WA Legislature - Update
(January 10, 2024)

WA Legislature - Update (January 10, 2024) - Takeaways

Cannabis waste legislation was advanced, another hemp bill may be on the way, the first cannabis-related bills were heard, and two new bills were scheduled for introduction.

Here are some observations of the Washington State Legislature (WA Legislature) for Wednesday January 10th, the 3rd day of the 2024 regular session.

My top 5 takeaways:

  • Following the Governor’s final State of the State Address to the Legislature, Senate Rules Committee members pulled the cannabis waste bill to their chamber’s floor calendar where it became eligible for second and third readings.
    • On Monday after reintroducing 2023 legislation, Senators boosted SB 5376 (“Allowing the sale of cannabis waste”) out of the Washington State Senate Rules Committee (WA Senate RULE) x-file and back into position for a potentially rapid advance to the floor.
    • On Tuesday, Senate leaders on the Rules Committee convened briefly at the rostrum around 1pm following Governor Jay Inslee’s State of the State Address to the combined chambers and esteemed guests to vote on moving pre-selected packages of gubernatorial appointments and legislation. SB 5376 was included in the regular package of bills pulled to the WA Senate floor calendar.  The legislation could be brought up for second and third readings at subsequent WA Senate floor sessions.
  • During public hearings on Tuesday, cannabis sector representatives spoke in unanimous support of low dose THC beverages but the weight of cities and counties was deployed against empowering citizens to decide whether to allow retailers in their home jurisdictions rather than elected officials.
    • HB 1249 - “Regarding limits on the sale and possession of retail cannabis products.”
    • HB 1650 - “Requiring voter approval for local government prohibitions on cannabis businesses.”
      • Positions (testifying + not testifying = total)
        • PRO: 1 + 14 = 15
        • CON: 3 + 5 = 8
        • OTHER: 0 + 0 = 0
      • The Cannabis Alliance Executive Director Caitlein Ryan was the sole individual to testify in support of the legislation, whereas representatives of counties and cities arrayed against the bill along with elected officials. Opposition downplayed increased revenue promises, overplayed election costs, and even summoned the ghost of the “gateway drug” theory of substance use escalation. Ryan pointed out that State legalization had required citizens to use the initiative process to override the inaction and opposition of elected officials, and retail sales remained prohibited in some jurisdictions where the popular vote supported Initiative 502.
    • SB 5791 - “Concerning the evaluation of the effectiveness of oral fluid roadside information in the enforcement of driving under the influence laws.”
      • Positions (testifying + not testifying = total)
        • PRO: 4 + 3 = 7
        • CON: 0 + 1 = 1
        • OTHER: 1 + 0 = 1
      • Primary sponsor Senator Mike Padden indicated his interest in deploying a pilot program for law enforcement field testing of voluntary oral fluid swabs of individuals suspected of impaired driving was to combat a rise in poly-drug impaired driving as indicated by data collected by the Washington Traffic Safety Commission (WTSC).  The methodology, used in multiple other states and carrying the endorsement of the National Traffic Safety Board (NTSB), entailed field testing of samples for “a panel of drugs.”  No representatives of the cannabis sector signed up to express a position in relation to the legislation.
        • In October 2022, the WTSC was presented with analysis by their research staff indicating that data on poly-drugged driving incidents overreported cases involving cannabis.
        • In April 2023, Washington Impaired Driving Advisory Council (WIDAC) members heard that even after modifications to traffic fatality data involving drug testing results, the narrative on the increasing prevalence of poly-drug incidences remained unchanged.
  • On Wednesday, legislators had no plans to address cannabis-related legislation but would continue to receive initial input on supplementing the biennium operating budget.