Key Pennsylvania GOP Senator Doesn’t See ‘Any Path Whatsoever’ To Legalizing Marijuana Under Governor’s Proposal

A top Pennsylvania Republican senator says he doesn’t “see any path whatsoever” to pass marijuana legalization as requested under the governor’s latest budget. But a Democratic House colleague is pushing for the reform, saying he can’t understand why Pennsylvania would forgo tax dollars from cannabis that are currently going to other states.

At the same time, the state secretary for the Department of Revenue is predicting that the governor’s legalization plan could be enacted during the current budget cycle, indicating that he feels reform could start to be implemented within months.

“I don’t see any path whatsoever,” Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Scott Martin (R) said in an interview on Tuesday, responding to Gov. Josh Shapiro’s (D) budget request to enact legalization. 

“There’s many states that have promised revenues that never materialized on the level that they said, but there’s something to be said about not jumping fully into the pool when you can’t answer all those questions,” he said, adding that the argument that Pennsylvania should pass the reform based on surrounding states doing so is a “pretty weak excuse.”

House Appropriations Chairman Jordan Harris (D) had a different perspective on the governor’s budget plan, echoing Shapiro’s argument about the state’s loss of revenue to neighboring legal states.

“People are going across the state line to go buy cannabis in New York and New Jersey,” he told WGAL. “That’s our tax dollars that should be here. I can’t understand why people wouldn’t want to keep that money in Pennsylvania.”

At a House Appropriations Committee hearing on the governor’s plan on Tuesday, members shared opposing takes on the cannabis proposal, with certain GOP lawmakers such as Rep. Charity Grimm Krupa (R) expressing concerns about issues related to public health and crime, the costs of implementation and the impact on workforce, for example.

Other lawmakers had questions about the appropriate tax rate for cannabis, how much marijuana officials project will be consumed in the state after legalization and how various agencies would work together to regulate the product.

Separately, Rep. Emily Kinkead (D)—who has sponsored legalization legislation in the past—raised concerns about an apparent lack of social equity language in the governor’s cannabis proposal to ensure that communities that have been most harmed by criminalization can benefit from the legal market.

At a separate Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on Tuesday, Sen. Joe Picozzi (D) pressed Secretary of Revenue Pat Browne on whether it’s “realistic to assume a legislative solution like this can be fully passed and implemented in order to allow for sales to begin in less than a year.”

“Our revenue projections assume—and that’s a statutory matter for the Assembly and the governor to consider and pass—but they assume that the forecast of revenues from this will come as a result of activity in the current cycle,” Browne said.

Similarly, Browne told House lawmakers that state officials will make “every effort” to ensure that a recreational market is in place to launch by January 1 of next year in line with the governor’s plan.

Rep. Marla Brown (R) asked the revenue official when legislation would need to pass by in order for that to happen.

“We’re making the proposal now as part of the budget. Our financial projections are part of the budget,” he replied. “So anytime within this budget cycle, as the budget is being worked on, would be something we would expect. We’re not anticipating that would happen outside the budget cycle and would happen along with the conversation about the budget. But anytime within that that time frame would allow us to move forward to do what we need to do.”

Browne added that officials are “working with the front office” on “the final product” of legalization legislation. “When it’s complete, we’ll make sure that the members of the Assembly have it,” he said.

At the separate Senate hearing, Picozzi also asked about potential complications under federal cannabis prohibition as far as tax collection is concerned, and the secretary noted that “we currently do that” under the state’s medical marijuana program.

“This is something that is a good benchmark for us,” he said. “Ohio is using their medical cannabis system as a platform for the recreational cannabis system, and that is the basis for us determining whether interacting with Washington will be a concern, because their situation regarding medical and recreational, as far as Schedule I, doesn’t change.”

“So does coming tax revenue generated from the sale of a Schedule I controlled substance expose the general fund to any potential legal ramifications?” Picozzi asked.

“We don’t believe so, given the fact that we are currently in the process of selling medical marijuana,” Browne said.

“With legalization of adult use recreational cannabis potentially jeopardize any federal funds received by the Commonwealth?” the senator asked.

“It does not,” he said.

House Majority Leader Matt Bradford (D), meanwhile, said following the governor’s budget speech that “there is real diversity of opinions among our members,” likely referencing split perspectives on regulatory models, with some lawmakers pushing for a state-run cannabis program.

He also said recently that he feels the time is ripe to advance marijuana reform this session, saying “it strikes me as abdicating our responsibility to protect our communities and our children, and at the same time, we are losing revenue that is going to go into our neighboring states.”

This comes about a week after Sen. Dan Laughlin (R), who supports marijuana legalization, said the governor’s latest cannabis proposal “undermines” the goals of the reform and has “no real path forward.”

“I have long believed that Pennsylvania needs a responsible, well-regulated adult-use cannabis program that prioritizes public safety, eliminates the illicit market and generates legitimate economic growth,” Laughlin said. “That’s why I have introduced legislation for the past four years to legalize cannabis in a way that makes sense for consumers, businesses and law enforcement.”

“I take this issue seriously and will continue to work toward a responsible and effective policy,” he said. “Unfortunately, while both [former] Gov. Tom Wolf and now Shapiro have included cannabis revenue projections in their budgets, neither administration has made a genuine effort to work with me or legislative leadership to get a bill passed. Simply projecting revenue without crafting a functional plan does nothing to move Pennsylvania forward.”

This has been a recurring criticism of the governor, who projected in his latest budget request this month that the state stood to generate $536.5 million from legal cannabis sales under his plan, which involves a relatively high tax rate for marijuana compared to other state cannabis markets.

Laughlin isn’t alone in his skepticism about the governor’s ability to see through the cannabis reform he’s proposing.

“The governor needs to lead on something. If he wants something done, he needs to lead on it,” Senate President Pro Tempore Kim Ward (R) said. “He can’t throw an idea out there—which he did last year—and say, ‘Let the legislature figure it out. I’ll sign it. Then I’ll go do press conferences all over the state.’”

House Minority Leader Jesse Topper (R) was also asked about the prospect of enacting various of the governor’s budget proposals, including marijuana. And he said while he’s “not going to speak for the governor,” there’s “one person that has the ability to bring those deals together—and that is the governor.”

He referenced recent remarks from Senate Majority Leader Joe Pittman (R) who said there are logistical challenges to advancing legalization that he’s unsure lawmakers will be able to overcome.

The feedback from GOP lawmakers is reminiscent of earlier criticism from the caucus about the governor, who they’ve claimed has made the call for reform without meaningfully engaging with the legislature about how to get it done.

Also, the new Republican state attorney general of Pennsylvania recently raised concerns about the “potential harm that could be caused criminally” by enacting the reform.

The Republican chair of a key Senate committee recently said he’s expecting to take up legislation this year that would make Pennsylvania the 25th in the U.S. to legalize adult-use marijuana. He also thinks that more of his GOP colleagues could get on board with the reform soon than have in the past.

While many legalization advocates and observers think Pennsylvania is among the most likely states to pass a recreational marijuana law this session, the devil is in the details. One lawmaker has floated a relatively simple bill to decriminalize personal possession, while two others plan to introduce more sweeping legislation that would legalize through a state-run system of stores.

Laughlin last spring introduced a bill meant to remove state barriers to medical marijuana patients carrying firearms. While it didn’t move forward, the lawmaker said in the recent interview that he believes political support for legalization more broadly has been building.

The senator said an event last May that the state is “getting close” to legalizing marijuana, but the job will only get done if House and Senate leaders sit down with the governor and “work it out.”

Reps. Dan Frankel (D) and Rick Krajewski (D) announced in December that they planned to file legalization legislation, emphasizing that there’s a “moral obligation” to repair harms of criminalization while also raising revenue as neighboring state markets mature.

Frankel said sponsors hope for a vote on the bill “sometime early spring,” though questions remain as to whether the legislature would be willing to get behind the push to end cannabis prohibition, especially through the state-run sales model he is proposing.

A separate decriminalization measure, meanwhile, from Pennsylvania Rep. Danilo Burgos (D), would make simple possession of cannabis a summary offense punishable by a $100 fine without the threat of jail time. Currently, low-level possession is considered a misdemeanor, carrying a penalty of up to 30 days in jail, a maximum $500 fine or both.

Additionally, in September, bipartisan Reps. Aaron Kaufer (R) and Kinkead formally introduced a bipartisan marijuana legalization bill, alongside 15 other cosponsors.

In July, the governor said his administration and lawmakers would “come back and continue to fight” for marijuana legalization and other policy priorities that were omitted from budget legislation he signed into law that month.

As for medical marijuana, the governor in October signed a bill to correct an omission in a law that unintentionally excluded dispensaries from state-level tax relief for the medical marijuana industry.

About three months after the legislature approved the underlying budget bill that Shapiro signed containing tax reform provisions as a partial workaround to a federal ban on tax deductions for cannabis businesses, the Pennsylvania legislature passed corrective legislation.

Separately, at a Black Cannabis Week event hosted recently by the Diasporic Alliance for Cannabis Opportunities (DACO) in October, Street and Reps. Chris Rabb (D), Amen Brown (D), Darisha Parker (D) and Napoleon Nelson (D) joined activists to discuss their legislative priorities and motivations behind advancing legalization in the Keystone State.

Other lawmakers have also emphasized the urgency of legalizing as soon as possible given regional dynamics, while signaling that legislators are close to aligning House and Senate proposals.

As for cannabis and gun ownership, Laughlin had been looking at the issue for more than a year before introducing last year’s bill, writing last February to the state’s acting police commissioner to “strongly encourage” he review a federal ruling that the U.S. government’s ban on gun ownership by people who use marijuana is unconstitutional.

Since then, further federal court cases have questioned the constitutionality of the federal firearm ban. A federal judge in El Paso, for example, recently ruled that the ongoing ban on gun ownership by habitual marijuana users was unconstitutional in the case of a defendant who earlier pleaded guilty to the criminal charge. The court allowed the man to withdraw the plea and ordered that the indictment against him be dismissed.

Supreme Court Asked To Settle Differing Interpretations Of Federal Medical Marijuana Protections Amid Lower Court Discrepancy