Congresswoman Nancy Mace on Legalizing Marijuana the Republican Way

use any type of drug. One of the most popular episodes the Psychoactive to date has been the one where I invited my friend Julie Holland to service my co host and answer questions with me from you the audience. So we're going to record another one of those episodes, and we need your questions. Leave us a voicemail with a question as d he tells us possible at one eight three, three seven, seven nine sixty, or you can record a voice memo and send it to Psychoactive at

protozoa dot com. I'm sure it's going to be a great second go with this. Hello, Psychoactive listeners. So our guest today is Congresswoman Nancy Mays. She's a freshman member of Congress, she's a Republican, and she's recently introduced a bill to legalize marijuana at the federal level. Now, before I asked her to join us, I wanted to talk briefly with Kyle Jaeger, a journalist for the online publication

Marijuana Moment who's been covering developments on Capitol Hill regarding marijuana. So, Kyle, thanks so much for joining me on Psychoactive. So here's Nancy Mays my guest today, who's introduced, you know, uh, marijuana legalization bill. First Republican, I think, first Republican to introduce such a bill and starting to be running with it. But there's other bills out there. Is There is that Schumer Bill, there is the Jerry Nadler More Act, or

Safe Banking. What is the state of play? Can you tell us first on the marijuana legalization bills before we get into the banking stuff. So we do have these

three major bills in play. Um. I think the more momentum that this issue has generated, the more we've seen divergent and increasingly bipartisan ideas about what a legalization framework should look like, and so you do have the bill from House Street to share you, Chairman jer Nadler Um, the Marijuana Opportunity, Reinvestment and Expungement Act or the MORE Act, which cleared the House historically in December and has since

passed a committee this session in September one. Um. And then like you said, we have the bill from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer um the KAWA or the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act, which we saw a draft version of that released last year and uh, and the Leader

has talked about introducing it hopefully in in April. But then as you as as you mentioned, we had this Republican lead bill sponsored by Congresswoman Nancy Maze, her State Reforms Act, which really generated a lot of excitement just you know, by virtue of a Republican leading on this issue is you know, the main point there, and you saw cannabis stocks immediate rally. But in any case, you know, we don't we don't have the text of the Schoomer Bill yet, so it's kind of hard to say where

you know, votes might lie on that issue. But yeah, those are the three main bills, and and they're fundamentally fairly similar. I mean all of them would remove marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act, they would deschedule it so that would enforce legalization on states. And then where they diverge is on you know, tax revenue issues. You know, who should be in charge of regulating the market, where

would revenue go toward? UM. It's very NUANCEDNT, but like the overall objectives are are ultimately I would say the same UM. And so then you know, as you mentioned, there's a Safe Banking Act which would very simply provide protections for financial institutions that work with state legal cannabis businesses against being penalized by federal regulators. And so that's

viewed as a more industry friendly incremental reform. Although you know it's it's chief sponsor in the House, Congressman pro Motter has really made a point to to stress, hey, this bill is also about equity, you know, providing you know, provides opportunities and avenues for small and minority owned businesses to get the capital to participate in the market, which would help reduce this disparity that we've seen not just under critinalization but even in legal markets. And so the

momentum here is clear. The fact that you're seeing this increasing bipartisan interest like that's that's a really encouraging sign

for stakeholders, for advocates, for everyone. But that means more opinions, and that means coming up with passible legislation might be might become a little bit more complicated the more actor Nadler's bill that passed a couple of years ago, I think with all but five or six Democrats on board and all but five or six Republicans against, do you think it's going to pass by somewhat similar margins this time around, I would predict so, if not a little

bit more. I mean they've had more time to digest to the various provisions and more time to to consider, you know, what this reform would accomplish, and the odds or that could happen sometime in March of this year. That's what we're hearing. Yeah, we're hearing that the floor votes on the more, which would be the second time that it's reached the House floor, will be aligned fairly similarly with the formal introduction of the Schumer Senate version

there Kawa call you use the acronym before Kawa. What does that mean, the KAWA is the bill from Majority Leeker Schumer, the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act. As for the Senate bill, what's the prospects with that going forward? It's hard to make any kind of predictions about what's achievable in the Senate. I would say we're likely looking at requiring sixty votes here, and there's been earlier reporting on some moderate Democrats still expressing some level of skepticism

about the just the very concept of legalization. But I think will understand a little bit more of the breakdown once we actually see the legislation like filed at. Schumer and his colleagues have been engaging very actively with advocates and stakeholders as they find wise this legislation. So I think, well, we'll know more in April. And can you imagine any Republicans, I mean the Alaska Senator Murkowski or anybody actually signing onto it. I could see that's just without the actual text.

That's kind of the go to response from from these you know, both on the fence Democrats and Republican senators. You know they need to see the bill text before they make a decision. But I do think, you know, the just the fact that we have a Republican led alternative introduced in you know, building the momentum in gaining interest.

It shows that, you know, there is an avenue potentially maybe room for compromise um as they merge or discuss the opportunities to incorporate different provisions of these varying bills. It seems like a major divide between Democrats and Republicans is that the Democratic bills really insist on racial equity measures being included, or the Republicans really get their backs up against anything like that. Is that your perception, I think so. I think that's right. This has been an

ongoing conversation like as they've as they've drafted this. I think that the more focus that you put on equity provisions, you know, there's this calculus of, you know, how much Republican support might you be losing. I think Congressman Matt Gates has kind of articulated that position on these more

Cannabis friendly members of Congress um. He was one of the republic Republicans who voted for the More Act, but expressed a lot of skepticism about the extent to which it addresses and and provides funding for these equity provisions that advocates are really pushing for. Whereas the mace bill, you know, has attracted both It has attracted by partisans

support but hers. But it's a lot of focus on respecting state autonomy and making sure that they're the industries that they've built over time, and so that's an appealing point for for both parties. I think. I think Nancy Macee has only attracted a half dozen or so co sponsors among the Republicans, and she says she wants to focus there before going on to Democrats. What's your broader take on where the Republicans are in the House. I mean,

are there in fact? You think many dozens who would support marijuana legalization if it was Masis bill as opposed to a Democratic bill. That's sort to say, I mean it. I think that Republicans might be more inclined to support something that was very very bare bones that, you know, something like a simple de scheduling bill that would promove

cannabis from Schedule one. But her bill, you know, is being pitched as this middle ground approach, you know, a lower tax rate than some of the Democratic lead bills that we're talking about out and like I said, a more industry focused approach to these this issue. So in terms of dozens of Republicans, you know, I I'd be skeptical about that, but I do think that she's done a good job of of of towing the line on this. It seemed like Nancy Mace came out of almost nowhere

to introduce this bill and nobody was expecting it. Why do you think she's doing it and what's your sense of how other Republicans are responding. I think that Nancy Mace has has done in you know, and she has a history both in the South Carolina legislature of of of backing medical cannabis reforms, so she's familiar with this issue.

I think she, like many of her colleagues, recognized the unpopularity of criminalization and she sees this opportunity to to take the lead on something that might you know, hopefully be passable from from her perspective legislation. Why do you think so many Republicans remain opposed even when you have polls showing a majority of Republicans at a strong majority of young Republicans in favor. That is the million dollar question, Ethan. You know, I can't I can't say. I mean, it's perplexing.

It's you know, there can they hear from their constituents. They they see these the same pollings that we're we're covering and following and um, and so it's you know, Congress has always been a few steps behind the public on on this issue, but it's just so overwhelming and increasingly bipartisan that it's hard to square any signs that Biden and the White House might get more supportive this year.

I don't think so. I mean, the last time that I remember, Fresh Secretary Saki asked about this, she she made it very clear the president's position on this issue

has not changed. And it's you know, perplexing by the fact that you've seen within this first year of him in office unfulfilled promises on more modest and incremental reforms, whether that's hardens for for people in federal prison for past cannabis convictions, or you know, taking steps to at the very least rescheduled cannabis as he promised to do

on the campaign trail. It doesn't exactly give a lot of hope that there's gonna be a one eight here and he's gonna openly and publicly back this issue, let

alone fulfill the more modest reforms that he campaigned. Well, Kyle, thank you so much for joining me on Psychoactive, and I just have to say that the writing that you and the co founder and your co editor of Marijuana Moment, Tom Angel had been doing and covering marijuana issues, including Capitol Hill, has been immensely helpful to me, and I encourage our listeners to subscribe and take a look at Marijuana Moment if you want to follow this. Thank you

very very much. Thank you for having me. We'll be talking more after we hear this ADM. Well, now that Kyle has provided the broader context for us, I want to invite on Congressmen Mace to talk about the marijuana bill she's introducing Congress, why she did it it, and how's it going. So Cosman Mace, thank you so much for joining me on Psychoactive, and thank you for having me.

You know, I feel like cannabis the only place is really controversials in d C. I don't know why we haven't done it yet, and it's one of my it's a big frustration of mine in Congress, So tell me why you did it. I have been a supporter of cannabis reform. Long before I went to Congress, I was a state lawmaker for a few years, and in South Carolina there's been a push for medical cannabis, and I was one of the co sponsors when I was in the state legislature. But this goes back further than that.

When I was young and growing up, I was sixteen and I was raped by a classmate of mine in school, and I dropped out of school, out of high school shortly thereafter, and I had a lot of issues trying to overcome the trauma that I had been through, and I was prescribed antidepressants at the time, and not long into that um, I felt like the prescription drugs I was given was making my depression actually worse and making me feel suicidal, and so I stopped taking the medicine

that was prescribed by my doctor and I started using cannabis unbeknownst to me because I was young, and you know, I didn't really know a lot about it, but it cut my anxiety and helped me get through some really really difficult times emotionally, mentally, physically in my life. And I use it for a limited period of time, but I saw the benefits that it had, you know, with moderate use for me personally to get through those times. It was better than doing other drugs and drinking, etcetera.

But it got me through and cut my anxiety and helped me manage some of the feelings that I had in order to survive basically this really traumatic period of my life. I mean, how did you even come up with the idea to try cannabis back then? I mean it was a friends who suggested it, or had you read about it or what was key? No, I mean, it was just I needed something to get through the challenges that I had and then I faced and I had access to it and I used it. And you know,

at the time it was really young. But you know, you sort of I'm forty four now and you look back on your life and you understand why some of the experiences that you have. But emotionally, like, for instance, I'm only passionate about veterans issues, and so when I talked about veterans, about PTSD and the high rate of suicides, like, I feel that pain because I've been in that pain.

I felt those kinds of emotions, and so for me, it's an issue that I'm personally very passionate about but you sort of learn it by trial and error, right for me anyway back in those days, which is one of the reasons. You know, if you want to study it thoroughly for medical if you want to study at marijuana for medical purposes, you've got to reschedule it. And to deschedule it, you have to decriminalize it. There's a

whole process here that has to happen. And so it's one of the reasons I'm just so passionate about getting this done and doing it in a way that respects the rights of states because every state is different and it's kind of a patchwork, and ensure that we have comprehensive legislation that has something for both Republicans and Democrats in there that we can work on it together. I wanted to prove that it can be done well before

we get into the bill itself. I just want to have another sort of personal question, which is you know, I mean, you first came to some tension in the media years ago because you were the first woman to graduate in the Core Kids program at South Carolina is state funded military college to Citadel, but also your father is a general he was the head, the commander, I guess at the citadel at that time. He's a highly

decorated Vietnam War veteran, he's a former general. How did your dad respond to a you're doing that when you were a teenager recovering from the rape and also more recently, how does he feel? And even as part of that, I'm curious about how other people in the middity mean, you obviously been part of this kind of military world in at least indirectly for quite some time. What kind of reaction do you get from your father and from

others in that world? You know, if when it comes to veterans issues in cannabis, my father, you know, it's sort of he has mixed feelings about it. He's sort of more traditional and and is and I think more concerned about I think long term effects and whether or not it's a it's a gateway product or not. I do know that he has been supportive of CBD in South Carolina, but when it comes to products with TCH,

he's got more hesitation. And he's older, he's what is eighty two, But my mom, who's eighties, she's like, if I ever get sick, please you know, she is, you know, much more supportive, and she understands the federalism part of it, in the states rights part of it. And so in my house with my parents is sort of a toss up, I guess. And so I'm gonna take that as a win.

If my father, who is eighty two and sort of twenty eight years in the military, and then my mom, this retired school teacher, I'll take that as as a win. And but you know, I leaned in on this issue. I lean in on issues I really care about. You know, I endorsed cannabis when I was running for this seat in the general election. I means something that I ran on.

And I think it's bullshit that when you hear people run for office and they say they care about these things and they're going to do something about it, and then they don't do anything about it. And this is an easy win. I mean, this is not difficult. This is something that the vast majority of Americans, Republican or Democrat, they support. I mean, I've seen the data I've pulled. I've even my own district, and I've seen statewide South

Khanta data. But even in like bright red South Carolina, this is a hugely popular issue, and with veterans, but with people from all walks of life, all colors, all zip codes, all income levels. This should not be a difficult thing to do. And I think my dad understands like the PTSD side of it. I mean, he's seen it firsthand too, and I think he understands that part of it and why I'm passionate. But he doesn't like me leaning in on things that he thinks are controversial.

I see. I think it's for Republicans, especially when we are so divisive, we have to find places to lean in we can bring people together. And I've done a lot a lot of work on Dr Fauci's abuses with beagle puppies and labs, and I've done a lot of cannabis work, and those are places that I've found far right or far left people agree and it shouldn't be difficult. This is a multi billion dollar industry and it shouldn't

be that difficult of affix. And certain candidates ran on it and it didn't do anything about it, which is why I think I've taken the wind out of a lot of people's sales on the issue because we're doing it. I love the fact that you've introduced this bill, and you know it's got a lot of something that's obviously the Schumer Bill out there with you, with Booker and Widen. And then there's Jerry Nadler's More Act in the House, which is probably gonna come up been March and could

pass in a very partisan vote. Right. I think the last time that the More Act went through, I think only a half dozen Democrats voted against it. Only half dozen Republicans voted in favor of Schumer doesn't even have enough Democrats to get this thing through, and it's unlikely that almost any Republicans will support it. You've put this thing out there, right, and I'm just understand it. Like both your bills and Schumer's bills, they both remove marijuanna

from controlled Subsidact. They both end the federal ban on marijuana. They both allow the states to create implement their cannabis laws. They both make provisions for interstate cannabis commerce. They both allow cannabis company success traditional financial systems. You've made clear you want to lower tax. You put some other provisions in there. You said you want this to be a

talking point. You've also said that you that You've talked to some Democrats who have said that you could you'll get a hearing on this, and I wonder is that going to happen, And is there any kind of quid pro quo where you might vote for the More Act and return for getting a hearing. No, I didn't have to do. There was no quid pro quo and getting a hearing. Personally, you know, I want to respect the process and more is going to come up again, and

let let Democrats do More Act. It will die in the Senate, and so when that's done, we will do our hearing. And um, there was nothing done in exchange for it. I just made the ask, and uh, we're making it happen. I mean, that's the thing. Like when I ran for office, one of the things I said, I would be willing to work with anyone who is

willing to work with me. And as a freshman Republican in the minority, I passed three bills out of the floor of the House last year, and so I have a precedent of reaching across sale where I find agreement with the other side and working together. And one of the recent things I heard about Schumer's bill, which is very encouraging is that he wants to treat cannabis like alcohol, which is what my bill does, and that is a very promising prospect. His taxes are too high, it'll fail.

In that regard. Everything is negotiable except for the taxation part of it, because if you don't have a very low futile exercise tax, you're only going to guarantee an illicit market. And we've seen that in other states where state taxes are just way too high, where their implementation of cannabis reforms has been troublesome because they're just tax it way too high and they're like an organized for example,

the black markets run wild. And you want to make sure that there are provisions in there where taxes are low, and I think that's where you can get Republicans on board. And then my bill too has some expungement and release, which is important, social equities important. I don't have that in there, but I leave it up to the states to determine if and how and when and where they

do that sort of thing. It's very much federalism driven, states rights driven, which is a hugely popular Republican ideal. On the same hand, if you can take that republican ideal and work with Democrats, which you know, cannabis legalization is popular everywhere its democrats. I mean, it's the best of both worlds. And so you've gotta respect what states are doing, because there are only three states in the

country that have zero cannabis reforms whatsoever. And so for an example, when I use that statistic, like my state has CBD and him I'm using that is one of the forty seven states, and then Florida has medical and you know we have other states with full adult use, and so every state is different and we respect that patchwork, but have the you have to have interstate commerce constitutionally. But putting that framework together, I want to show a proof of concept that would work. And I don't care

who gets it done. But if I can be a part of the conversation and drive that change, drive that message, then I want to be a part of it. Because this bill, the States Reform Act, has written about every single week. I mean, people are desperate to get this done and there's never a better time than the present.

Let me press you on this because you know, obviously this has now become a very partisan issue at the elected officials level, right I mean you have the Democrats, who you know, I was always frustrated for many years during my advocacy that they were hanging back, hanging back, taking forever. But now they're almost all on board. I mean, certainly in the House with the More Act. You see in the Senate there's a whole bunch who aren't that

keen on it. But you're seeing the Republicans still holding back. And as you pointed out, you know you already have now. I mean years ago you had a majority of young Republicans in favor. You know you now I think have a majority of all Republicans in favor. But when you look at elected officials, they're not there. Right. You look at the Republicans representing the states that have legalized marijuana, and I think, with one exception, Maurkowski, they're not back

in marijuana legalization. You look at the House Act, they they're not getting behind it. You see in in South Dakota where the Republican governor Christie no went out of her way to try to get rid of a legalization initiative that had passed by an overwhelming margin in the election. Is it that the Republicans of the House, they just don't want to give the Democrats a victory while they still have it. Is this going to change dramatically assuming

the Republicans take back power in the coming election. I mean, are there, in fact many dozens and dozens of Republican members of Congress who actually are in favor of this but just don't feel ready to, you know, stick their head up yet and join you on this thing. What's going on there? Yeah, And I would say, um, it's crazy, and it's sort of like, yeah, I had the head of my own party in my state attacked me over this bill, and I was like, dude, you didn't read

the bill. Like, if that's your position, you clearly didn't read the bill and don't know what you're talking about. In the state of South Carolina. Bright right, South Carolina, it is Republicans who are leading cannabis reforms in our state. They did see biting in Hemp and hopefully, across my fingers,

they're gonna get medical cannabis moved through. It was a Republican state Senator Tom Davis out of my district, and it's largely at the Republicans in my district in the low country of South Carolina that are leading on cannabis reform, but he's the one that's leading the medical cannabis side of it in the state, and its Republicans doing this

in my state. Um, But then it's also you've got the Republicans that are pushing back, and like many other issues, people are worried about their base, which is why even after November sentence split as a four person majority margin in the House. That's you would think that Congress would understand, this is time for consensus, right This is not time to go far left socialist, massive spending help the race to inflation increasing the way it is. But this is

not isn't for that moment. You would think that people would understand it's about consensus building right now because we're so divided. But the fringes and whether that's like far left progressives or far right Q and on people that base in your primaries, that's what I feel like, you know, people are afraid of. But my only thing is if you're not going to put it on a ballot referendum,

pull it. I mean, it just pulls so high. And in fact, I did a poll race just a couple of days ago for my own reelection and I pulled Republican primary voters on cannabis reform and at the at states being able to do it themselves. And it is extremely popular and more wildly popular than I thought, and I obviously didn't do it for that, but it's surprising that there's so much push back. And you know, the ten percent of people that are strongly opposed to it, well,

they don't vote on the issue. And I just don't understand some people think I'm controversial or take risks I don't need to, but I just you know, we need normal humans that are fiscally conservative, like don't waste my money, and are socially modern, right, and just like this is, everybody's doing it. They're doing it for different reasons. A

lot of it's for medical reasons. And you've got all these drugs that are addicting that are being prescribed to people, and you have all this data out there and states that have an opioid crisis. When you have cannabis legalized there at any way, shape or form, you know, those addiction rates go down, morbidity goes down, everything goes down, and there's no rate of increased rate of violent crime when you have cannabis and your state. I mean, it's

just the data is there. But I think, you know, it's a taking it's about educating people who are elected. And it's like this is not controversial as controversial as you think. And even in the last four years, Republicans have come really, really far on these issues. But I think it's how we talk about it, you know, and understanding you know, the role of the federal government in the Royal States, and understanding that hey, bets need this.

We have a huge veteran suicide rate. And if this could save a life, whether you're dying of cancer or you've got epilepsy, I mean, whatever it is, this is like a miracle drug for some people. And it's not addicting, right, They're not getting addicted to it. You're not, you know. And I talked to sheriffs and law enforcement and deputies and when they're being called into domestic violence or violent crimes, pot is not part of the problem. I mean, it's

just not. And so I would just incurdge elected Republicans is like find out, like where your constituents actually stand on the issue. That could be be a poll, that could be a ballot measure, ballot referendum, like the most popular issue. The data that I have on it I just got yesterday was just tremendous. I could not believe how popular it was. Let's take a break here and

go to an ad I have to tell you. I mean, for me, you know, who pursued this in a bipartisan way as an advocate for many years, you know, going back, you know, I mean the two most famous conservative aellectuals, you know, the twentieth century, William Buckley and Milton Freeman were my allies. I had George Schultz and Frank Carlucci on the honorary board of my Drug Policy Alliance. You know. Gary Johnson, their former Republican governor New Mexico, was a

great champion, know, way ahead of the curve. But at the same time, as you're pointing out, the Republicans keep hanging back in and fighting against this. And so I just want to go to your district, right, I mean, you're gonna be up for election, as all members of Congress are every two years now. Your district was really one of the few competitive ones, I think the only competitive one in South Carolina. A Democrat actually wanted, you know, back in twenty eighteen by one and a half points.

You beat him by about one and a half points in the most recent election. Now, as I understand that there's been a redistrict thing in your state, the governor just signed it. It means that your district is now going to go from being somewhat competitive to being a fairly safe Republican district. And I know the state endu a CP is suing to try to fight that, but let's assume that doesn't change at all. Now, it seems to me you're now going to have a Republican challenger,

and and Donald Trump has jumped all over you. You know, you're one of the Republicans who he's decided he's going to go after. And the Republican who's challenging the primary, she just put out an ad. You know what she says, is Nancy Mays high right now? Is there some reason that that to believe that she's gonna benefit from attack sacking you in this kind of under the belt kind of way. Yeah, it's really it's it's quite bizarre, quite frankly.

And when you compare records, for example, my my opponent, when President Trump was lowering taxes for the American people, my opponent was raising them. When President Trump was signing the First Step Act Prison reform bill and doing criminal justice reform. My opponent was working against me on criminal justice reform prison reform legislation in the state legislature. Because we served together, you know, I can be trusted with our nation's secrets. My opponent had her top secret security

clearance revoked for allegedly leaking classified information. And it's kind of bizarre. I don't quite understand it. And with regards to redistricting and everything, I don't know that it is going to get that much more republican this cycle. We're waiting to hear what the court says, but they might stay the case and not do the case until later this year. And so at this juncture, we're not sure if we're running under the old lines, which is the area I represent today, or the new lines that both

chambers of the state legislature passed. We just at this point we have no idea. But the interesting thing is from two thousand sixteen when Trump overwhelmingly in South Carolina to two thousand eighteen when my opponent was a nominee. Back in those days, there was a fourteen point swing in the wrong direction. And so this is really a swing district, and in a midterm election cycle, this district can swing fifteen points right from being a Republican majority

to Democrat winning. And so I would say that my district is uniquely positioned there. Our voters are uniquely as stute on policy and on the issues, and we do march to the beaut of our own drum. They don't want someone who's going to tow the party line. They want someone who's bhyscically conservative, um socially moderate on these issues.

And so it's interesting to see the kind of campaign that's coming after me in the attacks, and I'm like, Okay, if that's what you really think, please talk more, Please tell everybody that's that's where you stand. So let me ask you about the other South Carolina politicians here right, I think there's six Republicans and one Democrat there, but I don't know that any of them have stepped out

with you. Is yet the one the one Democrat, James Clyburne, who's enormously influential, you know, the black Democrat who was given all this credit for having put Joe Biden, helped him along in the primary. You know, he's part of that kind of group of I think Southern Black Democrats have always been kind of reluctant and just go along on the drug reform and marijuana reform, and they're pushed

by the party. But you also have in South Carolina, I think the only Black Republican Senator Tim Scott, and you've been very out there pointing out the racial disparities and marijuana arrest the fact that blacks are four times more likely to get arrested you've acknowledged as a significant racial justice issue there. Have you talked with Senator Scott about this and is he showing any openness or have

not talked to another Scott specifically about this bill. We're talking to other Senators UM in the Senate Chamber about having a companion bill filed over there, and so we're talking a couple of different offices about that. I tend to lan in on issues again for some reason, I think there's a reluctancy even in my party, UM in my state of folks to lean in on these kinds of things. I know, statewide, UM cannabis reform, at least medical is also wildly popular, like the population supports it

statewide and Bright red South Carolina. But it's just a matter of I think, educating people and showing the value the benefit of doing it this way. I don't know why it's so it's such a controversial subject for somebody. I've not approached him because I just, you know, I don't know that he would would be on board. I know that he and I do talk about criminal justice reform, and he's tried. He's worked so hard trying to make

that happen in the Senate. But again, that's an issue where I would you think Republicans and Democrats can come together, and he's led so well on those issues, but even he's had a hard time in the Senate making that happen as well. Right, I've been wondering about Senator Murkowski. I mean, she's another one who Trump's going after her. She comes from a state that has legalized marijuana. Don Young, the kind of longest serving member of Congress who's from Alaska,

has been out there a marijuana legalization forever. Have you talked to Murkowski and is she's somebody who might introduce the bill in the Senate that would be a companion. I am not. She's not on our radar for that we're looking at other offices. Um, but Don Young, he's an original co sponsor of my States reformat So my bill had the highest numbers five I believe original co sponsors on a Republican piece of cannabis legislation, and he was I think it was the first one to sign on.

So I love some do some Don Young. I think he's great. He represents his district well. But we have not spoken to Murkowski's office about it. Yeah. My hope, Reary is is that you know, I think back to

go to old Dana roar Backer. I mean when I am my staff started working on one of the first marijuana bills in Congress almost twenty years ago, and it was an amendment and it basically said to say, the Justice Department cannot spend any money going after medical marijuana the states that have legalized said And Dana Roorbacker was the Republican who was out there. He was teaming up with different Democrats. Uh Sam far from California where he's in.

She from upstate New York. And every year you know that Amocrats would get seventy eight hundred hundred twenty and the Republicans would go six ten twelve fourteen, and it never really kind of popped through with the Republicans, even on medical marijuana. But more broadly, can you see there being a kind of sudden break, a sudden jump where it goes from being a half dozen Republicans in the House to being many dozens and dozens, especially if the

Republicans regained power in the in the coming election. I would say anything is possible after the primaries are over. That's the thing. Everyone you know, they've got their primaries, and so that's why you're going to see I think Democrats do more in March right before their primaries take off, and while you'll see Republicans more Republicans come onto the State's Reformact after their primaries are over. So I would

say politics plays into this on both sides. I have a very unique district where we have more of an independent kind of streak. We march the beat of our own drum and the issues that I that I lean in on, our issues that my constituents care about, and so I know that I'm in the right place. I'm in the right spot. I mean, even adult recreational use in my district is the overwhelming majority of constituent support. So for me, it's a it's not a controversial play

down here. But for others I can see where maybe they'd be more hesitant about it, but not that's not the case in my district, I guess. And if you're against cannabis in my district, you know you're not on the right side of history. You know, it's nice seeing Charles Coke and his Americans for Prosperity organization really get behind you on this sort of thing. And this is one of these issues where you see Charles Coke and George Searles going hand in hand. I mean, there's a

few issues like that. But if Coke said he's going to spend either his people said they're going to spend millions of dollars to help move this forward. I mean, have you been in contact with M and DVID he says how they're gonna wait America for Prosperity. They supported me in my election in and we definitely, you know, took some of the information and research that they had when we're formulating this bill. This bill was my brain child, uh and I passed it off to my staff almost

a year ago. I guess it was March of last year. It took us about nine months, but talking with different stakeholders. But I have Republican groups like a FP involved in support of and endorsements bill. I've got Normal also on the other side that has endorsed the bill, and then we've got companies like Amazon that support the bill for

different reasons. There's progress that is happening on the right and a FPS involvement and leaning in on the issue I think will really be helpful too Republicans and encouraging them to get on more of the responsible cannabis reform. And that's the least we could ask for. And if you want to do it in a responsible way, then both sides have to be have to have a seat at the table, and that includes us and our party. If we turn our backs on it, then we've missed

a huge opportunity to serve our constituencies. Hmm. What about Crover Norquist? Does he leading on UM. I know that they've put out I believe some information on the tax side of it, and they support the bill as well because it's obviously very low taxes at three federal exercise tax and so a lot of the conservative tax groups are supportive of the bill in that regard as well, which is pretty awesome. That's that's great. I mean, has been a long time ally and drug policy reform stuff,

so I hope he'd be on this. So I'm gonna let you go in a moment, just I have a question here. There's another issue that's really gaining a lot of traction recently, and that's about the issue of psychedelics. And you know, there's a very good chance the FDA is going to approve m d M A for ptsd UH in the next year or two. There's all this evidence about, you know, psychedelics being helpful for veterans suffering from this. Former Texas Governor Rick Perry and a former

Trump Cabinet minute has been out there. Texas just recently passed a law. You know, there's a fellow named Jesse Gould, the veteran with his Heroic Hearts project who's making trying to make psychedelic therapy available to veterans. Is this an issue you've looked at? Have you spoken about? Can you

see getting involve deeply into the issue. About two years ago, I had a friend who's a veteran that started participate in one of these m d m A studies with PTSD, and so I am still learning about the issue and some of the opportunities out there. But again, these things need to be studied, like we need to be able to do this kind of research and understand the benefits or the positives and the negatives, what the outcomes could be.

Because some of the pharmaceuticals that are out there, some of the dry as you can get prescribed, I mean, have such high addiction rates uh and and sometimes can exacerbate PTSD and can exacerbate suicide rates. And so I think everything should be on the table if it can make you feel better and reduce the rate of suicide when you come home for more from combat than everything should be on the table. We should do right by our veterans and find ways for them to have a

higher quality of life. I mean, they were willing to take a bullet for our country. At least we can do is help them they come home. Okay, last question, I hope I don't blindside you with this one, which is one of the issues that's trying to drive me crazy,

especially with my fellow Democrats. It's the whole issue around the cigarettes and tobacco harm reduction, and everybody freaked out when the kids started jeweling and using all these cigarettes produced this overwhelming evidence right that ease cigarettes and other you know, non smokable forms of tobacco can be usually beneficial in reducing smoking in this country and other people

dying on this issue. And this is an issue where strangey, a lot of the Democrats have been very supportive of you know, marijuana legalization, harm reduction, drug posity form, needle change, you name it. Had been on the wrong side of the issue, but almost no Republicans are stepping up on

the other side of this issue. Have you paid attention to this issue and the state legislature, we did, because a lot of those reforms with the jewels and the cigarettes, those provisions, those regulations, statutes, and laws are largely done at the state level. And I know that we did a little bit of work on that when I was in the state legislature, but the federal level, it's not

something I've heard a lot about. Since I've been elected, my focus has really been on this cannabis bill because I knew, like, hey, I wanted to be a part of it at the state level, and when I got to Congress. This was something that I promised I would work on, and I had this great idea and I was like, we're going to do this, and so that's where my focus has really been. I haven't seen anything at the federal level on the cigarette issues at this

juncture yet. Okay, well, listen comms made. Thank you so much for joining me. I hope you kicked the butt of your Republican primary opponent. I hope you'll wipe her out. I wish you all the best in advancing this bill and working out compromises with the Democrats so something can actually happen on the federal level. And more power to you on all of this. Thank you so much for joining me on Psychoactive, and thank you so much for

having me today. If you're enjoying Psychoactive, please tell your friends about it, or you can write us a review at Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. We love to hear from our listeners. If you'd like to share your own stories, comments, and ideas, then leave us a message at one eight three three seven seven nine sixty that's eight three three psycho zero, or you can email us at Psychoactive at protozoa dot com or find me on Twitter at Ethan Natalman. You can also find

contact information in our show notes. Psychoactive is a production of I Heart Radio and Protozoa Pictures. It's hosted by me Ethan Nadelman. It's produced by no h'm osband and Josh Stain. The executive producers are Dylan Golden, Ari Handel, Elizabeth Geeseus and Darren Aronofsky from Protozoa Pictures, Alex Williams and At Frederick from my Heart Radio, and me Ethan Edelman. Our music is by Ari Blucien and a special thanks to Abbvi Brio, s F Bianca Grimshaw and Robert beep m