SSDPers Testify in Texas State House
Former University of North Texas Chapter Leader and current Elected Director on SSDP’s youth-led Board of Directors Jeannette McKenzie and Halle Tarvin, an SSDP alumni who was one of the original founders of UNT’s SSDP chapter, testified last week against two Texas bills that threaten to recriminalize cannabinoids and create harsh new penalties under law. The pair have been working hard to rally Texans against bad cannabis policy, including helping organize a recent lobby day in Austin.
Jeannette’s Testimony Against Texas House Bill 28
Good afternoon representatives,
My name is Jeannette McKenzie. I’d like to start by expressing gratitude to you Mr. Chairman and fellow committee members for your patience and consideration of our testimonies on this topic.
I currently serve as the director of people for Texas cannabis collective, a local volunteer ran non-profit. I also previously worked on the campaigns to decriminalize misdemeanor possession in both Denton and Dallas.
Unlike many who are here today, I do not work for any hemp related businesses nor do I work for any medical cannabis companies nor am I a patient. I am simply a concerned citizen, and a passionate volunteer in this community.
I’ve heard concerns from legislators today that I don’t want to dismiss or make light of. These concerns all originate from a place of concern for public safety which is not without basis. The current regulations for the hemp market are not being properly enforced due to lack of infrastructure and systems supporting accountability. There is also a need for additional regulations as cannabis science has evolved in recent years.
I’d like to approach this concerns from a perspective of harm reduction, an evidence based philosophy that is emphasizes individual liberty by aiming to reduce negative consequences associated with any behavior or action that has potential risks. Regulation is harm reduction. For example, if a bar is knowingly selling alcohol to minors or over serving guests, TABC shuts them down. Bartenders and servers are required to go through training to obtain TABC licenses and renew these licenses every two years. This is harm reduction.
Education and regulation are proven methods that reduce harm and keep our communities safe. And let me tell you, as someone who works in fine dining, no one messes around when it comes to TABC.
Cannabis is complex though, there are hundreds of cannabinoids that have different benefits, the majority of which are not psychoactive. Limiting cannabis to the beverage market and reducing it to solely THC would be a disservice to the plant and the potentials it offers. What Cannabis needs is its own version of TABC that is specific to these products and led by experts in the complexities of the plant.
Additionally, my concern as a citizen lies is in criminalization aspect of the bill. As has been previously stated, there is no regulatory authority able to stop out of state direct to consumer mailed sales and there is a demand for these products beyond drinks.
Jeannette’s Testimony Against Texas Senate Bill 3
Good evening, Representatives, Thank you all for your patience in being here this evening.
I wanted to go back to what I was saying at the end of my last testimony: I want to approach the topic of regulation from a perspective of harm regulation.
We’ve talked a lot about the potential harms of unregulated products. We’ve talked a lot about the harms that will come to compliant Texas businesses and the local economy. We’ve talked a lot about the harms that will come to medical patients who will lose access.
These are very real harms, but those harms can be reduced through sensible regulation and community education.
What has not been discussed is the known harms that incarceration has on individuals, as well as the ripples of detrimental effects that it has on families, friends, local economies, and communities as a whole.
As someone who has had loved ones ripped away from me for non violent cannabis offenses, I’ve seen first hand this destruction of people’s lives and experienced the ripple effect as a loved one.
Numerous studies have shown that incarceration leads to barriers in getting an education, jobs, housing, and more. That it exasperates both physical and mental health issues for individuals and family members. It often leads to financial crisis and places burden on relatives often causing them to go into extreme debt. It increases the likelihood of relapses in addiction, and like likelihood of recidivism, of which we have the highest rate in the developed world. This is especially concerning when you consider that most cannabis offenders are non-violent, yet are put in facilities where they are surrounded by violent offenders who, let me tell you, do have a negative influence.
I hope that you will consider the harms that will inevitably come to the average citizen consumer if you criminalize these products. If you’re concerned for consumers health and wellness, I can assure you incarceration will only exasperate these issues.
I would also love to provide some clarification on some definitions that have been talked about earlier. As far as synthetic versus semi-synthetic versus natural cannabinoids, as fully synthetic are not naturally occurring with the plant but they affect the endocannabinoid system.
Hallie’s Testimony Against Texas House Bill 28
Hello, my name’s Hallie Tarvin. I was born and raised in Texas. I attended UNT for undergrad, and I am currently a PhD candidate with SMU. I have been involved in cannabis education and research since I was 18 years old.
First, limiting a product’s cannabinoid content to just CBD, CBG, and delta-9-THC is not simple. It requires its own chemistry, which could incorporate toxins to ensure such products would be compliant with that three cannabinoid limit. All cannabinoids are hemp-derived cannabinoids. All cannabinoids oxidize into others over time, like CBN, like THCV. The issue is the synthesis of these cannabinoids, these naturally occurring cannabinoids in the plant, in trace amounts. The issue is not the actual trace cannabinoids themselves, like Delta-8, like CBN.
Second, all of this talk of extraction in synthesized cannabinoids neglects the entourage effect, a phenomenon which provides therapeutic benefits when the full spectrum of cannabinoids, including those trace cannabinoids, are present in a product. These beverages will produce no such effect because of their limited cannabinoid types due to this bill as well as beverage processing itself.
Third, I don’t understand what limiting products to beverages does for child safety. Can children not open cans? Will they sell these products in prescription cough syrup bottles with child safe lids? If not, I don’t really see efficacy here. Giving the cannabis industry over to TABC and the most profitable companies in the hemp beverage industry will not fix accidental pediatric ingestion and it will not protect the hundreds of thousands of Texans who will lose their jobs when the other 90% of the industry’s products are banned. I am all for testing, COAs, regulation, extensive regulation, establishing a regulatory authority, but opening the floodgates for an all beverage market only helps Texans already involved in that specific sector of the industry.
HB 28 is not enough. It does provide special privilege to specific members of this industry. Also, I second all of Susan Hayes’ facts. Thank you.
Hallie’s Testimony Against Texas Senate Bill 3
Hello, my name is Hallie Tarvin. I was born and raised in Texas. I went to UNT for undergrad. I’m currently a PhD candidate at SMU. I have been involved in cannabis research and education since I was 18 years old, and I also have a master’s in medical cannabis science from the University of Maryland.
To myself and many others, cannabis and hemp are not just industries. They are a part of a developing academic field, medical cannabis science. Cultivators, business operators, distributors, educators, clinicians, and researchers alike will absolutely and affirmatively be hindered by SB3.
Every legislative session, Texas lawmakers miss the opportunity to grab the reins, take control, and regulate this industry, this entire industry, like alcohol has been for almost a century, since 1935. It is my expert opinion that we need comprehensive regulation. If we had it, then the harm many claim to experience solely because of cannabis could almost entirely be avoided and thousands of jobs would arise.
We need a state-level regulatory agency only focused on cannabis, like other US states. Such an authority oversees cultivation, distribution, business standards, education, testing, medical care, research, and the enforcement of such regulations. Banning every cannabinoid except for CBG and CBD is not only scientifically impossible, but it will enable the black market to boom to an extent never before seen in Texas.
Also, Any psychoactive or psychostimulating substance can trigger psychosis in somebody with a genetic predisposition to it. I just wanted to clarify that. Ultimately, hundreds of thousands of Texans will be punished medically and professionally if SB3 is passed, and it holds them back from legally accessing cannabis science as a field and the cannabis industry. Ultimately, SB3 will fail and disable Texans as a whole. Thank you.
