“Turning a blind eye to a ballot initiative that actually helps some individuals in the State of Nebraska who really need help? That’s undermining the will of the voters.”

By Zach Wendling, Nebraska Examiner

The most common question many Nebraskans have asked of state lawmakers considering legislative regulations for new medical cannabis laws is, “Why?”

At a series of public forums this month in La Vista, Omaha and Lincoln, some supporters of medical cannabis asked why state senators were even entertaining Legislative Bill 677 a half-year after Nebraskans approved legalizing and regulating medical cannabis.

Voters overwhelmingly approved two ballot measures last November. The one to legalize medical cannabis secured 71 percent approval. A companion regulatory measure won with 68 percent of the vote.

The answer to why lawmakers are considering changing those laws largely has to do with setting aside state funds for the new regulatory commission voters approved and setting up additional guardrails in the face of bureaucratic and executive branch opposition to medical cannabis, limits on how much a ballot measure can accomplish in a single vote and continued legal challenges.

Sen. Ben Hansen has repeatedly said the way Nebraska handles medical cannabis could become the “wild west” if the Legislature doesn’t pass LB 677, largely because of the lack of funding.

“We will essentially have nothing in the State of Nebraska,” Hansen told reporters last week. “You want to talk about denying the will of the voters, turning a blind eye to a ballot initiative that actually helps some individuals in the State of Nebraska who really need help? That’s undermining the will of the voters.”

Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers (R), who opposes medical cannabis and has supported efforts to stop the bill from being implemented, has argued that allowing the laws to take effect as-is would be better for the “will of the people,” which Hansen rejects as “false hope.”

The sponsors of the medical cannabis ballot measures in Nebraska support Hansen’s LB 677.

Funding for new regulatory commission

Among the top concerns for the new voter-created Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission, which has sole regulatory authority over medical cannabis, is getting the regulatory process moving so physicians can recommend the medicine and patients can legally buy it in the state.

While voters passed a regulatory measure setting a July 1 deadline to set new regulations and an October 1 deadline to start licensing medical dispensaries, dispersing state funds is a power reserved to the Nebraska Legislature. This means the new regulators have no funding set aside for the new commission through the end of this fiscal year, June 30.

The proposed state budget for the next two years would earmark an additional $30,000 each year for any Medical Cannabis Commission work taken on by Nebraska Liquor Control Commission employees. When voters approved creating the Medical Cannabis Commission, they assigned those additional duties to the three commissioners on the Liquor Control Commission.

But the state budget creates no new and separate line item for the Medical Cannabis Commission.

LB 677 provides a path to getting the commission more funding, though how much will be difficult in the face of a major projected budget deficit. The bill would also explicitly allow the commissions to share staff and resources.

Hilgers has argued the Medical Cannabis Commission should be drafting regulations anyway, despite a late March court filing from the commissioners that they have “no ability to carry out any duties” outlined in the new laws without funding, such as creating open meetings notices or paying staff.

As of March, that meant no meetings. No deliberations. No votes. No employees. No regulations.

Hilgers, a former speaker of the Legislature, said that the Medical Cannabis Commission could expend “incidental funds” to regulate cannabis and then request those funds be reimbursed next year. However, some senators questioned how that would be possible with no line item, or overarching agency, to do so.

The Legislature might not approve such a reimbursement, and Hilgers’s office has vowed to sue the commissioners if they begin to license medical cannabis dispensaries anyway.

Continued legal challenges

LB 677 continues to face opposition from some state senators who look to Hilgers’s ongoing and pledged legal challenges against the underlying cannabis laws as a reason for hesitancy.

However, passage of LB 677 could weaken and possibly nullify a pending appeal to the Nebraska Supreme Court, led by Hilgers and a former Republican state senator who has long opposed marijuana.

Hilgers speculated last week that if LB 677 passed, “it makes our job a lot more difficult to what we think should be a fair fight” in front of the Nebraska Supreme Court.

His office has alleged widespread fraud in the ballot measure campaign, which organizers have denied and a Lancaster County District Court judge widely rejected in November, after voters had weighed in.

The appeal from Hilgers’s office argues that because the district court judge found at least some signatures from four notaries that should not have been counted—not enough to disqualify the petitions—as grounds for the thousands of signatures collected by those notaries to lose a “presumption of validity.” If so, the case could then move to a second phase where campaign officials could try to rehabilitate enough signatures and still reach the threshold that was needed to be on the ballot.

None of the four targeted notaries have been criminally charged, Hilgers confirmed last week.

Should any medical cannabis dispensaries be licensed, Hilgers’s office has planned to argue that the laws are preempted by the federal government, which continues to classify marijuana as a dangerous drug with no medical value. However, there have been steps under the Biden administration and now the Trump administration to reclassify the drug. Dozens of other states have implemented medical or recreational marijuana programs.

“I think two plus two is four, even if everyone else says two plus two is five,” Hilgers said last week.

LB 677 would also provide immunity to health care practitioners who recommend medical cannabis to patients. Under current law, Hilgers said, “all health licensure is at risk of revocation, except in this case, if this bill were passed.”

He didn’t directly answer a reporter’s question whether his office might investigate the licenses of all physicians who recommend medical cannabis, or if his office would do so on a case-by-case basis.

The Nebraska Medical Association, in a written comment letter for LB 677 earlier this year, voiced support for the measure’s additional protections for medical providers.

New restrictions and guardrails

Securing the votes to get LB 677 out of the General Affairs Committee has required adding on a list of qualifying conditions, which excludes post-traumatic stress disorder, and prohibiting smoking as a permissible form of using medical cannabis.

Under the original ballot measure, a patient or their caregiver only needed to get sign-off from a health care provider to use medical cannabis in any form, including smoking.

While some senators and Hilgers argue smoking has never been a form of medicinal use, Nebraskans lined up one week ago to say that when they voted in November, they did so thinking all Nebraskans with a medical need could use cannabis in whatever form best worked for them. Some said they wouldn’t have voted for the ballot measures otherwise.

LB 677 would also amend the five-ounce limit to state that no more than two ounces of that amount can be dried flower or bud, which could be manufactured into edibles, tinctures, ointments or other products. It would also add sales taxes to medical cannabis and direct tax revenue to property tax relief.

Hansen has told supporters that while PTSD, for instance, was left out as a “negotiating factor” to get the bill out of committee, the bill remains a “moving target.”

State Sen. John Cavanaugh (D) of Omaha, vice chair of the General Affairs Committee, has already filed amendments to add PTSD or to leave all conditions up to a patient and their physician.

“Medical cannabis is legal,” Cavanaugh said. “We need LB 677 to make it accessible and safe.”

Some Nebraskans have voiced concerns that leaving all regulations up to the Medical Cannabis Commission, as current law does, could lead to more restrictions than under LB 677. Part of the reason is that the governor’s two at-large appointments to the commission have opposed legislation concerning medical cannabis. One appointee opposed LB 677 at its March hearing.

Constitutional restraints

Why weren’t all guardrails considered or presented to voters in November? In part, because the Nebraska Constitution’s “single subject” requirement for ballot measures limits what could be presented to voters to begin with.

The ballot measures sought and created new state laws, rather than constitutional amendments, giving the Legislature the ability to amend the provisions with at least 33 votes, or a two-thirds majority. It was the third campaign in six years after numerous legislative bills stalled.

Some Nebraskans have also drawn connections between LB 677 and pending legislative efforts to water down voter-approved minimum wage increases and paid sick leave requirements.

Unlike those measures, medical cannabis supporters have partnered with Hansen.

Legislative strategy

However, the trade-off in going through the Legislature is the necessity of garnering at least 33 votes, which on this issue would likely require all 15 Democrats, one progressive nonpartisan and 17 Republicans in the officially nonpartisan Legislature.

The result would be stricter than at the ballot box, but supporters say it could be the best path forward for implementing the law.

Hansen and campaign officials have said LB 677 presents an “opportunity” to examine the medical cannabis programs in other states and create the best one for Nebraska.

Hansen, a Republican with a Libertarian bent, has told supporters to share their stories and photos, mostly with his Republican colleagues, to get 33 votes. He said he’s telling his colleagues to pass LB 677 and regulate medical cannabis, or the voters will end up legalizing recreational marijuana.

State Sen. Jared Storm (R) of David City, a lead opponent to Hansen’s LB 677 who already views it as recreational, said he and others will prepare to fight the bill, if it is scheduled, to its max eight hours during first-round debate, which he said will be “very divisive” and “very tumultuous.”

Lawmakers are running out of time as they are set to adjourn June 9.

At a recent public forum, Hansen said incremental progress is showing “the world hasn’t ended” before lawmakers can return and expand LB 677.

“We’re not going to eat 100 percent of the apple,” Hansen said. “We get 75 percent, 80 percent, make sure the people who need it, you get it.”

This story was first published by Nebraska Examiner.

Legalizing Marijuana Reduces The Cost Of Workers’ Compensation Claims And Lowers Prescription Drug Use By Patients, Study Shows

Photo courtesy of Chris Wallis // Side Pocket Images.

“The Medical Cannabis Commission is fully enabled to meet and carry out its responsibilities.”

By Zach Wendling, Nebraska Examiner

It’s not every day that Nebraska’s three branches of government are all involved in a single topic. But one issue is front and center within the next week: medical cannabis.

Days before legislative debate and a Lincoln court hearing, Gov. Jim Pillen (R) on Friday announced “intentions” for executive branch staff to offer available administrative support and resources for voter-approved medical cannabis regulators to begin their work.

“With support from the Policy Research Office, the Department of Administrative Services and other agencies, as necessary, the Medical Cannabis Commission is fully enabled to meet and carry out its responsibilities under the Patient Protection Act and the Regulation Act to meet its milestone dates of July 1 [for regulations] and October 1 [for licensing],” a news release said.

Any regulations proposed by the commission would need to go through the attorney general and the governor. The Policy Research Office is the governor’s personal lobbying and policy arm.

State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair, whose Legislative Bill 677 seeks to clarify and place additional guardrails, confirmed he will still push forward with the legislation and was “a little surprised” by an executive about-face that now seeks to “unilaterally” enact regulations.

He said he sees LB 677 as the Legislature’s responsibility to act and set parameters for regulators that “can’t be changed at a whim.”

State Sen. Rick Holdcroft of Bellevue, chair of the Legislature’s General Affairs Committee that is mulling medical cannabis legislation, said the executive action diminishes Hansen’s previous argument that the laws could be the “wild west” if the Legislature doesn’t provide more guidance.

“I think there’s actually been some thought into establishing the cannabis control commission. It’s not a bad thing,” Holdcroft told the Nebraska Examiner on Friday.

But Hansen, in response, said: “I’m not worried about the ‘wild west’ anymore. I’m worried about nothing happening, and then we have recreational cannabis in two years.”

He cites voters who have said that if the regulations are too restrictive, they will push a 2026 ballot measure for recreational marijuana, including some voters who prefer only medical use.

Appointees will follow ‘letter of the law’

Hansen adds that part of the reason LB 677 is still needed is Pillen’s two at-large “potential” appointees to the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission. Together, they would join the three commissioners pulling double duty on the Nebraska Liquor Control Commission to create the new entity, which voters approved in November.

Pillen has appointed Dr. Monica Oldenburg of Lincoln, an anesthesiologist, and Lorelle Mueting of Gretna, the prevention director at Heartland Family Service, which focuses on drug prevention. Both have consistently opposed efforts pushed by the Nebraskans who prevailed at the ballot box last fall after more than a decade of advocacy.

Still, Pillen said that Oldenburg and Mueting are “experienced, well-qualified individuals” who will ensure strong regulations “to the letter of the law the people of Nebraska enacted.”

“I urge the Legislature to promptly confirm them so they can take up the urgent work of writing strong and effective ‘rules of the road’ for the medical cannabis industry,” Pillen said Friday.

Both Oldenburg and Mueting opposed the closest legislative attempt to legalize medical cannabis in 2021, LB 474, led by former State Sen. Anna Wishart of Lincoln, who later helped the ballot measures. The 2021 bill fell two votes short, 31-18.

‘Other motives may be at play’

Crista Eggers, executive director of Nebraskans for Medical Marijuana, said Friday that while supporters appreciated Pillen’s actions, it is “disingenuous” to characterize the new appointments as “experienced” or “well-qualified.”

“Appointing regulators who are fundamentally opposed to the very issue they are charged with overseeing suggests that other motives may be at play—motives that appear misaligned with the public intent, and not to mention the will of 71 percent of the state,” Eggers said in a statement.

The legalization position passed with 71 percent of the vote, while the regulatory measure trailed just slightly, with about 67 percent support. Eggers and other long-time advocates support LB 677 as an initial step for regulations.

At a March hearing on four medical cannabis bills, Mueting opposed LB 677 and two very similar bills and was “neutral” on the narrowest bill: LB 483, from State Sen. Jared Storm of David City, seeking to limit medical cannabis to tinctures or pills alone. LB 483 sought to legalize up to 300 milligrams, 0.21 percent of the 5 ounces that voters approved.

Both appointees will go before the General Affairs Committee next Thursday for confirmation hearings before the full Legislature weighs in.

Laura Strimple, a spokesperson for Pillen, said the office interviewed three people and selected two. A staff member who oversees application materials for appointees was out of the office Friday, so the materials for Oldenburg and Mueting were not immediately made available.

State Sen. John Cavanaugh of Omaha, vice chair of the General Affairs Committee, said he looks forward to the confirmation hearings but is “skeptical” of Pillen’s sincerity in helping voters.

“I will keep an open mind, but any attempt to restrict what the voters passed through bureaucratic red tape should be opposed vigorously,” Cavanaugh said in a text. “In the meantime, the Legislature should pass LB 677 to make sure that medical cannabis is legal, safe and accessible in Nebraska.”

Executive branch funding

Part of Pillen’s Friday announcement mentions “operational funding” already appropriated to the Medical Cannabis Commission, but when the next two-year state budget passed Thursday, new funding was limited.

The Appropriations Committee offered an annual $30,000 each of the next two fiscal years for employees in the Liquor Control Commission, who take on additional duties under the new laws. In comparison, the Liquor Control Commission has a $2 million annual budget, including for enforcement of regulations for compliance.

There is no additional funding for the remaining two months of the current fiscal year.

The Department of Administrative Services can provide limited financial support to agencies crafting regulations. Strimple, citing the department director who previously oversaw the state’s budget, said the Liquor Control Commission has a cash fund appropriation of $100,000 that is “rarely used.”

“This funding authority will allow for [the Cannabis Commission] to operate, combined with registration fees for revenue,” she said in an email.

The Liquor Control Commission has one cash fund, derived from the commission selling copies of its rules, the law governing its actions and other publications. It also gets funds from a number of fees for registration, server training and more, according to a Legislative Fiscal Office directory of state funds and programs.

State law allows the funds to be used for “any administrative costs” associated with specific liquor statutes. Medical cannabis statutes were placed in a different section of the law, and the budget bills did not expressly authorize additional spending.

Legislative and legal fights await

Hansen’s LB 677 is expected to be filibustered at each stage of debate, at a maximum of eight hours on Tuesday. If so, it would require 33 votes to advance and become law at the end.

Hansen said that considering Oldenburg and Mueting are “both openly staunch anti-medical cannabis people, you can only assume the direction on maybe where they’re going to go with the implementation of this.”

“If we don’t do anything, we have no idea what to expect,” Hansen said.

Holdcroft said he would support Hansen and LB 677 by arguing in favor of a “compromise” amendment to the bill, which gives an extra three months for regulations, prohibits smoking and outlines qualifying conditions.

Pillen previously told the Examiner that cannabis wouldn’t be approved in a form that could become recreational.

“My advocacy for it is that if you have a medical condition [and] you need it, you’ll get it, but it’s going to taste like crap,” Pillen said last month. “It’s going to be a bitter pill to swallow.”

‘Effectively do business’

Also on Tuesday, Lancaster County District Judge Susan Strong will consider oral arguments on whether to dismiss a lawsuit that argues the voter-approved medical cannabis laws are unconstitutional because of federal laws outlawing marijuana.

Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers (R), whose office is defending Pillen and other state officials, fundamentally opposes medical cannabis. He is asking that the case be dismissed, as are the regulatory commissioners and the ballot measure sponsors.

The reason is specific: Hilgers’s staff argues that the Attorney General’s Office and not a private citizen should be the one to challenge the laws.

LB 677 also presents a different threat to a pending appeal to the Nebraska Supreme Court, including from Hilgers’ office, alleging signature fraud in the medical cannabis ballot measures. Strong rejected those arguments in November and upheld the ballot measures. The AG’s Office and a former state senator who brought both cases before Strong appealed.

Because LB 677 would provide additional legislative weight to the 2024 ballot measures, Hilgers and other advocates have acknowledged it could nullify or weaken the pending appeal. Hilgers has said he should get a “fair fight” in front of the high court. He has also pledged to sue the new commission if it issues any medical cannabis licenses in the future, too.

With Pillen’s announcement, he joined the likes of Hilgers and U.S. Sen. Pete Ricketts, R-Neb., who have argued that lawmakers should wait and pass no cannabis-related bills this year.

Said Strimple: “Governor Pillen does not believe it is necessary for LB 677 to pass because with existing statutory authority and resources, the Medical Cannabis Commission will have everything it needs to effectively do business.”

This story was first published by Nebraska Examiner.

Legalizing Marijuana Reduces The Cost Of Workers’ Compensation Claims And Lowers Prescription Drug Use By Patients, Study Shows

Photo courtesy of Chris Wallis // Side Pocket Images.

“While I support common-sense regulation to eliminate unsafe synthetic intoxicants and unregulated products from the market, this bill goes too far.”

By Nicole Dyer, U.S. Pain Foundation via Tennessee Lookout

I’m a Tennessean, a mother of three and someone who lives with a complex, disabling pain condition.

I’m also the CEO of a national nonprofit dedicated to improving the lives of the more than 51.6 million Americans who live with chronic pain. And right now, I’m deeply alarmed by Tennessee legislation that could strip away access to the thing that helps me—and thousands of others—get through the day: safe, full-spectrum CBD.

House Bill 1376 and Senate Bill 1413 would limit even trace amounts of delta-9 THC in hemp-derived products—effectively banning many full-spectrum CBD products that are non-intoxicating, carefully formulated and third-party tested. While I support common-sense regulation to eliminate unsafe synthetic intoxicants and unregulated products from the market, this bill goes too far. Rather than protecting consumers, it threatens to harm more than 665,000 Tennesseans who rely on full-spectrum hemp CBD for relief.

For people living with chronic pain, full-spectrum CBD is not a luxury—it’s a lifeline. I’ve lived with pain for over 30 years due to a rare, chronic pain condition that causes widespread, burning nerve pain. The simplest tasks—standing, lifting my child, working a full day—can be nearly impossible without some form of relief. I’ve tried dozens of treatments, from prescription medications to physical therapy to surgical interventions. Some helped. Many didn’t. Full-spectrum CBD is one of the few things that consistently makes a difference. It reduces inflammation, soothes muscle spasms and takes the edge off my daily suffering.

Every day, I use three specific full-spectrum products—a tincture, a topical and an edible. They contain trace amounts of naturally occurring delta-9 THC, well within the federal legal limit of 0.3 percent. These products don’t get me high. They help me sleep. They help me show up for my job and be present for my family. They allow me to contribute to my community and care for my kids. Without them, I don’t know how I would manage.

And I am not alone.

At the U.S. Pain Foundation, we regularly hear from individuals who face serious challenges in accessing the care and relief they need to manage chronic pain. Barriers like stigma, high costs, limited treatment options and restrictive policies often stand in the way. For some, hemp-derived CBD has become an essential part of their pain management plan, helping them live with greater dignity and less suffering.

In fact, a national survey we conducted in 2022 found that 22 percent of respondents currently use hemp-derived CBD products—often alongside other therapies as part of a multidisciplinary approach to care. These individuals deserve access to the treatments that help them, free from unnecessary barriers.

Science is catching up, too. Studies show CBD as a promising option for managing chronic pain, particularly neuropathic and inflammatory pain, due to its comprehensive therapeutic approach. Unlike isolated cannabinoids, full-spectrum CBD includes all naturally occurring compounds from the cannabis plant—such as a range of cannabinoids, terpenes and flavonoids—which work together to produce what’s known as the ‘entourage effect.’

Recent research explores the potential benefits of various cannabinoids in pain management and emphasizes the role of synergistic interactions and the entourage effect, highlighting the importance of full-spectrum products in achieving optimal therapeutic outcomes.

And yet, despite this growing body of evidence, Tennessee lawmakers are poised to remove this option from people who need it most. HB 1376/SB 1413 fails to distinguish between therapeutic, non-intoxicating full-spectrum products and the synthetic or recreational products that rightly raise concern. In doing so, it threatens the health, independence and stability of thousands of Tennesseans living with pain.

I was heartbroken to see the legislature pass this bill. But I still hold out hope—hope that rests now with Gov. Bill Lee (R). I’ve written to him personally, urging a veto. I ask my fellow Tennesseans—especially those who’ve never had to think twice about how they manage their pain—to consider what’s at stake.

This isn’t about special treatment or backdoor legalization. It’s about the right to access safe, plant-based wellness tools. It’s about evidence-based public policy that doesn’t punish people for trying to survive their conditions. It’s about understanding that one-size-fits-all health care solutions often leave the most vulnerable behind.

We are your neighbors, coworkers, veterans and grandparents. We are Tennesseans who want to live productive lives despite our pain. Please don’t take away one of the few tools that helps us do that.

I hope Gov. Lee will veto HB 1376/SB 1413 and protect access to full-spectrum CBD. Preserve the dignity, autonomy and well-being of people living with pain in Tennessee.

Nicole Dyer is a mom of three, a Tennessean living with chronic pain and CEO of the U.S. Pain Foundation.

This story was first published by Tennessee Lookout.

CBD Helped Relieve Chronic Pain In More Than 98% Of Patients, Newly Published Study Finds