Back in May, the Minnesota legislature’s conference committee held a session to pass amendments to its Omnibus Health and Human Services Bill. A committee staff member read one amendment’s description. The proposed amendment “inserts language exempting cannabinoids derived from hemp from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Schedule,” she read.
After the committee passed the amendment unanimously, its chairman, Republican senate majority leader Jim Abeler asked, “That doesn’t legalize marijuana — we just didn’t do that?” As it turned out, they kind of did.
At the end of June, the Minnesota Board of Pharmacy clarified what the amendment would actually do. Though it did not broadly legalize marijuana, it amended Minnesota’s statute regulating hemp products, allowing stronger edible cannabinoids to be manufactured and sold.
To be legal, products must not “contain more than five milligrams of any tetrahydrocannabinol in a single serving, or more than a total of 50 milligrams of any tetrahydrocannabinol per package.” Tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, is the ingredient in cannabis that makes the user high.
The news apparently came as a bit of a surprise to Abeler, who, in the aftermath of the board’s announcement, told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune that he thought the amendment only applied to the delta-8 THC, which gives off weaker effects than the standard delta-9 THC, which the bill’s broad language made legal. He called for the law to be rolled back, but Democrats would not entertain his request.
Many legislators were concerned about the impacts of delta-8 on their communities, according to the Minnesota Reformer. Although it is less potent than delta-9, it was not well-regulated, and its producers often targeted children who could not legally possess it. Democratic state representative Heather Edelson worked with Republicans to phase out delta-8 while using broad language to make the amendment, of which she was the chief architect, work in such a way that it legalized delta-9.
If this is true, it indicates a bit of malice on Edelson’s part. Working with other legislators while having ulterior motives is not the way most constituents would want lawmaking to work. At the same time, while we pretty much know that our elected representatives do not often bother to read the bills they vote on, maybe Abeler’s failure will tell them that they should. Neither Edelson’s nor Abeler’s office responded to requests for comment.
Abeler may be embarrassed; at least, many Minnesotans are trying to make him feel that way. Consumers posted pictures of their first legal edibles on social media and thanked Abeler for their availability. Some manufacturers went so far as to put Abeler’s name and likeness on the packaging of their products.
I guess this is a lesson to legislators: Don’t forget to read the legislation you’re passing. Otherwise you may become associated with the legalization of the thing you want to keep banned.