WA Legislature - Update
(January 12, 2024)

WA Legislature - Update (January 12, 2024) - Takeaways

Legislation on hemp extract as a food ingredient and a bill to shift authority from WSLCB to WSDA were ready for introduction, and substance use penalty language caught our attention.

Here are some observations of the Washington State Legislature (WA Legislature) for Friday January 12th, the 5th day of the 2024 regular session.

My top 2 takeaways:

  • Two new bills were scheduled for introduction on Friday, one aiming to make hemp extract a lawful food ingredient and the other to completely shift authority to license and regulate the wholesale supply chain to the Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA).
    • SB 6209 - “Concerning hemp consumable products.”
      • On Friday, Senator Ann Rivers planned to introduce legislation to authorize “Hemp extract” as a lawful food ingredient in “Hemp consumable” products.
        • “Hemp extract” is defined in RCW 69.07.010(12) as “a substance or compound intended for human ingestion that is derived from, or made by, processing hemp. The term does not include hemp seeds or hemp seed-derived ingredients that are generally recognized as safe by the United States food and drug administration.”
        • “Hemp consumable” is defined in RCW 15.140.020(8) as “a product that is sold or provided to another person, that is:”
          • “(a) Made of hemp;
          • (b) Not a cannabis product, as defined in RCW 69.50.101; and
          • (c) Intended to be consumed or absorbed inside the body by any means, including inhalation, ingestion, or insertion.”
        • The exclusion of “Cannabis products” as defined in RCW 69.50.101(h)(1) [(8)(a)] means hemp consumables cannot include "any detectable amount of THC.”
      • Senator Rivers had frequently influenced cannabis and hemp policy in Washington state, having most recently introduced the floor amendment to SB 5367 ("Concerning the regulation of products containing THC") that briefly removed definitions for hemp consumable products and defined “any product with any amount of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)” as a cannabis item. Representatives subsequently heard about the difficulties such an absolutist position would entail and somewhat walked back Senate changes to the “any detectable amount” language which, at publication time, had yet to be defined in rule by Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) staff.
      • On Tuesday January 9th, WSLCB Chair David Postman expressed concern about a hemp bill that had not been introduced as of yet.
      • The legislation was scheduled to be referred to the Washington State Senate Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources, and Parks Committee (WA Senate AWNP) where it joined Senator Bob Hasegawa’s more encompassing hemp in food bill, SB 6077.
    • HB 2334 - “Transferring certain cannabis licensing activities to the department of agriculture.”
      • Also on Friday, Representative Kristine Reeves planned to introduce a bill described as "AN ACT Relating to transferring the licensing and regulating of the production, processing, and testing of cannabis products from the Washington state liquor and cannabis board to the department of agriculture."
      • The revolutionary changes envisioned in the 50-page bill were concisely summarized in the first section as: “(1) All powers, duties, and functions of the board relating to the licensing and regulating of the production, processing, and testing of cannabis concentrates, useable cannabis, and cannabis infused products are transferred to the department of agriculture.”
      • WSLCB and WSDA staff would have a little more than one year to comply with the transfer of authority by July 1, 2025.
      • The bill was scheduled to be referred to the Washington State House Regulated Substances and Gaming Committee (WA House RSG) where Reeves is a member.
  • We identified legislation appearing to target irresponsible parents with the threat of child removal for abusing opioids like fentanyl which we thought may also unintentionally include responsible adults who utilize State-legal recreational cannabis within the grasp of the power sought; but the prime sponsor believed our concerns were unfounded.
    • On Tuesday January 9th, Representative Travis Couture introduced HB 2233, “Providing an appropriate response to the use and presence of controlled substances by parents to protect children.”  The bill was referred to the Washington State House Human Services, Youth, and Early Learning Committee (WA House HSEL) where Couture is the Assistant Ranking Member.
    • The bill caught our attention because it appeared to target parents who abuse opioids like fentanyl, creating a threat of the State taking their children into custody “to prevent imminent physical harm.” Distressingly, the controlling language may also create the same threat for parents who responsibly utilize State-legal cannabis, which remained a federal and State controlled substance at publication time.
      • The controlling language in the original bill text states: "Use of a controlled substance or substances, as defined in chapter 69.50 RCW, not obtained directly from, or pursuant to, a valid prescription or order of a medical practitioner while caring for a child constitutes reasonable grounds to believe that removal is necessary to prevent imminent physical harm to the child due to child abuse or neglect…"
      • RCW 69.50.101(o) defines "Controlled substance" as "...a drug, substance, or immediate precursor included in Schedules I through V as set forth in federal or state laws, or federal or commission rules, but does not include hemp or industrial hemp as defined in RCW 15.140.020."
    • This prompted me to reach out to Representative Couture and his Legislative Assistant Adam Carney to ask for clarification because “Cannabis patients who have obtained a medical authorization may be exempted from the controlling language. But can you confirm---and ensure---that adult parents purchasing cannabis from the regulated marketplace need not be concerned that the State may choose to interpret their responsible use of a State-sanctioned product against them?”
    • Representative Couture subsequently responded, “I understand your concerns, but I can absolutely confirm that the bill does not remove children for legally regulated substances like marijuana, or any other prescribed drug.”  He went on to add, “I will also state that I am not in any way opposed to legal marijuana.”