On Election Day, cannabis legalization measures were struck down by voters in Florida, North Dakota, and South Dakota.
But do the results indicate that the public has soured on legalization or is the issue more complicated?
Last week, we held a webinar with economist, business analyst, and cannabis policy wonk Andrew Livingston of the cannabis law firm Vicente LLP to look back at the results of the cannabis initiatives that were on the ballot this Election Day and what they mean for the cause of legalization.
Here are some of the main takeaways.
Cannabis multi-state operator Trulieve poured more than $140 million into the Florida legalization campaign. Pre-election polls showed that as much as two-thirds of voters supported cannabis reform in the Sunshine State. Nonetheless, Amendment 3 failed, and that may say more about Florida’s election laws than anything else.
“Florida requires that you have a 60% threshold to pass legislation through the ballot. It just means that it’s really hard to get anything passed in Florida,” Livingston said.
In addition, Livingston said Republican lawmakers have worked to make ballot access for these initiatives harder.
If Florida had passed cannabis legalization “it would have been another sign that cannabis is an overwhelming bipartisan issue. But there was opposition from both the left and the right,” Livingston said.
He added that among legalization supporters there were those who wanted a more expensive program than that covered by Amendment 3 and then the more well-known opposition from the right from those who, you know, didn't want cannabis legalization because of what it meant for cultural issues or public health."
It’s understandable that in the wake of the election day defeats some people get the impression that support for cannabis legalization has dipped in recent years.
“The question is, has support for legalization declined? No, but support for legalization has not continued to increase at the pace it did between 2014 and 2020. In 2014, cannabis legalization was at 51% approval by 2020, it was at 68,” Livingston said.
The fate of cannabis legalization over the next four years may depend in part upon which cultural issue the Trump administration focuses on Livingston stated, though it's unclear what that could mean for cannabis.
“The larger question with all of this is will cannabis get lumped in with Democratic cultural issues and as such, create a reflexive opposition from Republicans and social conservatives or is it different, is it kind of its own unique issue because Trump isn't necessarily opposed to it,” Livingston said.
He added that while legalization does have bipartisan support among voters, it's less clear when it comes to politicians.
Livingston said that over the next four years, the main focus for cannabis reform advocates should be lobbying the Trump Administration to ensure that the DEA is not going to scuttle cannabis rescheduling.
“We want Schedule III to happen and to just keep the status quo in terms of federal enforcement, which was the case under Trump's first administration and Trump has said that he's in favor of Schedule III,” Livingston said.
When asked which state he thinks is most likely to be the next to legalize, he said to keep all eyes on Hawaii, one of the only not-legal cannabis states in which Democrats control the governorship, House of Representatives, and Senate.
Regardless of what happens - or doesn’t happen - in Hawaii, Livingston said the next four years will be more about renovations than replacement.
“Sometimes you're in a cycle where you're looking to buy a new house, other times you're in a cycle where you're looking to do home renovations. The next four years will be, essentially home renovations and looking for how we can improve the operations of cannabis markets.”
To watch the webinar on-demand, stream it here on the Rootwurks website.