Op-ed:
Bills that are perfect?
As the Texas legislative session begins in January, and the MORE Act recently passing, there is something you can bank on: There will be no shortage of complaints about the bills filed or passed.
That’s not to say criticism isn’t warranted on bills that make their way to committees and on to votes and signed. Criticism is the first step towards changing bad law. We should change bad laws.
The issue is when the citizens criticize for the outcome of perfect on the first pass of a bill. As much as anybody would want marijuana to be legal tomorrow, in some areas it will require conservatism, as that’s what the majority of the population wants in this state. Conservatism as in small or light incremental steps. Obviously, Texas has not done that, as it’s basically crawled to where it is at now.
A growing group in marijuana activism
But there appears to be this growing voice of people that won’t back a big or small bill, at all, for various reasons. Usually because of a handful of provisions that the bill does or does not contain. And those provisions just don’t align with their desires or long term goals at the moment. Despite that the bill would likely help their fellow citizens on a socio-economic level, they won’t back it.
We even see it amongst the Representatives that are standout reps amongst the typical crowd. Just to see another support a bill, such as the MORE Act.
How Republican Thomas Massie responded after his no vote on the MORE Act.
Learn how to become a medical cannabis patient in Texas
Then there is this conservative’s take on the same bill. Amash voted yes.
The difference there is that Massie is taking a purely liberty anti-state stance. There is nothing wrong with the points that he makes. Amash is taking a conservative approach of slowly fixing a problem step by step. There is nothing wrong with his approach either. And it’s entirely subject to each person on how to go forward. And yes, the bill was far from perfect.
But the growing number of people that won’t take any sort of win, likely will only hurt the movement more and more over time.
No win attitude
There is just isn’t a winning bill for them. That’s not to be confused with a bill that wins by being passed. Yes, the last movement in cannabis legislation was not ideal and didn’t really do much. And when it comes to getting behind a bill, there is a lot to factor in, and last-minute changes near the March deadline of bill filing can make monumental changes.
Look at the 2019 Texas legislative session with all of the bills put forth, especially in the House. It provides a great example. At the last moment Senator Dr. Donna Campbell filed her own bill (HB 2416) in the Senate. That bill would have been better than anything we got at the end of the 86th legislative session. Campbell’s bill raised the cap to 1% and had no qualifying conditions as it left the decision with the doctors.
When introduced, activists didn’t look favorably upon HB 2416. Compared to the other bills, it looked very lacking. Understandably so. HB 1365 started off with no THC caps and expanded the list to a vast number of conditions for patients in Texas. By the time it left the committee, it was down to its original cap of 0.5%. On the House floor, it was reduced to not even allowing medical boards the power to change the THC cap either. That bill didn’t even make it out of the Senate committee. HB 3703 did make it, and it had far fewer conditions than 1365.
SB 2416 would have been a dream. Compared to what the Governor of Texas signed, that would have been a great step forward.
Hindsight
Well of course looking back at what could have come is easy to compare. Everyone can see the data and information and what politicians wanted. Anyone can have hindsight. Those that were at the capitol during the session for the committee hearings, can attest. Those individuals can look back at all the bills and the support showed in the House during committee testimony. They will tell you how they can look back at it all. Tell of how they know how efforts appeared to be working but were possibly aimed at the wrong item. Possibly the right item but with an inaccurate approach. We can look back and remember that a particular House member said that it had to be their bill and the Senate wasn’t going to hear any other bill.
Read more about Delta-8 in Texas
And foresight
We don’t know the future though. But that doesn’t mean we can’t have foresight. The last thing about hindsight was that a particular member was giving us possible foresight or insight. And ignoring foresight will likely work against us all in the long term. The trick is the align the foresight with your goals. Usually with politics that can be hard. Especially in Texas politics.
Here is another example of foresight.
Steve Toth (R) has a bill that would decriminalize cannabis of 2 ounces or more to a class C misdemeanor. It comes with no arrest and no revocation of the drivers license. Given his direct comment on the voter guide survey, it likely stands that he knows that Patrick will not let a Democrat bill go by. Erin Zwiener (D) has a similar bill that will take 1 ounce or less to class C. Has the same consequences as Toth’s bill. If you had to pick which one you would likely take as getting past Dan Patrick, would it be the D or R bill?
Dan Patrick would go for the one-ounce bill you say, if he were to go for a bill. But he likely won’t go for a bill with a D beside the name as Toth points out. Toth’s bill has the ability to start off higher and move down to becoming what Zwiener’s bill looks like. From there the playing politics of elected officials is going to play to the (R) labeled bill. The bigger bill is a negotiation tactic. A haggle if desired to call it so. It being worked down to a lesser amount is a sign of willingness to compromise. Compromise to get something across the finish line.
Compromise
No bill will likely look exactly as you want it to be on its entry. It will face amendments and changes. Its also highly likely to face downgrades in the Texas legislature. It’s necessity, acceptance, and moral standing doesn’t always equate to approval in chambers in Texas state politics.
And taking a hardline stance of not supporting anything that doesn’t do everything for everyone, isn’t negotiating. It’s isn’t teamwork or proper compromise. And there isn’t much that can be done on the constituent side other than showing support for a particular bill, and voting people out of office. In Texas politics, people have to unfortunately take what’s handed to them after the election.
There is no ballot initiative measure in Texas. You vote for people to hold office. Those people move bills forward as they see fit. They may take your input along the way. If you want the system to change, you have to vote for people in your party that will change it. That is why primaries are so important.
Not supporting a bill because it has a specific higher THC cap, has a list of patients, does or does not specify veterans exclusively, creates a special cannabis board to get it out of DPS hands – could be going against a step forward.
No perfect bill
Everyone has their feeling about these bills. Whether it be inadequacies or expansions that just aren’t desired. There will be no perfect bill that goes through the legislature to the governor’s desk this session, and likely next session. And that is if we don’t see the Governor and Lt. Governor replaced in the election. Yes, there is are HJR’s and SJR’s (joint resolutions to change the TX constitution) that would be highly desired. Some say those are perfect and fitting. They likely aren’t even going to be heard in their respective committees though.
Activists are going to have to find common ground on something being proposed, aligns with the known foresight by the bill submission deadline, and likely can be passed. Then get behind it as one and push it forward. Because there is no perfect bill, and waiting for it helps nobody