MPP

4 BUSINESS VIEW MAGAZINE VOLUME 10, ISSUE 9 out the complexities of navigating the diverse cannabis laws across states. “While we’re advocating for federal legalization to address challenges arising from state-by- state discrepancies, we recognize the unique power states hold in matters of health and welfare,” she explains. She highlights the complications stemming from the federal illegality of cannabis, such as banking issues, federal tax burdens, and the absence of standardized rules on matters like pesticides. However, she also sees a silver lining in this patchwork approach. “While the federal prohibition presents its challenges, allowing states to act as laboratories of democracy has its merits. Different states have adopted varied approaches, especially in social equity programs, providing a chance to discern what works and what doesn’t.” She mentions that while MPP offers model legislation, they understand and respect the unique priorities and political landscapes of each state. Addressing the intricacies of cannabis use across state lines, O’Keefe points out, “Typically, the law of the state you’re in governs your actions. However, there are exceptions.” She cites South Dakota as an example where internal possession of cannabis is a crime, meaning having THC in one’s system after consuming in a legal state could technically be a violation. Another concern is the unscientific DUI laws in some states that criminalize individuals for having cannabis in their system, even if they’re not impaired. “THC can remain in one’s system for weeks, making it possible for someone to face charges for a substance consumed legally elsewhere,” she warns. “Unlike alcohol, where there’s a clear threshold for impairment, cannabis, and other drugs require a more comprehensive assessment,” she explains. The MPP advocates for a system where trained experts, combined with blood tests, determine impairment, ensuring that innocent individuals aren’t wrongfully convicted. Packaging and Safety: Protecting the Younger Generation When it comes to ensuring the safety of cannabis products, especially in households with children, O’Keefe underscores the importance of clear and secure packaging. “Our model legislation mandates that cannabis products sold by retailers be housed in opaque, child-proof packaging. Additionally, a standardized THC warning symbol is essential, ensuring that even adult consumers are well-informed and can make conscious choices,” she explains. She further emphasizes the dual responsibility of both the state and consumers in ensuring safety. “The bills we advocate for allocate a portion of the state’s cannabis tax revenue towards comprehensive education campaigns. Much like how parents are cautioned about household items like Tide Pods or certain cosmetics, which account for numerous child poisonings annually, they need to be equally vigilant about cannabis products,” she elaborates.