ReportWire

Tag: mike johnson

  • ‘We’re going to get this job done’: GOP Leaders see narrow path to end partial shutdown Tuesday

    The House is expected to vote today on a funding bill aimed at ending the partial government shutdown, with President Donald Trump urging lawmakers to act swiftly despite Democratic calls for changes to immigration operations.The deal that passed the Senate last week funds the government through the rest of the fiscal year, except for the Department of Homeland Security. Lawmakers would have until Feb. 13 to negotiate Homeland Security funding and immigration enforcement provisions. On Monday, Trump told both sides in the House to send the bill to his desk without any delays, expressing his desire to see the government reopen as soon as possible. “We need to get the Government open, and I hope all Republicans and Democrats will join me in supporting this Bill, and send it to my desk WITHOUT DELAY,” the president wrote on social media.However, many Democrats want to see changes to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol operations before anything is signed.”The American people want to see the masks come off. The American people want to see body cameras turned on, and mandated. The American people want to see judicial warrants,” said House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.House Speaker Mike Johnson argues that requiring immigration officers to remove masks would not have support from Republicans, as it could lead to problems if their personal images and private information are posted online by protesters. Passing this legislation could be a challenge because Johnson is working with a razor-thin majority and can only afford to lose one Republican defection, but he is confident he will pull it off.”We’re going to get this job done, get the government reopened. Democrats are going to play games and the American people can see who really cares,” Johnson said.Lawmakers from both parties are concerned the shutdown will disrupt the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which they rely on to help people after deadly snowstorms and other disasters.Keep watching for the latest from the Washington News Bureau:

    The House is expected to vote today on a funding bill aimed at ending the partial government shutdown, with President Donald Trump urging lawmakers to act swiftly despite Democratic calls for changes to immigration operations.

    The deal that passed the Senate last week funds the government through the rest of the fiscal year, except for the Department of Homeland Security. Lawmakers would have until Feb. 13 to negotiate Homeland Security funding and immigration enforcement provisions.

    On Monday, Trump told both sides in the House to send the bill to his desk without any delays, expressing his desire to see the government reopen as soon as possible.

    “We need to get the Government open, and I hope all Republicans and Democrats will join me in supporting this Bill, and send it to my desk WITHOUT DELAY,” the president wrote on social media.

    However, many Democrats want to see changes to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol operations before anything is signed.

    “The American people want to see the masks come off. The American people want to see body cameras turned on, and mandated. The American people want to see judicial warrants,” said House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

    House Speaker Mike Johnson argues that requiring immigration officers to remove masks would not have support from Republicans, as it could lead to problems if their personal images and private information are posted online by protesters.

    Passing this legislation could be a challenge because Johnson is working with a razor-thin majority and can only afford to lose one Republican defection, but he is confident he will pull it off.

    “We’re going to get this job done, get the government reopened. Democrats are going to play games and the American people can see who really cares,” Johnson said.

    Lawmakers from both parties are concerned the shutdown will disrupt the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which they rely on to help people after deadly snowstorms and other disasters.

    Keep watching for the latest from the Washington News Bureau:


    Source link

  • Where things stand with the government shutdown and how soon it could end

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    House Speaker Mike Johnson gave his prediction for when the partial government shutdown will end, as he fends off Democrats who are trying to kill funding for the Department of Homeland Security.

    Johnson appeared on NBC News’ “Meet the Press” on Sunday and said he is hopeful that the shutdown will end “at least” by Tuesday. The Senate on Friday passed a funding bill that separates DHS funding and allots a two-week window for Congress to debate that topic specifically, while allowing the rest of the government to trundle on.

    “I’m confident that we’ll do it at least by Tuesday,” Johnson said. “We have a logistical challenge of getting everyone in town and because of the conversation I had with Hakeem Jeffries, I know that we’ve got to pass a rule and probably do this mostly on our own.”

    House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has said Democrats will not support the current version of the bill because it provides stopgap funding for the DHS through the two-week window of debate.

    TRUMP, SCHUMER REACH GOVERNMENT FUNDING DEAL, SACRIFICE DHS SPENDING BILL IN THE PROCESS

    Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., is hopeful the government shutdown will end by Tuesday. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

    “What is clear is that the Department of Homeland Security needs to be dramatically reformed,” Jeffries told ABC News on Sunday, adding that the Senate bill is a “meaningful step in the right direction.”

    Other Democrats were more obstinate, however, with Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., saying he refuses to “give more money to ICE agents as they’re violating our Constitutional rights.”

    The rebellion from House Democrats flouted the leadership of Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who negotiated the Senate deal with the White House.

    TENSIONS BOIL IN HOUSE OVER EMERGING SENATE DEAL TO AVERT GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN

    Hakeem Jeffries speaks at a press conference

    House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries split with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. (Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images)

    Republicans first have to pass a procedural rule to bring the legislation forward. The House Rules Committee is set to consider the Senate bill on Monday.

    The bill must then survive a House-wide “rule vote,” a procedural test vote that normally falls on party lines, before voting on final passage.

    HOUSE CONSERVATIVES SKEPTICAL AS SENATE DEAL SACRIFICING DHS SPENDING REACHED: ‘NON-STARTER’

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    The federal government has been in a partial shutdown since early Saturday morning after Congress failed to find a compromise on the yearly budget by the end of Jan. 30.

    Fox News’ Elizabeth Elkind contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • Can Cannabis Make 2026 the Best Year Yet

    Discover how cannabis make 2026 the best year yet for wellness, balance, fitness, sleep, and mindful living.

    As 2026 unfolds, cannabis is rapidly moving from fringe to frontline in health, wellness, and even mainstream culture. With shifting public opinion, expanding research, and potential federal policy changes looming, many are asking: Can cannabis make 2026 the best year yet? The green plant delivers on its promise — for medicine, lifestyle, and society at large.

    One major reason for optimism is the growing possibility of federal rescheduling. Moving cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act would mark a historic shift. While not full legalization, rescheduling would acknowledge medical value, expand research opportunities, and reduce barriers for doctors, scientists, and legitimate businesses. Even the discussion itself signals how far public policy has evolved, and 2026 could be the year the progress becomes official.

    RELATED: Sara Carter Bailey Approved For New Drug Czar

    The progress is already visible in medicine. Across the country, healthcare providers are increasingly open to cannabis as a complementary therapy. Medical cannabis is now commonly discussed in the context of chronic pain, cancer-related symptoms, neurological conditions, and inflammatory disorders. Patients report benefits for pain management, appetite stimulation during cancer treatment, and relief from nausea and muscle spasms. Importantly, many doctors view cannabis as a potential alternative or adjunct to opioids and other medications with more severe side effects, especially when used thoughtfully and under medical guidance.

    Mental health is another area where cannabis plays a growing role, particularly for younger adults. Anxiety rates among Gen Z have risen sharply, driven by economic stress, social media pressure, and a nonstop digital environment. Rather than heavy intoxication, many in this generation are turning to microdosing cannabis. Low doses of THC or balanced THC-CBD products are used to take the edge off anxiety without impairing focus or motivation. This measured approach reflects a broader trend toward intentional, mindful consumption rather than excess.

    Sleep, often called the foundation of good health, is another reason cannabis is gaining attention. Many adults struggle with insomnia or restless sleep, and cannabis, particularly products with calming terpenes or higher CBD content, is increasingly used as part of nighttime routines. Better sleep can ripple outward, improving mood, productivity, and overall resilience. Similarly, cannabis is being discussed more openly in the context of intimacy, where it may help some people relax, enhance sensory awareness, and reduce anxiety around connection and performance.

    RELATED: The Return of Nostalgic Snacks

    Perhaps most surprising to skeptics is cannabis’s role in healthier lifestyle changes. As more people reassess their relationship with alcohol, cannabis has emerged as a substitute rather than an addition. Many report drinking less when cannabis is available, leading to fewer hangovers, better sleep, and improved workouts. Certain strains and products are also used before exercise to increase focus, enjoyment, and mind-body awareness. Combined with reduced alcohol intake, these shifts may support weight management and more consistent fitness habits.

    Cannabis is not a cure-all, and responsible use matters. But as policy evolves, research expands, and social attitudes mature, cannabis is increasingly seen as a tool rather than a taboo. For millions of Americans, 2026 may be the year cannabis moves fully into the mainstream of health, balance, and intentional living, helping make it one of the best years yet.

    Sarah Johns

    Source link

  • First Week of 2026 Sets High Stakes for Cannabis

    The first week of 2026 sets high stakes for cannabis as Congress, the White House, and regulators clash. 

    Congress is back in session and the first week of 2026 sets high stakes for cannabis. DC has delivered a series of consequential developments for the industry, highlighting growing momentum for reform alongside persistent resistance in Washington which could shape the sector’s trajectory throughout 2026. On Capitol Hill, the U.S. House of Representatives moved quickly to pass an appropriations measure to continue long-standing protections for state medical marijuana programs. The bill maintains language barring the Department of Justice from interfering with state-legal medical cannabis systems, a provision which has been renewed annually for nearly a decade. Notably, the House rejected an effort to include language that would have blocked the federal government from rescheduling marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act.

    RELATED: Sara Carter Bailey Approved For New Drug Czar

    The House vote was seen as a significant signal to the cannabis industry, which has closely watched congressional maneuvering over federal reform. By allowing the spending bill to advance without restrictions on rescheduling, lawmakers effectively cleared one procedural obstacle to a change that could have sweeping financial and regulatory consequences for cannabis businesses nationwide. The measure now heads to the Senate, where similar provisions have historically received bipartisan support.

    These legislative developments come as the executive branch continues to press forward with plans to reschedule marijuana. In late December, President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing the Department of Justice to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, a classification which would formally recognize its medical use and significantly reduce the tax burden on state-legal cannabis operators by easing Internal Revenue Code Section 280E restrictions.

    Despite the executive order, progress has been uneven. House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana has publicly expressed opposition to rescheduling, raising concerns about public health and warning against moving too quickly on cannabis reform. His resistance reflects broader divisions within Congress, particularly among conservative lawmakers who remain skeptical of federal marijuana policy changes even as public support for legalization continues to grow.

    Adding to the uncertainty, the Drug Enforcement Administration has indicated it will follow standard administrative procedures before implementing any rescheduling decision. While the White House has called for expedited action, industry observers say the DEA’s internal review process could slow the timeline, potentially pushing final implementation well into the year.

    RELATED: Greenland And Cannabis

    Beyond marijuana itself, federal attention has also turned to hemp and hemp-derived products. Regulatory scrutiny of intoxicating hemp compounds, including delta-8 and similar cannabinoids, remains intense as lawmakers and federal agencies debate tighter limits on THC content and clearer enforcement standards. While recent executive actions did not directly alter existing hemp law, companies across the sector are preparing for potential changes later this year potentially reshaping the rapidly growing hemp marketplace.

    Taken together, the opening days of 2026 underscore a cannabis industry navigating a complex policy environment. Congressional support for medical marijuana protections, executive pressure to advance rescheduling, leadership opposition in the House, and unresolved questions around hemp regulation have combined to create a moment of high stakes and mixed signals. How these forces resolve in the coming months will have lasting implications for patients, consumers, investors, and businesses across the United States.

    Terry Hacienda

    Source link

  • Sara Carter Bailey Approved For New Drug Czar

    Sara Carter Bailey approved for new drug czar as cannabis rescheduling debates grow amid strong public support and political resistance.

    The U.S. cannabis industry stands at an inflection point as federal policy debates over rescheduling marijuana intensify. After decades of cannabis being listed as a Schedule I controlled substance — the federal designation reserved for drugs deemed to have no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse — recent actions by the executive branch have signaled a willingness to reconsider the status. In 2025, the current president  signed an executive order aimed at expediting the rescheduling of cannabis, potentially from Schedule I to Schedule III, a move acknowledging its medical use and ease research and regulatory burdens which have long hampered the industry. This shift has been buoyed by strong public support: polls consistently show a majority of Americans favor federal cannabis reform, even as some political leaders, including House Speaker Mike Johnson, have expressed resistance to broader legalization efforts. Federal rescheduling has become a flashpoint in the ongoing debate about drug policy and states’ rights. And to add something to the mix, Sara Carter Bailey approved for new drug czar, adding another  level of unknown.

    RELATED: 5 Ways Microdosing Cannabis Can Boost Work Performance

    The U.S. Senate confirmed Bailey on 6 January 2026, as the new Director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), often referred to as the federal “drug czar,” in a 52–48 vote. Her appointment comes at a consequential juncture for national drug policy, including cannabis reform. Bailey’s confirmation marks the first time a woman has led the ONDCP, placing her at the center of efforts to shape how the federal government approaches both illicit substances and regulated medical drugs.

    Bailey’s background is unconventional for the post. She built her career as an investigative journalist, covering drug trafficking, national security, and cartel operations, including time as a contributor to national news outlets. She has never before held public office, nor does she have formal training in public health, law enforcement, or drug policy — a point which drew scrutiny from some senators during her confirmation process. Critics questioned her qualifications, while supporters highlighted her on-the-ground reporting experience and understanding of the complex landscape of illegal narcotics.

    On issues directly affecting the cannabis industry, Bailey has left a mix of signals. During her confirmation hearing, she described cannabis rescheduling as a “bipartisan issue” and emphasized federal policy should be informed by “research and data” as the administration evaluates next steps. She also acknowledged past public comments supporting medical cannabis, saying she does not “have any problem if it’s legalized and monitored,” particularly for therapeutic use. However, as the incoming head of ONDCP, she has stopped short of advocating specific policy changes, noting her role requires compliance with existing federal law and collaboration with interagency partners.

    RELATED: There’s No Known Cure For Arthritis, But Marijuana Works Wonders

    Industry observers and advocates will be watching closely to see how Bailey’s tenure influences the cannabis sector. Rescheduling to Schedule III could remove significant legal and financial obstacles for medical cannabis businesses, including access to banking services and federal research opportunities. As ONDCP director, Bailey can play a key role in advising the president and shaping the interagency strategy on drug scheduling, public health education, and enforcement — all of which could either accelerate or complicate the pace of federal cannabis reform. Her path forward will require balancing statutory responsibilities with the growing momentum for change among lawmakers, industry stakeholders, and the public.

    Terry Hacienda

    Source link

  • They’ve had enough — dozens of lawmakers won’t seek reelection to Congress in 2026 – WTOP News

    After Americans said goodbye to 2025, dozens of lawmakers will soon say the same to Congress after deciding not to run for reelection in 2026.

    After Americans said goodbye to 2025, dozens of lawmakers will soon say the same to Congress after deciding not to run for reelection in 2026.

    More than 50 members of the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate have announced they won’t run again for their current seats during the midterm elections.

    They include at least 30 Republicans and 23 Democrats.

    There is always turnover in Congress, but the number of lawmakers deciding to leave Capitol Hill has been especially high in recent election cycles.

    In 2022, 2024 and now in 2026, the amount of lawmakers not seeking reelection has been more than 50.

    No members of the Virginia or Maryland congressional delegations have announced plans to leave Congress, however.

    D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, who at age 88 is the oldest member of the House, has continued to hold open the possibility that she will run again. This comes as she faces several opponents in a Democratic primary, and has been urged by a former staffer not to seek reelection.

    Former U.S. Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland retired in 2024, after serving in Congress for nearly four decades.

    Norton has represented the District since 1991 and this is the first election in decades in which she has faced serious opposition, including from D.C. Council members Robert White and Brooke Pinto.

    Lawmakers leaving are frustrated   

    While many lawmakers are retiring with pride over their long years of public service, others are hitting the U.S. Capitol exits because they are frustrated by political gridlock.

    The longest government shutdown in history, in which the House remained out of session, contributed to an overall feeling that lawmakers weren’t getting anything done.

    There is also concern with the growing power of President Donald Trump that Congress is increasingly becoming irrelevant.

    One of the president’s strongest MAGA supporters, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia’s 14th District, surprised many political observers with her announcement that she wouldn’t seek reelection.

    “I refuse to be a battered wife hoping it all goes away and gets better,” she said in a video announcing her decision in November.

    “If I’m cast aside by the president and the MAGA political machine and replaced by neocons, big pharma, Big Tech, military industrial war complex, foreign leaders and the elite donor class that can never, ever relate to real Americans, then many common Americans have been cast aside and replaced as well.”

    Greene has said she has no immediate plans for her political future.

    But others have chosen to leave their frustration in the halls of Congress and try to lead their states from the governor’s mansion.

    Ten Republican House members and one Democrat are running for governor in 2026. That’s the most GOP lawmakers to run for governor in two decades.

    How will the lawmaker exodus impact the midterm elections?

    Democratic congressional leaders believe they have momentum on their side, as they seek to flip control of the House.

    Ironically, that is in part because two Democratic lawmakers decided not to run for reelection in 2025.

    Abigail Spanberger left the House and is now the governor-elect of Virginia. Mikie Sherrill also left the House and is the governor-elect of New Jersey.

    Both will be sworn into their new offices later this month.

    Democrats say their victories are a sign of things to come in the midterm elections, as the party tries to retake power in the House.

    But House Speaker Mike Johnson has publicly remained bullish on the GOP’s efforts to maintain control of the lower chamber.

    Despite all the congressional departures and the tumult of redistricting, Johnson believes he can hold onto his slim majority.

    He has also brushed aside the significance of the Democrats’ victories in Virginia and New Jersey.

    “We’re looking forward to a great election, running on our record and we’re going to get all of our incumbents reelected and we’re going to add to the number here,” Johnson said on the Capitol steps, after the November elections.

    Many incumbents of both parties announced they wouldn’t seek reelection in 2026, in the weeks after those elections.

    One of them was former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who will not seek another term after 38 years in Congress.

    While she’s not running for reelection, not surprisingly, she has a different view than Johnson of what will happen in the midterm elections.

    When Jonathan Karl on ABC’s “This Week” recently started to ask, “So if the Democrats win the House back …” she jumped in and said, “No, not ‘if.’ When the Democrats win the House back.”

    Whatever happens this fall, it’s likely neither party will have more than a slim House majority.

    Mitchell Miller

    Source link

  • What Does Cannabis Rescheduling Mean

    What does cannabis rescheduling mean for patients, doctors, retailers and small businesses as the President weighs federal action.

    The last few days have been a rollercoaster for the cannabis industry with a press release was released on Friday saying the President is going to use an executive order on cannabis.  The market soared and then crashed and then rebounded now he has he commented he is considering it when directly asked a question. When the President says he’s “considering” rescheduling cannabis, that’s not the same as legalizing it — but it could still be the single biggest federal shift for the industry in decades. But what does cannabis rescheduling mean? The act would change marijuana’s place on the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) from Schedule I — the category reserved for drugs the law says have no accepted medical use and high potential for abuse — to a lower schedule, most often discussed as Schedule III. The practical effects would be immediate for researchers and investors, consequential for doctors and patients, and potentially life-changing for thousands of mom-and-pop retailers drowning under today’s tax rules.

    RELATED: Mike Johnson And Marijuana

    Moving cannabis out of Schedule I would remove a major administrative barrier to clinical research. Researchers say rescheduling would simplify access to plant material for federally-funded studies and could speed trials on cannabinoids for pain, epilepsy and other conditions — because Schedule III substances are treated more like prescription medicines that can be studied with fewer legal hurdles. That said, rescheduling is not an FDA approval: doctors would still lack the uniform, FDA-style prescribing framework that exists for most pharmaceuticals, and states would continue to control patient access under their own medical cannabis rules. In short: more and better science is likely, but a medical-practice revolution would depend on follow-up regulatory and clinical work.

    Photo by Aaron Kittredge via Pexels

    Rescheduling would not erase state laws or create a nationwide retail market overnight. Consumers in states with legal sales would still use the existing retail channels, and in states where cannabis is illegal, possession and sale could remain crimes under state law. But at the federal level, rescheduling could unlock easier banking access and attract mainstream investment: Schedule III status reduces the shadow-banking risk that currently forces many operators to run primarily in cash and stay out of regular capital markets. That improved access to banking and capital could make stores safer and give established local operators better options for growth.

    For many small cannabis retailers the single most consequential change would be tax relief. Under current law, Internal Revenue Code Section 280E prevents businesses trafficking in Schedule I or II substances from deducting ordinary business expenses — meaning rent, payroll, advertising and professional fees are largely nondeductible. As a result, effective federal tax rates for some retailers have been extraordinarily high. If cannabis were reclassified to Schedule III, 280E would no longer apply — allowing businesses to deduct ordinary expenses like any other small business. That could free up cash flow, lower effective tax rates dramatically, and determine whether many family-run shops survive or shutter.

    RELATED: Marijuana Use And Guy’s Member

    An administrative rescheduling (for example by executive order or DEA action) could be challenged in court or limited by Congress. Some lawmakers argue a President cannot unilaterally rewrite statute; others note that Congress could respond, creating new limits or tax rules. And rescheduling alone will not erase criminal records automatically — separate policy steps would be required to address convictions and resentencing. So while rescheduling is a powerful and pragmatic lever — speeding research, unlocking banking, and ending the worst tax penalties — it is not a one-click path to full legalization or automatic amnesty.

    If the President moves ahead, which is still up in the air, rescheduling would be a structural shift: better science, easier finance and crucial tax relief for operators — especially small, mom and pop retailers. But legalization, standardized medical prescribing and answers about criminal records would still require follow-on legislative and regulatory work. For mom-and-pop shops, rescheduling could mean the difference between surviving another year and finally having breathing room to compete.

    Terry Hacienda

    Source link

  • Cannabis Faces Headwinds Despite Rumors

    Cannabis faces headwinds despite rumors of White House action, as congressional opposition threatens meaningful federal reform.

    Last week, the cannabis market soared after rumors the President would take action on cannabis. Stocks rose as it seemed the administration was listening to the public with public opinion decisively in favor of reform. Thousands of mom and pop business are hoping it is is true, but cannabis faces headwinds despite rumors. The President faces determined opposition in Congress — most notably from Speaker of the House Mike Johnson and several influential lawmakers who remain firmly resistant to change. Congress has been more resistant to orders from the president, which has emboldened some of marijuana’s opponents.

    RELATED: Mike Johnson And Marijuana

    Cannabis reform has become one of the rare issues where public sentiment is clear. Polls consistently show strong bipartisan support for legal medical marijuana, broad backing for adult-use legalization, and overwhelming agreement cannabis should no longer be treated as a serious criminal offense. Many voters view reform as both a social justice issue and an economic opportunity, particularly as states continue to collect billions in cannabis tax revenue. The administration is being bombarded with issues from affordability to Epstein, this would be seen as a popular win with little downside in the public eye.

    Despite this momentum, federal action remains complicated. Speaker Mike Johnson has been vocal about his opposition to marijuana legalization, framing cannabis as a public health and social risk rather than a regulated consumer product. His position matters. As Speaker, Johnson has significant control over which bills reach the House floor, making it difficult for cannabis legislation to advance even when bipartisan support exists.

    Other congressional foes echo similar concerns, often citing public safety, youth access, or workplace issues. While some Republicans support limited reforms such as medical marijuana protections or banking access for cannabis businesses, broader legalization efforts frequently stall due to leadership resistance. This dynamic has created a familiar pattern: bipartisan cannabis bills introduced with optimism, only to languish in committee or fail to receive a vote.

    For the President, this resistance narrows the available paths forward. Comprehensive legalization would require congressional approval, making it a steep uphill battle in the current political climate. However, executive actions remain an option. These include directing federal agencies to review cannabis scheduling, expanding pardons for federal marijuana offenses, or clarifying enforcement priorities. Such steps would not legalize cannabis nationwide, but they could meaningfully reshape how federal law treats marijuana.

    RELATED: Marijuana Use And Guy’s Member

    Advocates argue incremental progress is still progress. Rescheduling cannabis, for example, could improve access to medical research, ease tax burdens on state-legal businesses, and signal a shift away from decades of punitive policy. Critics, however, warns executive action alone risks being temporary or vulnerable to future administrations.

    As election season approaches, cannabis reform may once again become a talking point — especially among younger voters and communities disproportionately affected by past enforcement. Yet the reality remains presidential interest does not automatically translate into policy success. Congressional leadership, committee chairs, and internal party politics still hold substantial power over the outcome.

    While there is growing talk the President may move on cannabis, he faces entrenched opposition from Speaker Mike Johnson and other congressional leaders who remain skeptical of reform. Action will depend on the adminstration’s needs regarding public opinion. The clash between shifting public opinion, the President’s needs and legislative resistance will likely define the next chapter of federal cannabis policy — whether the chapter brings meaningful change or more political stalemate.

    Terry Hacienda

    Source link

  • House GOP unveils health care plan, with vote on track for next week

    Washington — House Republican leaders unveiled a plan Friday to address health care costs ahead of a year-end lapse to tax credits that will result in skyrocketing premiums for more than 20 million Americans. 

    But the plan does not include an extension to the Affordable Care Act subsidies. Instead, Republican leaders will allow a vote on an amendment to the plan that would include an extension to those expiring tax credits, according to a GOP leadership aide.

    The move is aimed at appeasing moderate Republicans who are trying to force votes, through what is known as a discharge petition, on separate pieces of legislation to extend the tax credits for one to two years with reforms.  

    An extension has split the party, with those opposed saying the subsidies are ripe with fraud and high-income households shouldn’t qualify. 

    Democrats have pushed a three-year extension without reforms — a nonstarter with Republicans. 

    The Republican plan released Friday includes a provision to expand association health plans, in which multiple employers band together to purchase coverage and lower the costs of benefits. Another provision would provide funding for cost-sharing reduction payments meant to lower premiums for some Affordable Care Act enrollees. The proposal would also require more transparency from pharmacy benefit managers in an effort to lower drug costs. 

    “While Democrats demand that taxpayers write bigger checks to insurance companies to hide the cost of their failed law, House Republicans are tackling the real drivers of health care costs to provide affordable care, increase access and choice, and restore integrity to our nation’s health care system for all Americans,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, said in a statement. 

    Johnson has been meeting with leaders of several factions of the conference this week to try to build a consensus on a plan. 

    The House Rules Committee is set to take up the package on Tuesday afternoon, teeing it up for a potential floor vote as soon as Tuesday evening or Wednesday. 

    It’s unclear whether it has enough support to survive a floor vote.  

    In a statement Friday night, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a New York Democrat, called the GOP proposal an “11th hour measure” and said he would oppose it if the bill reaches the House floor.

    “House Democrats will continue our fight to protect the healthcare of the American people. We are ready to work with anyone in good faith on the other side of the aisle who wants to prevent the Affordable Care Act tax credits from expiring at the end of the month,” Jeffries said. “Unfortunately, House Republicans have introduced toxic legislation that is completely unserious, hurts hardworking America taxpayers and is not designed to secure bipartisan support.”

    Source link

  • Senate rejects extension of health care subsidies as costs are set to rise for millions of Americans

    The Senate on Thursday rejected legislation to extend Affordable Care Act tax credits, essentially guaranteeing that millions of Americans will see a steep rise in costs at the beginning of the year.Senators rejected a Democratic bill to extend the subsidies for three years and a Republican alternative that would have created new health savings accounts — an unceremonious end to a monthslong effort by Democrats to prevent the COVID-19-era subsidies from expiring on Jan. 1.Ahead of the votes, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York warned Republicans that if they did not vote to extend the tax credits, “there won’t be another chance to act,” before premiums rise for many people who buy insurance off the ACA marketplaces.”Let’s avert a disaster,” Schumer said. “The American people are watching.”Republicans have argued that Affordable Care Act plans are too expensive and need to be overhauled. The health savings accounts in the GOP bill would give money directly to consumers instead of to insurance companies, an idea that has been echoed by President Donald Trump. But Democrats immediately rejected the plan, saying that the accounts wouldn’t be enough to cover costs for most consumers.Some Republicans have pushed their colleagues to extend the credits, including Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who said they should vote for a short-term extension so they can find agreement on the issue next year. “It’s too complicated and too difficult to get done in the limited time that we have left,” Tillis said Wednesday.But despite the bipartisan desire to continue the credits, Republicans and Democrats have never engaged in meaningful or high-level negotiations on a solution, even after a small group of centrist Democrats struck a deal with Republicans last month to end the 43-day government shutdown in exchange for a vote on extending the ACA subsidies. Most Democratic lawmakers opposed the move as many Republicans made clear that they wanted the tax credits to expire.The deal raised hopes for bipartisan compromise on health care. But that quickly faded with a lack of any real bipartisan talks.The dueling Senate votes are the latest political messaging exercise in a Congress that has operated almost entirely on partisan terms, as Republicans pushed through a massive tax and spending cuts bill this summer using budget maneuvers that eliminated the need for Democratic votes. They also tweaked Senate rules to push past a Democratic blockade of all of Trump’s nominees. An intractable issueThe votes were also the latest failed salvo in the debate over the Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obama’s signature law that Democrats passed along party lines in 2010 to expand access to insurance coverage.Republicans have tried unsuccessfully since then to repeal or overhaul the law, arguing that health care is still too expensive. But they have struggled to find an alternative. In the meantime, Democrats have made the policy a central political issue in several elections, betting that the millions of people who buy health care on the government marketplaces want to keep their coverage.”When people’s monthly payments spike next year, they’ll know it was Republicans that made it happen,” Schumer said in November, while making clear that Democrats would not seek compromise.Even if they view it as a political win, the failed votes are a loss for Democrats who demanded an extension of the benefits as they forced a government shutdown for six weeks in October and November — and for the millions of people facing premium increases on Jan. 1.Maine Sen. Angus King, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, said the group tried to negotiate with Republicans after the shutdown ended. But, he said, the talks became unproductive when Republicans demanded language adding new limits for abortion coverage that were a “red line” for Democrats. He said Republicans were going to “own these increases.”A plethora of plans, but little agreementRepublicans have used the looming expiration of the subsidies to renew their longstanding criticisms of the ACA, also called Obamacare, and to try, once more, to agree on what should be done.Thune announced earlier this week that the GOP conference had decided to vote on the bill led by Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, the chairman of the Senate Health, Labor, Education and Pensions Committee, and Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, even as several Republican senators proposed alternate ideas.In the House, Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has promised a vote next week. Republicans weighed different options in a conference meeting on Wednesday, with no apparent consensus.Republican moderates in the House who could have competitive reelection bids next year are pushing Johnson to find a way to extend the subsidies. But more conservative members want to see the law overhauled.Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Calif., has pushed for a temporary extension, which he said could be an opening to take further steps on health care.If they fail to act and health care costs go up, the approval rating for Congress “will get even lower,” Kiley said.___Associated Press writers Kevin Freking and Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report.

    The Senate on Thursday rejected legislation to extend Affordable Care Act tax credits, essentially guaranteeing that millions of Americans will see a steep rise in costs at the beginning of the year.

    Senators rejected a Democratic bill to extend the subsidies for three years and a Republican alternative that would have created new health savings accounts — an unceremonious end to a monthslong effort by Democrats to prevent the COVID-19-era subsidies from expiring on Jan. 1.

    Ahead of the votes, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York warned Republicans that if they did not vote to extend the tax credits, “there won’t be another chance to act,” before premiums rise for many people who buy insurance off the ACA marketplaces.

    “Let’s avert a disaster,” Schumer said. “The American people are watching.”

    Republicans have argued that Affordable Care Act plans are too expensive and need to be overhauled. The health savings accounts in the GOP bill would give money directly to consumers instead of to insurance companies, an idea that has been echoed by President Donald Trump. But Democrats immediately rejected the plan, saying that the accounts wouldn’t be enough to cover costs for most consumers.

    Some Republicans have pushed their colleagues to extend the credits, including Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who said they should vote for a short-term extension so they can find agreement on the issue next year. “It’s too complicated and too difficult to get done in the limited time that we have left,” Tillis said Wednesday.

    But despite the bipartisan desire to continue the credits, Republicans and Democrats have never engaged in meaningful or high-level negotiations on a solution, even after a small group of centrist Democrats struck a deal with Republicans last month to end the 43-day government shutdown in exchange for a vote on extending the ACA subsidies. Most Democratic lawmakers opposed the move as many Republicans made clear that they wanted the tax credits to expire.

    The deal raised hopes for bipartisan compromise on health care. But that quickly faded with a lack of any real bipartisan talks.

    The dueling Senate votes are the latest political messaging exercise in a Congress that has operated almost entirely on partisan terms, as Republicans pushed through a massive tax and spending cuts bill this summer using budget maneuvers that eliminated the need for Democratic votes. They also tweaked Senate rules to push past a Democratic blockade of all of Trump’s nominees.

    An intractable issue

    The votes were also the latest failed salvo in the debate over the Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obama’s signature law that Democrats passed along party lines in 2010 to expand access to insurance coverage.

    Republicans have tried unsuccessfully since then to repeal or overhaul the law, arguing that health care is still too expensive. But they have struggled to find an alternative. In the meantime, Democrats have made the policy a central political issue in several elections, betting that the millions of people who buy health care on the government marketplaces want to keep their coverage.

    “When people’s monthly payments spike next year, they’ll know it was Republicans that made it happen,” Schumer said in November, while making clear that Democrats would not seek compromise.

    Even if they view it as a political win, the failed votes are a loss for Democrats who demanded an extension of the benefits as they forced a government shutdown for six weeks in October and November — and for the millions of people facing premium increases on Jan. 1.

    Maine Sen. Angus King, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, said the group tried to negotiate with Republicans after the shutdown ended. But, he said, the talks became unproductive when Republicans demanded language adding new limits for abortion coverage that were a “red line” for Democrats. He said Republicans were going to “own these increases.”

    A plethora of plans, but little agreement

    Republicans have used the looming expiration of the subsidies to renew their longstanding criticisms of the ACA, also called Obamacare, and to try, once more, to agree on what should be done.

    Thune announced earlier this week that the GOP conference had decided to vote on the bill led by Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, the chairman of the Senate Health, Labor, Education and Pensions Committee, and Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, even as several Republican senators proposed alternate ideas.

    In the House, Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has promised a vote next week. Republicans weighed different options in a conference meeting on Wednesday, with no apparent consensus.

    Republican moderates in the House who could have competitive reelection bids next year are pushing Johnson to find a way to extend the subsidies. But more conservative members want to see the law overhauled.

    Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Calif., has pushed for a temporary extension, which he said could be an opening to take further steps on health care.

    If they fail to act and health care costs go up, the approval rating for Congress “will get even lower,” Kiley said.

    ___

    Associated Press writers Kevin Freking and Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • House Speaker Mike Johnson says House GOP does not want to extend health care subsidies: sources

    The White House’s plan to draft an Affordable Care Act subsidies extension may have hit a snag. CBS News has confirmed that House Speaker Mike Johnson called senior Trump officials, telling them that most House Republicans have little interest in extending the tax subsidies once they expire at the end of the year. CBS News political reporter Hunter Woodall has more details.

    Source link

  • Trump’s Healthcare Plan Is Just a Mirage

    Is Mike Johnson really telling Trump what to do on health care policy? Probably not.
    Photo: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

    There was an enormous hullabaloo in Washington over the weekend when reports surfaced that Donald Trump was about to unveil a health-care deal without much in the way of advance consultation with his congressional Republican vassals. According to multiple accounts, the plan would include a two-year extension of the enhanced Obamacare premium subsidies due to expire at the end of the year with new (and fairly minor) eligibility limits and a “skin in the game” requirement of minimum premium payments. There would have also been some sort of Health Savings Account option in a gesture to conservatives who want to get rid of health insurance and encourage people to pay health-care providers directly. But by and large, the proposal as presented was very much along the lines of what was being discussed behind the scenes by both Republican and Democratic senators and was politically feasible, recognizing that some lawmakers in both parties won’t support any deal at all.

    But Monday came and went without the expected presidential announcement, and next thing you knew Trump was headed to Mar-a-Lago for Thanksgiving. It’s possible that the rollout of what would have inevitably been labeled “Trumpcare” was simply delayed until next week. But all along, the prospects of a presidentially brokered health-care deal depended on speed, stealth, and a my-way-or-the-highway declaration from Trump that his plan had to be backed by virtually every congressional Republican, much like his One Big Beautiful Bill Act. It sure looked like that sort of Trump blitz was in the works, until it wasn’t.

    According to The Wall Street Journal, the mouse that roared in putting a hold on Trumpcare 2025 was none other than House Speaker Mike Johnson:

    Speaker Mike Johnson (R., La.) cautioned the White House that most House Republicans don’t have an appetite for extending enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies, according to people familiar with the matter, showing how hard it will be politically to stave off sharp increases in healthcare costs next year for many Americans.

    The message from Johnson, in a phone call with administration officials, came as President Trump’s advisers were drafting a healthcare plan that extended the subsidies for two years.

    The warning underscores the hurdles facing any deal in coming weeks.

    The narrative all but writes itself: House Republicans, emboldened by their successful defiance of Trump over the Epstein Files Transparency Act, are refusing to take orders from Trump to bless the signature health-care initiative of the much-despised 44th president. And instead of going into a hate-rage and ordering purges, the newly chastened 47th president is going back to the drawing board.

    That’s one interpretation of what’s happening. Another is that this version of “Trumpcare” is largely a feint — or to be less charitable, a scam. The only reason Republicans have even considered an Obamacare-subsidy extension deal is that the huge premium spike on tap if nothing is done could become a big issue in midterm elections already prospectively dominated by affordability concerns. They could have nestled an extension into the OBBBA but didn’t, which is a pretty clear indication of their underlying wishes. But for purposes of midterm “messaging,” lofting trial balloons and agitating the air over health-care costs is nearly as valuable as actually doing something about the problem. It’s possible that’s what Trump is doing before he manages to blame the failure to act on the Radical Left Democrats.

    Even if Trump is serious about the issue and has a come-to-Jesus meeting with the allegedly rebellious Mike Johnson to force support for a Trumpcare proposal, there’s a very convenient poison pill he could put into the mix to sabotage any actual deal that might divide his own party. Despite safeguards placed in the original Affordable Care Act to ensure no direct federal payments for abortion services, the anti-abortion lobby has long demanded more extensive prohibitions to make sure states don’t pony up the money to provide abortion coverage in Obamacare policies. The debate over the extension of subsidies provides a fresh opportunity for these people — who have felt marginalized ever since Donald Trump rejected their call for a national abortion ban — to prove they are still an indispensable element of the GOP/MAGA coalition. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, who has promised Democrats a vote on Obamacare-subsidy extensions by mid-December, is also on record demanding tighter restrictions on abortion coverage. Rejecting such restrictions is a red line for many Democrats, who will already be under pressure to make minimal concessions to the GOP on an issue that could otherwise represent midterm dynamite for the opposition party.

    So perhaps Congress and the White House are significantly farther away from a health-care deal than it appeared just yesterday. But let’s not credit Mike Johnson for too much courage or clout. If Trump really wants a health-care deal based on Obamacare-subsidy extensions with the conservative bells and whistles, he can get it with the appropriate ham-handed ultimatums combined with take-it-or-leave-it blandishments to Democrats. He really ought to do so, because health-care costs aren’t going away as an issue and Trump has no better plan for coping with them than he did when he took office in 2017 and “Trumpcare” became a joke.


    See All



    Ed Kilgore

    Source link

  • Johnson says House Democrats forcing



    Johnson says House Democrats forcing “show vote” for Epstein files to be released – CBS News










































    Watch CBS News



    House Speaker Mike Johnson addressed his colleagues ahead of Tuesday’s vote on Rep. Ro Khanna’s Epstein Files Transparency Act, slamming Democrats for their push and calling it a “political exercise.”

    [ad_2]
    Source link

  • House expected to vote on bill forcing release of Jeffrey Epstein case files

    The House is expected to vote Tuesday on legislation to force the Justice Department to publicly release its files on the late financier Jeffrey Epstein, the culmination of a monthslong effort that has overcome opposition from President Donald Trump and Republican leadership.When a small bipartisan group of House lawmakers introduced a petition in July to maneuver around House Speaker Mike Johnson’s control of which bills see the House floor, it appeared a long-shot effort, especially as Trump urged his supporters to dismiss the matter as a “hoax.” But both Trump and Johnson failed in their efforts to prevent the vote.Now the president has bowed to the growing momentum behind the bill and even said Republicans should vote for it. His blessing all but ensures that the House will pass the bill with an overwhelming margin, putting further pressure on the Senate to take it up.Trump on Monday said he would sign the bill if it passes both chambers of Congress, adding, “Let the Senate look at it.”Tuesday’s vote also provides a further boost to the demands that the Justice Department release its case files on Epstein, a well-connected financier who killed himself in a Manhattan jail while awaiting trial in 2019 on charges he sexually abused and trafficked underage girls.A separate investigation conducted by the House Oversight Committee has released thousands of pages of emails and other documents from Epstein’s estate, showing his connections to global leaders, Wall Street powerbrokers, influential political figures and Trump himself.Trump’s reversal on the Epstein filesTrump has said he cut ties with Epstein years ago, but tried for months to move past the demands for disclosure. On Monday, he told reporters that Epstein was connected to more Democrats and that he didn’t want the Epstein files to “detract from the great success of the Republican Party.”Still, many in the Republican base have continued to demand the release of the files. Adding to that pressure, several survivors of Epstein’s abuse will appear on Capitol Hill Tuesday morning to push for release of the files. They also met with Johnson and rallied outside the Capitol in September, but have had to wait two months for the vote.That’s because Johnson kept the House closed for legislative business for nearly two months and also refused to swear-in Democratic Rep. Adelita Grijalva of Arizona during the government shutdown. After winning a special election on Sept. 23, Grijalva had pledged to provide the crucial 218th vote to the petition for the Epstein files bill. But only after she was sworn into office last week could she sign her name to the discharge petition to give it majority support in the 435-member House.It quickly became apparent the bill would pass, and both Johnson and Trump began to fold. Trump on Sunday said Republicans should vote for the bill.Rep. Thomas Massie, the Kentucky Republican who sponsored the bill alongside Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna, said Trump “got tired of me winning. He wanted to join.”How Johnson is handling the billRather than waiting until next week for the discharge position to officially take effect, Johnson is moving to hold the vote this week. He indicated the legislation will be brought to the House floor under a procedure that requires a two-thirds majority.“I think it’s going to be an important vote to continue to show the transparency that we’ve delivered,” House Republican leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said Monday night.House Democrats celebrated the vote as a rare win for the minority.“It’s a complete and total surrender, because as Democrats we made clear from the very beginning, the survivors and the American people deserve full and complete transparency as it relates to the lives that were ruined by Jeffrey Epstein,” said House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries.What will the Senate do?Still, it’s not clear how the Senate will handle the bill.Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has previously been circumspect when asked about the legislation and instead said he trusted the Justice Department to release information on the Epstein investigation.But what the Justice Department has released so far under Trump was mostly already public. The bill would go further, forcing the release within 30 days of all files and communications related to Epstein, as well as any information about the investigation into his death in federal prison. Information about Epstein’s victims or continuing federal investigations would be allowed to be redacted, but not information due to “embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”Johnson also suggested that he would like to see the Senate amend the bill to protect the information of “victims and whistleblowers.”But Massie said the Senate should take into account the public clamor that forced both Trump and Johnson to back down.“If it’s anything but a genuine effort to make it better and stronger, it’ll backfire on the senators if they muck it up,” Massie said.___Associated Press writers Kevin Freking and Matt Brown contributed to this report.

    The House is expected to vote Tuesday on legislation to force the Justice Department to publicly release its files on the late financier Jeffrey Epstein, the culmination of a monthslong effort that has overcome opposition from President Donald Trump and Republican leadership.

    When a small bipartisan group of House lawmakers introduced a petition in July to maneuver around House Speaker Mike Johnson’s control of which bills see the House floor, it appeared a long-shot effort, especially as Trump urged his supporters to dismiss the matter as a “hoax.” But both Trump and Johnson failed in their efforts to prevent the vote.

    Now the president has bowed to the growing momentum behind the bill and even said Republicans should vote for it. His blessing all but ensures that the House will pass the bill with an overwhelming margin, putting further pressure on the Senate to take it up.

    Trump on Monday said he would sign the bill if it passes both chambers of Congress, adding, “Let the Senate look at it.”

    Tuesday’s vote also provides a further boost to the demands that the Justice Department release its case files on Epstein, a well-connected financier who killed himself in a Manhattan jail while awaiting trial in 2019 on charges he sexually abused and trafficked underage girls.

    A separate investigation conducted by the House Oversight Committee has released thousands of pages of emails and other documents from Epstein’s estate, showing his connections to global leaders, Wall Street powerbrokers, influential political figures and Trump himself.

    Trump’s reversal on the Epstein files

    Trump has said he cut ties with Epstein years ago, but tried for months to move past the demands for disclosure. On Monday, he told reporters that Epstein was connected to more Democrats and that he didn’t want the Epstein files to “detract from the great success of the Republican Party.”

    Still, many in the Republican base have continued to demand the release of the files. Adding to that pressure, several survivors of Epstein’s abuse will appear on Capitol Hill Tuesday morning to push for release of the files. They also met with Johnson and rallied outside the Capitol in September, but have had to wait two months for the vote.

    That’s because Johnson kept the House closed for legislative business for nearly two months and also refused to swear-in Democratic Rep. Adelita Grijalva of Arizona during the government shutdown. After winning a special election on Sept. 23, Grijalva had pledged to provide the crucial 218th vote to the petition for the Epstein files bill. But only after she was sworn into office last week could she sign her name to the discharge petition to give it majority support in the 435-member House.

    It quickly became apparent the bill would pass, and both Johnson and Trump began to fold. Trump on Sunday said Republicans should vote for the bill.

    Rep. Thomas Massie, the Kentucky Republican who sponsored the bill alongside Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna, said Trump “got tired of me winning. He wanted to join.”

    How Johnson is handling the bill

    Rather than waiting until next week for the discharge position to officially take effect, Johnson is moving to hold the vote this week. He indicated the legislation will be brought to the House floor under a procedure that requires a two-thirds majority.

    “I think it’s going to be an important vote to continue to show the transparency that we’ve delivered,” House Republican leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said Monday night.

    House Democrats celebrated the vote as a rare win for the minority.

    “It’s a complete and total surrender, because as Democrats we made clear from the very beginning, the survivors and the American people deserve full and complete transparency as it relates to the lives that were ruined by Jeffrey Epstein,” said House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries.

    What will the Senate do?

    Still, it’s not clear how the Senate will handle the bill.

    Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has previously been circumspect when asked about the legislation and instead said he trusted the Justice Department to release information on the Epstein investigation.

    But what the Justice Department has released so far under Trump was mostly already public. The bill would go further, forcing the release within 30 days of all files and communications related to Epstein, as well as any information about the investigation into his death in federal prison. Information about Epstein’s victims or continuing federal investigations would be allowed to be redacted, but not information due to “embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”

    Johnson also suggested that he would like to see the Senate amend the bill to protect the information of “victims and whistleblowers.”

    But Massie said the Senate should take into account the public clamor that forced both Trump and Johnson to back down.

    “If it’s anything but a genuine effort to make it better and stronger, it’ll backfire on the senators if they muck it up,” Massie said.

    ___

    Associated Press writers Kevin Freking and Matt Brown contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • President Trump signs government funding bill, ending shutdown after a record 43-day disruption

    President Donald Trump signed a government funding bill Wednesday night, ending a record 43-day shutdown that caused financial stress for federal workers who went without paychecks, stranded scores of travelers at airports and generated long lines at some food banks.The shutdown magnified partisan divisions in Washington as Trump took unprecedented unilateral actions — including canceling projects and trying to fire federal workers — to pressure Democrats into relenting on their demands.The Republican president blamed the situation on Democrats and suggested voters shouldn’t reward the party during next year’s midterm elections.“So I just want to tell the American people, you should not forget this,” Trump said. “When we come up to midterms and other things, don’t forget what they’ve done to our country.”The signing ceremony came just hours after the House passed the measure on a mostly party-line vote of 222-209. The Senate had already passed the measure Monday.Democrats wanted to extend an enhanced tax credit expiring at the end of the year that lowers the cost of health coverage obtained through Affordable Care Act marketplaces. They refused to go along with a short-term spending bill that did not include that priority. But Republicans said that was a separate policy fight to be held at another time.“We told you 43 days ago from bitter experience that government shutdowns don’t work,” said Rep. Tom Cole, the Republican chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. “They never achieve the objective that you announce. And guess what? You haven’t achieved that objective yet, and you’re not going to.”The frustration and pressures generated by the shutdown were reflected when lawmakers debated the spending measure on the House floor.Republicans said Democrats sought to use the pain generated by the shutdown to prevail in a policy dispute.”They knew it would cause pain and they did it anyway,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said.Democrats said Republicans raced to pass tax breaks earlier this year that they say mostly will benefit the wealthy. But the bill before the House Wednesday “leaves families twisting in the wind with zero guarantee there will ever, ever be a vote to extend tax credits to help everyday people pay for their health care,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass.Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said Democrats would not give up on the subsidy extension even if the vote did not go their way.”This fight is not over,” Jeffries said. “We’re just getting started.”The House had not been in legislative session since Sept. 19, when it passed a short-term measure to keep the government open when the new budget year began in October. Johnson sent lawmakers home after that vote and put the onus on the Senate to act, saying House Republicans had done their job.What’s in the bill to end the shutdownThe legislation is the result of a deal reached by eight senators who broke ranks with the Democrats after reaching the conclusion that Republicans would not bend on using a government funding to bill to extend the health care tax credits.The compromise funds three annual spending bills and extends the rest of government funding through Jan. 30. Republicans promised to hold a vote by mid-December to extend the health care subsidies, but there is no guarantee of success.The bill includes a reversal of the firing of federal workers by the Trump administration since the shutdown began. It also protects federal workers against further layoffs through January and guarantees they are paid once the shutdown is over. The bill for the Agriculture Department means people who rely on key food assistance programs will see those benefits funded without threat of interruption through the rest of the budget year.The package includes $203.5 million to boost security for lawmakers and an additional $28 million for the security of Supreme Court justices.Democrats also decried language in the bill that would give senators the opportunity to sue when a federal agency or employee searches their electronic records without notifying them, allowing for up to $500,000 in potential damages for each violation.The language seems aimed at helping Republican senators pursue damages if their phone records were analyzed by the FBI as part of an investigation into Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss. The provisions drew criticism from Republicans as well. Johnson said he was “very angry about it.””That was dropped in at the last minute, and I did not appreciate that, nor did most of the House members,” Johnson said, promising a vote on the matter as early as next week.The biggest point of contention, though, was the fate of the expiring enhanced tax credit that makes health insurance more affordable through Affordable Care Act marketplaces.”It’s a subsidy on top of a subsidy. Our friends added it during COVID,” Cole said. “COVID is over. They set a date certain that the subsidies would run out. They chose the date.”Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the enhanced tax credit was designed to give more people access to health care and no Republican voted for it.”All they have done is try to eliminate access to health care in our country. The country is catching on to them,” Pelosi said.Without the enhanced tax credit, premiums on average will more than double for millions of Americans. More than 2 million people would lose health insurance coverage altogether next year, the Congressional Budget Office projected.Health care debate aheadIt’s unclear whether the parties will find any common ground on health care before the December vote in the Senate. Johnson has said he will not commit to bringing it up in his chamber.Some Republicans have said they are open to extending the COVID-19 pandemic-era tax credits as premiums will soar for millions of people, but they also want new limits on who can receive the subsidies. Some argue that the tax dollars for the plans should be routed through individuals rather than go directly to insurance companies.Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said Monday that she was supportive of extending the tax credits with changes, such as new income caps. Some Democrats have signaled they could be open to that idea.House Democrats expressed great skepticism that the Senate effort would lead to a breakthrough.Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said Republicans have wanted to repeal the health overhaul for the past 15 years. “That’s where they’re trying to go,” she said.When could things return to normal?While the shutdown will end tonight, the return to pre-shutdown status will not be immediate. Air travel is expected to experience lingering impacts, as the transportation secretary noted that the speed of recovery will depend on how quickly air traffic controllers return to work, with many having retired during the shutdown. The FAA administrator stated that air traffic controllers will receive their full back pay within a week, but it remains unclear how quickly other federal workers will be compensated. In previous shutdowns, it took up to eight weeks for some workers to receive back pay.Regarding SNAP benefits, the American Public Human Services Association anticipates that most states will issue full benefits within three days after the shutdown ends, though some states may take about a week due to complications from issuing partial benefits during the shutdown. The Small Business Administration has indicated that once the government reopens, it will immediately begin processing and approving loans for small businesses. ___Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

    President Donald Trump signed a government funding bill Wednesday night, ending a record 43-day shutdown that caused financial stress for federal workers who went without paychecks, stranded scores of travelers at airports and generated long lines at some food banks.

    The shutdown magnified partisan divisions in Washington as Trump took unprecedented unilateral actions — including canceling projects and trying to fire federal workers — to pressure Democrats into relenting on their demands.

    The Republican president blamed the situation on Democrats and suggested voters shouldn’t reward the party during next year’s midterm elections.

    “So I just want to tell the American people, you should not forget this,” Trump said. “When we come up to midterms and other things, don’t forget what they’ve done to our country.”

    The signing ceremony came just hours after the House passed the measure on a mostly party-line vote of 222-209. The Senate had already passed the measure Monday.

    Democrats wanted to extend an enhanced tax credit expiring at the end of the year that lowers the cost of health coverage obtained through Affordable Care Act marketplaces. They refused to go along with a short-term spending bill that did not include that priority. But Republicans said that was a separate policy fight to be held at another time.

    “We told you 43 days ago from bitter experience that government shutdowns don’t work,” said Rep. Tom Cole, the Republican chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. “They never achieve the objective that you announce. And guess what? You haven’t achieved that objective yet, and you’re not going to.”

    The frustration and pressures generated by the shutdown were reflected when lawmakers debated the spending measure on the House floor.

    Republicans said Democrats sought to use the pain generated by the shutdown to prevail in a policy dispute.

    “They knew it would cause pain and they did it anyway,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said.

    Democrats said Republicans raced to pass tax breaks earlier this year that they say mostly will benefit the wealthy. But the bill before the House Wednesday “leaves families twisting in the wind with zero guarantee there will ever, ever be a vote to extend tax credits to help everyday people pay for their health care,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass.

    Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said Democrats would not give up on the subsidy extension even if the vote did not go their way.

    “This fight is not over,” Jeffries said. “We’re just getting started.”

    The House had not been in legislative session since Sept. 19, when it passed a short-term measure to keep the government open when the new budget year began in October. Johnson sent lawmakers home after that vote and put the onus on the Senate to act, saying House Republicans had done their job.

    What’s in the bill to end the shutdown

    The legislation is the result of a deal reached by eight senators who broke ranks with the Democrats after reaching the conclusion that Republicans would not bend on using a government funding to bill to extend the health care tax credits.

    The compromise funds three annual spending bills and extends the rest of government funding through Jan. 30. Republicans promised to hold a vote by mid-December to extend the health care subsidies, but there is no guarantee of success.

    The bill includes a reversal of the firing of federal workers by the Trump administration since the shutdown began. It also protects federal workers against further layoffs through January and guarantees they are paid once the shutdown is over. The bill for the Agriculture Department means people who rely on key food assistance programs will see those benefits funded without threat of interruption through the rest of the budget year.

    The package includes $203.5 million to boost security for lawmakers and an additional $28 million for the security of Supreme Court justices.

    Democrats also decried language in the bill that would give senators the opportunity to sue when a federal agency or employee searches their electronic records without notifying them, allowing for up to $500,000 in potential damages for each violation.

    The language seems aimed at helping Republican senators pursue damages if their phone records were analyzed by the FBI as part of an investigation into Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss. The provisions drew criticism from Republicans as well. Johnson said he was “very angry about it.”

    “That was dropped in at the last minute, and I did not appreciate that, nor did most of the House members,” Johnson said, promising a vote on the matter as early as next week.

    The biggest point of contention, though, was the fate of the expiring enhanced tax credit that makes health insurance more affordable through Affordable Care Act marketplaces.

    “It’s a subsidy on top of a subsidy. Our friends added it during COVID,” Cole said. “COVID is over. They set a date certain that the subsidies would run out. They chose the date.”

    Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the enhanced tax credit was designed to give more people access to health care and no Republican voted for it.

    “All they have done is try to eliminate access to health care in our country. The country is catching on to them,” Pelosi said.

    Without the enhanced tax credit, premiums on average will more than double for millions of Americans. More than 2 million people would lose health insurance coverage altogether next year, the Congressional Budget Office projected.

    Health care debate ahead

    It’s unclear whether the parties will find any common ground on health care before the December vote in the Senate. Johnson has said he will not commit to bringing it up in his chamber.

    Some Republicans have said they are open to extending the COVID-19 pandemic-era tax credits as premiums will soar for millions of people, but they also want new limits on who can receive the subsidies. Some argue that the tax dollars for the plans should be routed through individuals rather than go directly to insurance companies.

    Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said Monday that she was supportive of extending the tax credits with changes, such as new income caps. Some Democrats have signaled they could be open to that idea.

    House Democrats expressed great skepticism that the Senate effort would lead to a breakthrough.

    Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said Republicans have wanted to repeal the health overhaul for the past 15 years. “That’s where they’re trying to go,” she said.

    When could things return to normal?

    While the shutdown will end tonight, the return to pre-shutdown status will not be immediate. Air travel is expected to experience lingering impacts, as the transportation secretary noted that the speed of recovery will depend on how quickly air traffic controllers return to work, with many having retired during the shutdown.

    The FAA administrator stated that air traffic controllers will receive their full back pay within a week, but it remains unclear how quickly other federal workers will be compensated. In previous shutdowns, it took up to eight weeks for some workers to receive back pay.

    Regarding SNAP benefits, the American Public Human Services Association anticipates that most states will issue full benefits within three days after the shutdown ends, though some states may take about a week due to complications from issuing partial benefits during the shutdown.

    The Small Business Administration has indicated that once the government reopens, it will immediately begin processing and approving loans for small businesses.

    ___

    Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • Speaker Mike Johnson calls shutdown

    House Speaker Mike Johnson addressed reporters on Wednesday night after the lower chamber voted to pass a Senate-backed funding package to end the 43-day government shutdown, the longest in U.S. history. Johnson admonished Democrats over the impasse and touted Republicans’ achievements in the first 10 months of President Trump’s second term.

    Source link

  • House returns, set to end record-breaking government shutdown

    Right now the process is underway to reach that final vote in the House to end this longest government shutdown ever. We also wanted to lay out how it’s currently set to work. Over the last 2 days, House lawmakers have been flying in from across the country as they’ve been on recess during the entire shutdown. Some potentially face shutdown-related flight delays, but they are on their way back to the Capitol. The House agenda today was very specific, swearing in *** new congresswoman from Arizona when the House resumed this. Afternoon then debate and an initial procedural vote scheduled for around 5 p.m. Eastern today. If that passes, the House would debate again and is currently scheduled to hold *** final vote around 7 p.m. Eastern. That vote does not include healthcare subsidies, which started the whole shutdown in the first place. Of course we want to reopen the government. But that we need to decisively address the Republican healthcare crisis, and that begins with extending the Affordable Care Act tax credits. We believe the long national nightmare will be over tonight. It was completely and utterly foolish and pointless in the end, as we said all along. Democrats are largely expected to vote no on this. Republicans who hold *** majority in the House can only afford to lose 2 votes in order to pass this bill. And if that happens, the bill then heads over to President Donald Trump for his signature before the very likely long process of getting the government back up and running again. Reporting on Capitol Hill, I’m Amy Lou.

    House returns, set to end record-breaking government shutdown

    House lawmakers reconvened in Washington on Wednesday to vote on a bill that would end the longest government shutdown in U.S. history.

    Updated: 2:05 PM PST Nov 12, 2025

    Editorial Standards

    House lawmakers raced back to Washington on Wednesday to vote on a bill that could end the 43-day government shutdown, making it the longest in U.S. history. Over the last two days, lawmakers have been flying in from across the country, some facing their own potential shutdown-related delays, to get to Wednesday’s expected final vote. The House’s agenda included swearing in a new congresswoman from Arizona, followed by debate and an initial procedural vote scheduled for early evening. If that passes, the House debates again before holding a final vote on the bill, expected around 7 p.m. ET. The bill currently does not include Affordable Care Act subsidies, which started the shutdown in the first place.Democrats, who are largely expected to vote “no” on the bill, expressed disappointment.”Of course, we want to reopen the government, but we need to decisively address the Republican health care crisis,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said. “That begins with extending the Affordable Care Act tax credits.”House Republicans, who hold a majority in the chamber, were largely expected to pass the measure despite Democrats’ objections, but can only afford to lose two votes for the bill to pass. “We believe the long national nightmare will be over tonight,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said. “It was completely and utterly foolish and pointless in the end, as we said all along.”If the bill clears the House, it will require President Donald Trump’s signature before beginning the likely lengthy process of getting the government back up and running again.However, full Republican support is not clear-cut ahead of the final vote. The bill includes a controversial provision that would ban most hemp products in the U.S. Supporters say it would close a dangerous loophole on unregulated products, but others argue it would destroy the hemp industry for many farmers. In the Senate, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., for example, voted against the bill. Similar action in the House on Wednesday could hold up its passage.Watch the latest coverage on the government shutdown:

    House lawmakers raced back to Washington on Wednesday to vote on a bill that could end the 43-day government shutdown, making it the longest in U.S. history.

    Over the last two days, lawmakers have been flying in from across the country, some facing their own potential shutdown-related delays, to get to Wednesday’s expected final vote.

    The House’s agenda included swearing in a new congresswoman from Arizona, followed by debate and an initial procedural vote scheduled for early evening. If that passes, the House debates again before holding a final vote on the bill, expected around 7 p.m. ET. The bill currently does not include Affordable Care Act subsidies, which started the shutdown in the first place.

    Democrats, who are largely expected to vote “no” on the bill, expressed disappointment.

    “Of course, we want to reopen the government, but we need to decisively address the Republican health care crisis,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said. “That begins with extending the Affordable Care Act tax credits.”

    House Republicans, who hold a majority in the chamber, were largely expected to pass the measure despite Democrats’ objections, but can only afford to lose two votes for the bill to pass.

    “We believe the long national nightmare will be over tonight,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said. “It was completely and utterly foolish and pointless in the end, as we said all along.”

    If the bill clears the House, it will require President Donald Trump’s signature before beginning the likely lengthy process of getting the government back up and running again.

    However, full Republican support is not clear-cut ahead of the final vote. The bill includes a controversial provision that would ban most hemp products in the U.S.

    Supporters say it would close a dangerous loophole on unregulated products, but others argue it would destroy the hemp industry for many farmers.

    In the Senate, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., for example, voted against the bill. Similar action in the House on Wednesday could hold up its passage.

    Watch the latest coverage on the government shutdown:

    Source link

  • Senate Democrats discussing ways to end record government shutdown

    On Day 37 of the longest government shutdown in U.S. history, Senate Democrats held a caucus meeting to try to figure out ways to end the stalemate with Republicans over funding. CBS News congressional correspondent Nikole Killion has more from Capitol Hill.

    Source link

  • Cannabis Is Another Industry Hit Hard By The Shutdown

    Joining thousands of mom-and-pop businesses and American households, cannabis is another industry hit hard by the shutdown

    The ongoing federal government shutdown which began October 1, 2025 is reshaping spending behavior in several consumer categories — notably those tied to discretionary goods such as marijuana and alcohol. With paychecks delayed for hundreds of thousands of federal workers, and everyday Americans facing persistent inflation and rising costs, spending is beginning to come under strain. And with thousands of mom and pop businesses, cannabis is another industry hit hard by the shutdown like retail, grocery and dining.

    According to a survey by Ipsos in October 2025, a majority of people at every income level reported cutting back on at least one expense amid economic uncertainty, tariffs and the shutdown. Another data point from TransUnion shows that 52 % of consumers in Q2 2025 reduced discretionary spending — the highest share in months.

    RELATED: Making Your Cannabis Dollars Stretch During The Shutdown

    The shutdown’s direct ripple effect on consumer wallets is real. Roughly 700,000 federal employees are furloughed, and nearly as many working without pay — which means delayed incomes and fewer dollars available for non‑essentials. Even more broadly, the Council of Economic Advisers warns that a month‑long shutdown could reduce U.S. consumer spending by as much as $30 billion.

    For the cannabis industry (medical and recreational both), the implications are significant. While the sector continues to grow in many states, the shutdown is freezing key reform efforts — for example, regulation of hemp‑derived THC and federal policy remains in limbo. Concurrently, budget‑tight consumers are being more selective with how they deploy their discretionary dollars.

    Photo by Jeff Vinnick/Stringer/Getty Images

    While exact national figures for cannabis spending drops during the shutdown are not yet published, the confluence of reduced incomes + high living costs + regulatory uncertainty suggests a tightening belt is very much in play. Retailers and dispensaries in profit‑sensitive markets may feel the pinch first.

    It’s worth emphasising the income angle here. According to data from the Federal Reserve’s Economic Well‑Being of U.S. Households in 2024 report, 39 % of adults live in families with incomes of $100,000 or more. By contrast, the implication is that around 61 % of adults live in households with income under $100K. Those households are less buffered from shocks like a missed paycheck, rising utility bills, or price increases.

    RELATED: The Feds Foul Play Around Cannabis

    On inflation specifically, a note by RBC points out that Americans earning less than $100K have seen grocery prices rise 33 % since 2019, compared to 25 % for those earning more than $150K. In short: the under‑$100K cohort is both larger in number and under more cost‑pressure.

    Given this, it’s no surprise we see signs of belt‑tightening amongst this group. The KPMG Consumer Pulse Survey reports that “consumers expect to spend less across most categories this summer — except increases in groceries and automotive.” KPMG

    For cannabis vendors, this means a shifting consumer base: more value‑seeking, more conservative purchasing, more emphasis on cost‑efficiency (as the Fresh Toast article highlighted). Alcohol spending may also be more vulnerable. While long‑term data show alcohol consumption trending down in some segments, the immediate dynamic here is one of substitution or reduction: when paycheck‑uncertainty and rising rent/food bills dominate, spending on “extras” tends to drop.

    RELATED: Study Reveals Stance By Physicians And Public About Cannabis

    The shutdown exposes a deeper fault‑line: public policy and everyday economic reality are diverging. The Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Mike Johnson, has adopted a hardline posture on several fronts — including opposition to major healthcare subsidies, blocking full funding of federal agencies and resisting broader cannabis reform efforts. In doing so he appears detached from both: the majority of Americans who earn under $100K and are scrambling to make ends meet, and the broader public’s shifting views on medical marijuana and hemp reform.

    While polls show majority support for medical cannabis access and broader reform, the GOP Congress remains stalled. That impasse matters because for the cannabis industry — which is still suffering under federal ambiguity — policy action isn’t just nice‑to‑have; it’s a lifeline. The leadership’s lack of responsiveness to that reality sends a signal beyond the Hill: it tells everyday consumers, and businesses, that their pressures may not be fully appreciated by those in power.

    If the shutdown persists, we can expect:

    • Further reductions in discretionary spending among households under $100K as paychecks and benefit flows remain uncertain
    • Slower growth for cannabis retailers in mature markets, a greater emphasis on value plays and lower‑price substitution
    • Elevated risks for the industry as regulatory and policy advances are paused, making cost control and margin optimization more urgent
    • A heightened political risk for leadership whose policy stance appears misaligned with the economic burdens faced by a majority of Americans

    The shutdown isn’t just a headline about federal funding. It is a real‑world brake on consumer spending, a warning sign for lifestyle markets like cannabis and alcohol, and a reminder policy‑making ignoring everyday economic pressures runs the risk of being out of touch.

    Terry Hacienda

    Source link

  • The Feds Foul Play Around Cannabis

    The Feds foul play around cannabis exposes misinformation, fear tactics, and how Washington ignores 88% of Americans

    While nearly 88% of Americans support some form of legal cannabis, the old guard in Washington continues to misrepresent the will of the people. This isn’t a quiet disagreement over policy — it’s a stubborn act of defiance by a political class clinging to outdated narratives, using fear and misinformation to stall progress. The Feds foul play around cannabis includes misleading federal ad campaigns to state-level repeal efforts and congressional inaction, the message from the establishment is clear: even overwhelming public consensus won’t shake their prohibitionist reflex.

    RELATED: Zohram Mamdani And NYC’s Legal Marijuana

    The federal government’s recent “Make America Fentanyl Free” initiative sounds like a noble effort — until you look closer. The campaign warns Americans fentanyl-laced cannabis is contributing to a spike in overdose deaths, echoing rhetoric found on official websites like Get Smart About Drugs, a DEA-linked platform.

    But credible health experts and toxicologists have called this claim a myth. Studies and verified cases show virtually no evidence of widespread fentanyl-contaminated marijuana. The CDC’s own overdose data reveal more than 100,000 overdose deaths annually are overwhelmingly tied to synthetic opioids, not cannabis. By folding marijuana into the fentanyl crisis narrative, the campaign blurs science and fear — conflating a regulated, state-legal product with the nation’s deadliest illicit drugs.

    In Massachusetts, prohibitionists are running a petition drive critics say tricks voters into repealing the state’s adult-use cannabis law — one which passed in 2016 with 53.6% support. The so-called Coalition for a Healthy Massachusetts has been accused of presenting the petition as a measure to “protect youth” and “prevent fentanyl exposure,” when in reality it would end the state’s $1.6-billion legal cannabis market.

    Industry advocates and civil-rights leaders argue this fear-based language mirrors the federal fentanyl narrative — a coordinated effort to weaponize overdose panic against legitimate regulation and equity programs have taken years to build.

    At the center of the federal gridlock is House Speaker Mike Johnson, a staunch opponent of cannabis reform who has consistently voted against legalization and banking protections. Johnson has blocked the SAFE Banking Act — a bipartisan bill allowing legal cannabis businesses access banking services — from reaching a floor vote, despite majority support in both chambers. He’s also refused to advance measures like the MORE Act and the Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act, effectively freezing all momentum toward federal reform.

    Johnson’s leadership ensures even modest, widely supported reforms remain in limbo. His record earns him an “F” rating from cannabis policy groups and makes him one of the most significant obstacles to aligning federal law with public opinion.

    RELATED: Marijuana Use And Guy’s Member

    When the federal government claims “drug overdoses are due to fentanyl-laced marijuana,” and state actors use similar rhetoric to roll back legalization, it’s more than misinformation — it’s policy manipulation. The consequences are profound:

    • Public confusion: Americans are told cannabis is linked to deadly fentanyl overdoses, though data show otherwise.
    • Policy paralysis: Federal leaders block reform while invoking the specter of addiction and moral decline.
    • Economic harm: Legal markets — and the jobs, tax revenue, and social-equity progress they bring — are jeopardized by political gamesmanship.

    With almost nine in ten Americans favoring legalization — and over half living in states where cannabis is legal — continued federal obstruction is untenable. The real crisis isn’t cannabis; it’s an outdated federal narrative refusing to evolve with science or society.

    Until Washington stops peddling fear and starts listening to its citizens, the gulf between federal prohibition and public reality will only grow wider. It’s time to replace misinformation with evidence, prohibition with regulation, and political posturing with policy actually serving the American people.

    Terry Hacienda

    Source link