WA Senate LCTA - Committee Meeting
(March 18, 2021) - HB 1210 - Public Hearing

Cannabis - Marijuana, Marihuana - Hemp

Thoughtful public testimony and an amendment tying in ‘hemp’ encouraged senators to take a closer look at a bill to change state law mentions of ‘marijuana’ to ‘cannabis’.

Here are some observations from the Thursday March 18th Washington State Senate Labor, Commerce, and Tribal Affairs Committee (WA Senate LCTA) meeting.

My top 3 takeaways:

  • Testimony came from two people who signed up as ‘other’ on the legislation which elicited two questions and a comment from senators.
    • Jessica Tonani, VerdaBio CEO (audio - 2m, video
      • Tonani testified that her company was the first licensed cannabis research facility in the state and while she supported the intent of HB 1210, “I think it’s important to recognize that the term cannabis has scientific and legal definitions. The word cannabis represents a genus of plants that through legal definitions has been sub-typed into two classes” based on the concentration of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). She commented that “high THC cannabis plants are defined in both state and federal [law] as marijuana. And those that produce less than 0.3% THC...are defined as hemp.”
      • In contrast, Tonani said the 2018 U.S. Farm Bill and the federal Controlled Substances Act “use the term cannabis to define low and high THC plants.” She asked that a “qualifier [be] added before the word cannabis, for example using the term ‘high THC cannabis’” because changing phrasing from marijuana to cannabis is “analogous to changing the term ‘commercial vehicle’ to simply ‘vehicle’ in legislation. That would have unintended consequences for non-commercial vehicles.”
      • While supportive of the “concept of the bill,” Tonani concluded, “I’m hoping this bill proceeds with a qualifier to differentiate high THC plants from low THC cannabis plants.” Keiser remarked that she “had not heard that there was federal law involved with this.”
      • Ranking Member Curtis King sought clarification from Tonani around the implications of defining “‘low THC’ as below 0.3% THC as hemp...does that resolve her issue with having to say ‘high THC’ or can we just call it cannabis?” Tonani emphasized that she was “a scientist not a lawyer” and said the word cannabis “is essentially the name of the plant so I [would] really say, from my perspective, you should differentiate the plant types that you’re talking about to prevent any confusion.” She added that the CSA says “cannabis sativa plants with greater than 0.3% THC” but that the Farm Bill read “cannabis sativa plants with less than 0.3% THC.” Tonani advised that “the easiest thing, I think, is to add a qualifier and just maybe say ‘high THC cannabis plants’ or something like that” (audio - 1m, video).
    • Kelly McLain, Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) Policy Advisor to the Director (audio - 1m, video
      • McLain reported that “WSDA currently has regulatory authority over many areas of the recreational cannabis industry” and a “unique nexus with the specific term cannabis as we are the regulatory authority over the commercial production of hemp.” She commented that WSDA had “no concerns” with changing references from ‘marijuana’ to ‘cannabis’ in law but “we would like to request that the committee consider Senator Stanford’s amendment” to include a statutory definition of hemp as part of references to cannabis impacted by the bill.
      • Though the amendment was “still in process with committee staff,” she reported, it would state “low THC cannabis that falls under 0.3% THC is defined in the statute as hemp.” McLain said the change would “alleviate any regulatory or statutory concerns for us as an agency.”
      • Keiser invited Stanford to offer any remarks he had on the topic, who replied that he shared the concerns of WSDA and hoped his amendment would bring needed clarity to HB 1210. Stanford said, “It is a little confusing because we’re using the word cannabis to mean sort of a subset of the cannabis plants” and lawmakers would work to clearly define “what’s hemp, what’s cannabis, and make sure everything is dealt with accordingly” (audio - 1m, video).
    • Vice Chair Steve Conway wondered about the original wording of I-502 and whether cannabis was “the language we used in the initiative.” Shepard-Koningsor assured Conway and the committee that he’d review the initiative and ventured “I believe the term was marijuana at that point” (audio - 1m, video).
      • The initiative text amended or created more than a dozen RCW statutes which already referred to ‘marijuana.’
  • The committee acknowledged three individuals signed in support of the bill, which was scheduled for an executive session the following week.

Information Set