour before it was to become law.
In a dramatic last-minute move, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) vetoed a total ban on recreational cannabis that had been backed by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R), causing a rare rift between the state’s top elected officials.
Abbott signed the veto of Senate Bill 3 on Sunday just one hour before its deadline, calling for a special legislative session in mid-July to address the state’s wild-west cannabis market.
The move came one day after Abbott signed House Bill 46, which dramatically expanded the state’s medical cannabis program to include a wide range of new conditions, put dispensaries across the state and allow the sale of new products such as vaporizers.
Senate Bill 3, which passed last month after a bitterly contested fight, represented what the Houston Chronicle has called a “civil war” between medical and recreational cannabis, in which medical — until Sunday — appeared to have won.
In a Sunday statement, Patrick blasted the veto — and Abbott. “His late-night veto, on an issue supported by 105 of 108 Republicans in the legislature, strongly backed by law enforcement, many in the medical and education communities, and the families who have seen their loved ones’ lives destroyed by these very dangerous drugs, leaves them feeling abandoned,” Patrick said.
In his veto statement, Abbott claims the bill, as currently written, in unenforceable due to the 2018 federal farm bill inadvertently legalizing marijuana.
Allowing Senate Bill 3 to become law — knowing that it faces a lengthy battle that will render it dead on arrival in court — would hinder rather than help us solve the public safety issues this bill seeks to contain. The current market is dangerously under-regulated, and children are paying the price. If Senate Bill 3 is swiftly enjoined by a court, our children will be no safer than if no law was passed, and the problems will only grow.
He further states that because SB3 bans any amount of THC, it falls below the federal threshold. “It therefore criminalizes what congress expressly legalized and puts federal and state law on a collision course.” He also notes the possibility of abusive private property seizures under the bill.
“Abbott urged lawmakers to consider an approach similar to the way alcohol is regulated, recommending potential rules including barring the sale and marketing of THC products to minors, requiring testing throughout the production and manufacturing process, allowing local governments to prohibit stores selling THC products and providing law enforcement with additional funding to enforce the restrictions.”
Abbott has now called a special session for July 21 to address the SB3 veto and a handful of other vetoes.
The 89th Texas Legislature will gavel back in for a special session on July 21 — called by Gov. Greg Abbott an hour after he vetoed the hotly-debated Senate Bill (SB) 3 banning THC-derived products on Sunday night.
Abbott specified five bills that he intends for the Legislature to address besides SB 3: SB 1758 by Sen. Brian Birdwell (R-Granbury), related to the operation of cement kilns;
“Cement kilns” doesn’t really address the issue, as the full bill title is “Relating to the operation of a cement kiln and the production of aggregates near a semiconductor wafer manufacturing facility.” Basically aggregate operations = vibrations, and vibrations can crash semiconductor yields or impair wafer growing operations, and the bill seems to be for limiting the liability for existing aggregate operations in Granbury near GlobalWafers 300mm epitaxy plant, along with a pilot test program. Which might be worth a separate post if I didn’t think it would glaze the eyes of the vast majority of the blog’s readership.
Back to The Texan:
SB 1253 by Sen. Charles Perry (R-Lubbock), regulating certain water projects;SB 1278 by Sen. Tan Parker (R-Flower Mound), on affirmative defense in cases of human trafficking;SB 2878 by Sen. Bryan Hughes (R-Mineola), concerning the operation of the state judicial branch; and SB 648 by Sen. Royce West (D-Dallas), related to recording requirements of real property.
“At this time, the Governor has identified several bills that were vetoed or filed without signature that will be placed on the upcoming Special Session agenda for further consideration,” his press release read.
“Working with the Texas Legislature, we delivered results that will benefit Texans for generations to come,” said Abbott in a press release shortly after midnight — the 20-day deadline for the governor to take action on bills passed during the regular session.
He noted that all seven of his emergency priorities passed during the regular 89th session, which spanned from January 13 to June 2 — property tax relief, generational investment in water, raising teacher pay, expanding career pay, school choice, bail reform, and creating the Texas Cyber Command.
The clash between Abbott and Patrick is interesting, because the state’s two highest elected officials rarely feud so publicly. (Privately is a different matter; those two are not best buds, but they have an effective working relationship.)
It’s also interesting because of the clash between conservative and libertarian impulses. Neither Texans nor the legislature have ever voted for full marijuana or THC legalization. It seems that Dan Patrick and the legislature are merely instructing localities to actually enforce existing state law. But, as Abbott notes, the threshold apparently clashes with federal law.
There’s a case to be made for marijuana legalization on the ground of personal autonomy, but both de facto and de jure marijuana legalization in other states have brought along with them considerable negative externalities, from sketchy potheads in broken RVs trashing formerly respectable neighborhoods to state and national forests trashed by illegal grow operations. Oklahoma has suffered from Chinese mob control of the marijuana trade. legalization seems to have made these problems notably worse, by making law enforcement disinclined to go after any grow operations.
In other states, the “medical marijuana” loophole has been expanded so far that you can drive several weed-filled 18-wheelers through it.
The Austin-area quasi-legal “three smoke shops in a half mile stretch” status quo (which SB3 would theoretically eliminate) probably isn’t socially healthy. But it’s entirely possibly that they’re less unhealthy than current full legalization regimes in other states.
On the other hand, marijuana prohibition at the federal level should be repealed because it violates the 10th Amendment, and the idea that the federal government can prohibit what someone can grow and consume on their own land is absurd, unconstitutional, and rests on the horrible precedent of Wickard vs. Filburn.
Polls seem to show a majority of Texas voters oppose a THC ban, but want to see it more heavily regulated. Usual poll caveats apply, and transient public opinion is not the final arbiter in representative government, but I think it’s safe to say that the majority of Texans are considerably less enthused about a THC ban than Dan Patrick.
I’m not entirely sure of the best way forward. Abbott’s suggestion for alcohol-type regulation going forward is probably better (and more likely to withstand legal challenge) than Patrick’s more heavy-handed approach. Whatever law is settled on, Austin and a few other locals will almost certainly continue to under-enforce it.
Marijuana legalization has often been cited as a slippery slope to full drug legalization, and we have seen much of that in deep blue hellholes like San Francisco. But in Texas, while there does indeed appear to be a slope, it doesn’t seem particularly slippery…
