The rapid growth of cannabis products in Texas, combined with growing consumer safety concerns, has led some lawmakers to propose a ban on the hemp industry. However, experts from Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy say this approach is unlikely to effectively reduce access to products or improve public safety.
“Enforcing a ban would place further strain on law enforcement agencies, which are already overwhelmed with unsolved violent crimes,” said Katharine Neill Harris, the Alfred C. Glassell, III, Fellow in Drug Policy at the Baker Institute. “Diverting resources to enforce a hemp ban would exacerbate these problems, and any additional funding would be better spent addressing violent crime.
“Moreover, banning hemp-derived cannabinoids could increase health risks for consumers. Without regulatory oversight, illegal products could enter the market, and law-abiding businesses that follow safety protocols may exit the industry. This could create a vacuum for criminal organizations to fill, leading to unregulated products and potential violence in the market.”
The report, How a Well-Regulated Texas Hemp Industry Can Promote Public Safety, provides seven recommendations for the Texas Legislature:
1. Limit minors’ access to consumable hemp products.
2. Place a milligram cap on the total amount of THC that one serving of a consumable hemp product can contain.
3. Strengthen safety standards for consumable hemp products.
4. Improve advertising standards with a focus on public health.
5. Increase resources and funding for regulatory oversight.
6. Decriminalize possession of small amounts of cannabis flower and cannabis concentrates.
7. Expand the Compassionate Use Program (CUP) to make medical marijuana more accessible for patients in need.
“We could fund regulatory enforcement by raising licensing fees for hemp retailers and making small increase in the taxes on these products,” Harris said. “The way the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission (TABC) handles its licensing and permits could serve as a model to help reduce bad actors and fund enforcement efforts more fairly through a tiered cost system.”
The overarching goal of cannabis regulation should be to minimize the public health harms that may come with greater incidences of heavy cannabis use among minors as well as the population at large, according to the report.
“This goal need not — and should not — come at the expense of criminalizing an activity in which millions of Americans engage, one that can be safely and effectively regulated,” it reads.
Reducing public health risks needs a smart approach to regulation, Harris said. This means enforcing safety standards for products, encouraging both consumers and producers to choose less potent options, limiting marketing aimed at minors, and making sure people are educated about the potential dangers of using high-potency cannabis too often or in large amounts.
“While federal leadership is urgently needed on this issue, states, such as Texas, can work toward more sensible cannabis policy that does not entail the harms of prohibition nor the harms of allowing private industry to profit from encouraging heavy use of a powerful plant,” the report reads.