Legalizing marijuana makes sense for New York

By Crystal Peoples-Stokes, 

Ending marijuana prohibition and taxing and regulating marijuana for adult use in New York is smart for our communities, for racial justice, and for our state's economy. As the co-sponsor of the bill that would legalize the production, distribution, and use of marijuana for adults over the age of 21 in New York.

I have spent a great deal of time studying the outcomes of legalizing marijuana in the eight states and Washington, D.C. that have regulated marijuana markets. In his budget address last week, Gov. Andrew Cuomo called for a study of the implications of legalizing marijuana in New York; I think he will be interested in learning from the successful experiences of other states, as I have.

Get your morning news every day from Times Union!

timesunion

Each of these states has approached legalization differently and has distinct regulatory structures. Yet each state taxes and regulates marijuana in a manner similar to alcoholic beverages, with age limits, licensing requirements, quality controls, and other regulatory restrictions that are effective.

New York benefits from the experiences of other states that have already implemented this new regulatory approach to marijuana policy. New York policy makers can feel assured knowing that the sky did not fall in states like Washington, Colorado, Oregon, and Alaska that have legalized the adult use of marijuana.

Evidence shows that marijuana legalization is working so far. States are saving money in court costs and protecting the public by redirecting law enforcement resources. Previously static economies have experienced a boom benefitting a variety of industries that has generated millions in tax revenue and created new jobs. Some states have also adopted policies that will help repair social and economic harms of damaged communities caused by prohibition and the failed war on drugs.

Available research shows marijuana legalization has a positive effect on public health and safety.

Nationally, and in states that have legalized marijuana, youth marijuana use has remained stable or declined. In part, this is because the regulated marijuana market has made it possible for states to create age restrictions and other barriers to access for young people that could not exist under prohibition. In fact, statewide surveys of junior high to high school age students living in states with a recreational market have shown no significant increase in marijuana use among young people.

Lifetime use has remained stable, as well as recent use.

New York is facing an unprecedented opioid overdose crisis. Legal access to marijuana is also associated with reductions in some of the most troubling harms associated with opioid use, including opioid overdose deaths and untreated opioid use disorders. In states with medical marijuana access, overdose death rates are almost 25 percent lower than in states with no legal access to marijuana, and the reductions in overdose death rates strengthened over time.

Road safety has not been negatively impacted in states with existing regulated marijuana markets. DUI arrests for driving under the influence (of alcohol and other drugs) have declined in Colorado and Washington, the first two states to establish legally regulated adult use marijuana markets.

In addition, data shows there is no correlation between marijuana legalization and crash rates. In both states, crash rates have remained similar to those in comparable states that have not legalized marijuana.

Experiences in states with regulated marijuana markets also indicate that creating a system to tax and regulate marijuana for adult use would be a sound economic investment for New York. Colorado has now collected more than $500 million in taxes and fees from legal marijuana since retail sales began in 2014, with increased revenue projected for this year. Between January 2016 and March 2017, state and local governments in Washington and Oregon were able to collect over $80 million and $75 million, respectively, in tax revenue. There are more people in New York than all of these states combined, therefore New York would likely generate even larger revenues than these three states.

For example, illicit marijuana sales in New York are estimated at $3 billion, and an official study by the NYC Comptroller in 2013 estimated potential tax revenue for a legal marijuana market in NYC alone would be more than $400 million, acknowledging that the actual revenue could be much higher.

The marijuana industry is also creating jobs. The legal marijuana industry currently employs approximately 200,000 full and part-time workers across the country. This number will only continue to grow as more states legalize marijuana and replace their unregulated markets with new legal markets--while many other industries like manufacturing continue to lose jobs.

The economic growth experienced as a result of legalization has also spread beyond the marijuana industry into related sectors including legal services, financial services, tourism, real estate, construction, and security. Additionally, legalization has provided an indirect boost to states' coffers through enforcement and criminal justice savings, income tax revenues from newly created jobs, and retail tax revenues from increased consumer spending by the newly employed.

All of this suggests that legalization could serve as a better option for reducing unemployment than continuing to rely on shrinking industries. However, state marijuana laws must create avenues for participation by Black and Latino people and low-income people in order to avoid establishing new barriers to employment for the persons and communities most harmed by marijuana prohibition. Such measures, which are included in the Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act, will help New York begin to repair its legacy of racially disparate marijuana enforcement.

Nationally, legalization presents a unique and much-needed racial equity and economic justice opportunity, while reinvesting in communities most damaged by this country's failed war on drugs.

For New York — the marijuana arrest capital of the world — legalization offers a chance to assume an active role in repairing the harms of the drug war, particularly for the state's most vulnerable communities. The Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act (MRTA) — the legislation I co-sponsor with Sen. Liz Krueger, D-Manhattan, for ending prohibition in New York — directs marijuana tax revenue to education and job training in communities most harmed by the drug war, as well as drug prevention and health services for New Yorkers.

There is no reason why New York, a global economic powerhouse, should not be able to provide its residents with the same opportunities that are being afforded to individuals in states that are generating millions of dollars in revenue from legalization. New York State has the potential to generate billions of dollars in all types of tax revenues from the legalization of marijuana.

Virginia moves toward approving cannabis oil as a medical treatment

By Patricia Sullivan

A bill that would allow physicians to broadly prescribe a form of medical marijuana received preliminary approval in the Virginia House of Delegates on Thursday and seems likely to become law, its sponsors say, after years of failed attempts.

The legislation, HB 1251, would permit the use of non-hallucinogenic marijuana or cannabis extracts known as cannabidiol oil or THC-A oil to treat any diagnosed condition or disease. Scientific studies indicate that the oils can reduce nausea and alleviate pain, and also may slow the growth of and kill some cancer cells.

After a final vote in the House on Friday, the legislation would move to the Senate, where sponsors of the House bill say it also has strong support.

“This allows another option for residents of Virginia, and it does provide some assistance for pain management and may give people an alternative to . . . opioids,” said Del. Benjamin L. Cline (R-Rockbridge), the chief sponsor of the House bill.

Similar bills have failed for years in the state legislature, although a more narrow statute passed in 2015 allows Virginians to use cannabis oils to treat “intractable epilepsy.” But that law does not provide any way for the drug to be produced in the state or for patients to secure a doctor’s permission to obtain it.

The District of Columbia and 28 states, including Maryland, have legalized most or all types of marijuana products for medical purposes. Nine states and the District have also legalized the drug for recreational use.

Sixteen other states, in addition to Virginia, allow limited use of marijuana products for a narrow range of diseases, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The increased legalization of medical marijuana — including in Guam and Puerto Rico — reflects a shift in public opinion on marijuana: In 1969, 84 percent of Americans thought the drug should be illegal, the Pew Research Center said. By 2017, only 37 percent agreed.

Del. Eileen Filler-Corn (D-Fairfax), chief co-patron of the Virginia bill on the Democratic side, said she’s been working on the proposal for four years, ever since she was approached by a family in her district about the difficulty of controlling their daughter’s seizures. The family was so frustrated with the slow pace of change that they temporarily moved to Colorado to have legal access to cannabis.

Another child whose family was seeking access to marijuana oil had a seizure in the hearing room during a hearing on one of the bills, Filler-Corn said.

“It is a huge, huge deal, especially for people with epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, Crohn’s disease or cancer,” Filler-Corn said. “Things happen very slowly in the legislature, and this was an educational process. It took time and education and a tremendous amount of energy and passion on the part of the families.”

Launching a medical marijuana industry can be both time-consuming and lucrative. It took Maryland four years to license growers, producers and retail sellers before opening its first medical marijuana dispensaries late last year.

If the more expansive bill passes, Virginia would seek requests for proposals for five growing and distribution facilities this spring or summer. Patients and physicians would be required to register with the state Board of Medicine to have access to the oils, which could be recommended for those suffering from specific, serious conditions.

Del. Mark H. Levine (D-Alexandria) tried to pass a medical marijuana bill aimed at cancer patients last year, but the legislation died in subcommittee.

Bills by state Sens. Adam P. Ebbin (D-Alexandria) and Barbara A. Favola (D-Arlington) that would have decriminalized marijuana possession and reduced penalties for its distribution failed in committee this year.

Lawmakers said they believe the medical marijuana bill has gained enough support to pass because of lobbying efforts by families and individuals, the growing number of peer-reviewed scientific studies supporting medical marijuana, and the increased number of states that have made it legal.

Let science drive marijuana policy - not superstition

Rob Weidenfeld, 

Earlier this month, The Enquirer featured two letters to the editor that were very critical of the legalization of marijuana. One suggested marijuana use caused a fatal accident, and the other concerned marijuana being a gateway drug. I am no expert, but I thought I would share my research.

In 1969, I was a junior in college and member of a fraternity. That year I learned that a prospective member had a history of smoking marijuana. While the substance was becoming more fashionable, I was uncertain. But any given fraternity brother could “blackball” a nominee, thereby keeping him out of our group. Taking my power seriously, I decided to speak to our chapter adviser, a family physician in our southeast Ohio community. He gladly informed me of all the horrors of marijuana usage, including all the stereotypes that were bandied about then and even to this day. I blackballed this individual based on his account. I was lobbied intensely from my fellow “brothers” to change my vote, but I steadfastly refused.  

The year after I graduated, I came to find a book called "Marijuana: The New Prohibition." It had just been published and the author was John Kaplan. Kaplan had served in 1966 as the Assistant U.S. Attorney in California and former prosecutor of drug law violators. A short while later, he was asked to rewrite the California penal code for drugs under then-Gov. Ronald Reagan. After two years of research, he submitted the findings of his committee, which included research scientists, physicians, lawmakers and psychologists. He was summarily fired and removed from his appointment. His act of betrayal: his research team called for the legalization of marijuana. He then decided to publish his comprehensive findings, and this book was the result. 

Though marijuana was legal in this country until 1937, the classic “Reefer Madness" (1936) depicted a highly fictionalized version of the depravity which ensues after the casual use of marijuana. 

Attitudes towards marijuana began to change rapidly.

As the false associations continue to spread, marijuana became tarnished in the eyes of well-intentioned people who associated its use with puritanical visions of pleasure, permissiveness, radicalism, and lack of law and order.

Kaplan's studies closely examined the widely-perceived, age-old fairy tale that marijuana leads to harder drugs, leads to aggression and would impair coordination. The comprehensive testing done for his studies found all of the above to be unfounded. 

By the way, I am not vouching for all forms of marijuana as currently used. Over the years, marijuana has been laced with all kinds of vile additives which create an entirely different substance. This is what happens when there is no regulation. I am speaking of a pure form, grown naturally, as would happen should the DEA drop its outrageous characterization of it and let states regulate the growing and distribution of it.

Currently, marijuana is classified as a Schedule I Controlled Substance. There are five Schedules, according to the DEA website, with the most dangerous drugs being Schedule I. This group includes those drugs “with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.” Included in this category with marijuana are LSD, heroin, some methamphetamines, and peyote. Less dangerous drugs, meaning Schedule II, according to the DEA, are opioids!

If you are thinking that we should be enlightened enough to know better today, then look no further than a news conference with Sean Spicer, former press secretary for President Donald Trump, who during a Feb. 24, 2017 news conference suggested that marijuana use could lead to harder drugs and even linked its usage to the opioid crisis.

  

I have long believed that the federal government and local authorities, by demonizing recreational marijuana as malevolent and promoting false narratives about it, have undermined our countries efforts to convince young people of the truly dangerous drugs that they should always avoid. I have not even discussed the positive medical aspects of marijuana. Yet my hope is that policy on this drug will be driven by scientific facts, not hearsay and superstition.

Grass may not be greener

 

 

By ARDEN IGLEHEART

When talking with friends, you may have heard the well-known fact that while excessive use of alcohol kills people every year, no deaths have been caused by marijuana. It’s true that while there were 88,000 deaths related to alcohol use between 2006 and 2010, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were zero deaths directly related to marijuana. Despite this, mortality rates shouldn’t be the only factor one considers when deciding if something is safe, yet it seems like it is the only consideration for a lot of college students. Adults ages 19-22 are the least likely adult age group to use tobacco or alcohol, but are also the least likely to see any risks in using marijuana, according to a study by Monitoring the Future. As the risks from using tobacco and alcohol become more and more well-known, the risks of using marijuana aren’t following suit.

Some health professionals do see marijuana as a safer alternative to alcohol, but to say marijuana is risk-free is inaccurate. Several studies have shown a link between teen use of marijuana and schizophrenia. A Swedish study followed 45,000 marijuana users and non-users over a 15-year period. These participants had no symptoms of psychosis when first examined, but at the end of the study the researchers found that the marijuana users were 2.4 times more likely to develop schizophrenia, according to Scientific American. A smaller study done in Germany also found a link between lifelong marijuana use and development of psychotic symptoms.

Marijuana use could also lead to a drop in IQ, especially if a user starts at a young age. A New Zealand study, which looked at 1,037 people, found that people who smoked marijuana often and began early in life experienced an average decline of eight IQ points by the time they turned 38, according to Scientific American. If a participant was dependent on marijuana at the age of 18, quitting did not remove the problem. Average IQs still declined by the time these participants turned 38. On the other hand, the study found that non-users had their IQ increase an average of one point by the time they reached the same age, according to CBS. Of course, correlation does not equal causation. The author said that those with lower IQs might be more likely to start using marijuana at an earlier age. But even if this is true, she said, those who started smoking as teenagers rather than as adults experienced the biggest decline in IQ, suggesting that the drug affects teen brains worse than those of adults. 

Some people claim that driving while high on marijuana is safe, or that it helps them drive better. 

This is statistically untrue. A recent experiment by the National Institute on Drug Abuse had participants use varying levels of marijuana, alcohol and placebos, and tested their driving. 

The researchers found that participants with a 13.1 ug/L blood concentration of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, weaved within lanes as much as those with a .08 blood concentration of alcohol, the legal limit for driving under the influence. Admittedly, this THC concentration is much more than has been recorded in most drugged drivers, but this study clearly demonstrates that the drug does have a negative effect on driving. The CDC said that the substance can slow one’s reaction time, impair hand-eye coordination and problem-solving, and cause memory loss, all of which are skills necessary for driving. This means that college students need to employ safe methods to ensure they don’t drive while using, such as having a designated driver who doesn’t smoke or taking an Uber.
  
Additionally, the negative effects from THC could be on the rise, with the potency of marijuana available becoming much higher. The American Chemical Society said that the average TCH potency was around 20 percent in 2015, far more than the 1980 average of four percent. 

I’m not here to tell anyone that they shouldn’t smoke weed. Marijuana users have reported the substance to have a number of benefits, including more creativity and focus, better sleep, less anxiety and, to some degree, social acceptance. It also has many important medicinal uses, as Floridians acknowledged when they voted to legalize medical marijuana in 2016. 

But like with any drug, one should consider both the rewards and the risks before deciding to partake. 

I drink several cups of coffee per day, knowing it might hurt my sleep and raise my heart rate, but those are risks I’m willing to take because the caffeine helps my productivity. College students who choose to use marijuana need to make sure that their choice is an informed one.

Ohio Hospitals: Are You Ready for Medical Marijuana?

Brian F. Higgins

Physicians interested in recommending medical marijuana are already completing the two hours of continuing medical education credit necessary before applying for a Certificate to Recommend from the State of Ohio.

The Ohio Medical Board projects the application for a Certificate to Recommend will be available in February of 2018. Physicians have also been brushing up on how to properly recommend medical marijuana by utilizing my Ohio Physician’s Guide To Cannabis Compliance. Clearly, physicians are preparing themselves for this new form of treatment, but for Ohio hospitals, the question remains, are you ready?

Are you prepared to allow your physicians to recommend medical marijuana to a patient? What if an inpatient with a recommendation has medical marijuana in her pocket – will you allow her to keep it?

Should she self-administer her recommendation or should a physician or mid-level provider do that? Would that violate the Controlled Substances Act? How will the medical marijuana interact with other drugs the patient has already received? Could the hospital lose its Medicare enrollment or other federal licenses? Should the hospital take the medical marijuana and store it until the patient needs another dosage? It’s dizzying, I know.

These are just some of the questions that need to be addressed by an Ohio hospital’s leadership before the medical marijuana program begins in September of this year. Hospitals need to understand the risks associated with medical marijuana and have clear policies addressing how the hospital will handle the new treatment. If a hospital will allow medical marijuana, it must ensure that its policies detail procedures that strictly comply with Ohio’s medical marijuana law to firmly protect against any potential federal prosecution under the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer Amendment (the “Amendment”).

The Amendment was recently extended until February 8, 2018, but is often misunderstood as a prohibition on any federal medical marijuana prosecutions in states with medical marijuana laws. Rather, the Amendment is more accurately understood as a bar to federal prosecutions only when the accused can demonstrate that their conduct was expressly authorized by state law.

“Individuals who do not strictly comply with all state-law conditions regarding the use, distribution, possession, and cultivation of medical marijuana have engaged in conduct that is unauthorized, and prosecuting such individuals does not violate [the Amendment].”

United States v. McIntosh, 833 F.3d 1163, 1178 (9th Cir. 2016). Therefore, the Department of Justice may continue with medical marijuana prosecutions; to invoke the Amendment’s protections and enjoin such prosecutions, it will have to be demonstrated that all medical marijuana-related conduct was completely authorized by the State’s medical marijuana law. This demonstration is typically done through an evidentiary hearing. See id at 1179.

Since the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in McIntosh, three district courts within the Sixth Circuit -- the federal court system with jurisdiction over Ohio -- have applied the Ninth Circuit's reasoning in adjudicating defendants’ motions for evidentiary hearings and to enjoin the prosecutions. See United States v. Bally, No. 17-20135, 2017 WL 5625896, at *4 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 22, 2017); United States v. Samp, No. 16-CR-20263, 2017 WL 1164453 at *1 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 29, 2017); United States v. Ragland, No. 15-CR-20800, 2017 WL 2728796 at *1 (E.D. Mich. June 26, 2017). These cases all stem from Michigan, which has had a medical marijuana program in place for some time, and give Ohio healthcare providers a guide as to how federal prosecutions will be handled here.

Therefore, Ohio hospitals planning to allow medical marijuana use on their premises, or to be recommended by their physicians, need to be prepared to show documentation, policies, and procedures that such medical marijuana conduct is in strict compliance with Ohio’s medical marijuana law (O.R.C. 3796, et seq.). Preparing these policies and procedures will require an in-depth understanding of Ohio’s medical marijuana program and the federal marijuana laws. This exercise should be completed by each Ohio hospital before medical marijuana in one way or another shows up on your doorstep in September of this year.

Even after legalization, black Americans are arrested more for marijuana offenses

Racial disparities stick. (Reuters/Brian Snyder)

by Aamna Mohdin

Americans have finally come around to pot. There has been a historic shift in public opinion for legalizing marijuana over the last generation. And as public mode changed, so did the law; marijuana has now been legalized in eight states and Washington, DC (though the extent of legalization differs between states).

While legalization led to dramatic reductions in the number of arrests for marijuana, racial disparities persist. That’s the conclusion of a recent report by The Drug Policy Alliance, a drug policy reform organization, which analyzed the impact of legalizing marijuana on the criminal justice system, public health, road safety, and the economy.

Black and Latino people use and sell drugs at a similar rate to other racial groups, but they are far more likely to be arrested and prosecuted. This racial disparity didn’t change after marijuana was legalized, the report notes.

“Initial data show that while legalization substantially reduced the total number of black and Latinx people arrested for marijuana offenses, it did not eliminate the forces that contributed to the disparity in the first place, such as the over policing of low-income neighborhoods, racial profiling, and other racially motivated police practices,” researchers note in the report.

Most states legalized marijuana with limits on where it can be consumed and how much someone can possess or grow it. Alaska legalized marijuana in 2015, but restricted the amount of marijuana someone could possess to 1 ounce. The law also stated that people couldn’t harvest more than 4 ounces in their home, or consume marijuana in public.

After 2015, marijuana arrests plummeted in the Alaska. The marijuana arrest rate for white and black Americans dropped by nearly 99% and more than 93%, respectively. But the report’s authors point out that Alaska’s marijuana arrest rate for black people (17.7 per 100,000) is still ten times greater than that of white people (1.8 per 100,000).

The report found a similar pattern in Colorado. White people benefitted the most from marijuana legalization, with arrests decreasing by 51% for white people, compared to 33% for Latino people, and 25% for black people between 2012 and 2014. By 2014, the marijuana arrest rate for black people (348 per 100,000) was nearly triple that of white people.

The overall post-legalization arrest rate for black people in Washington DC is reported to be double that of other races. The report notes that despite decriminalizing marijuana in 2014, public consumption of marijuana is a criminal misdemeanor (residents can consume the product on private property).

The report found that a black person in DC is 11 times more likely than a white person to be arrested for public consumption of marijuana. There are also significant racial disparities in California and Nevada.

The disparity in marijuana use across racial groups is low—in 2010, 14% of blacks and 12% of whites reported using marijuana in the past year, and in every year from 2001 to 2010, more whites than blacks between the ages of 18 and 25 reported using marijuana in the previous year, according to an analysis of federal data from the American Civil Liberties Union (pdf).

“To fully remedy the unequal enforcement of marijuana laws, police practices must be reformed,” the Drug Policy Alliance report concludes. The Drug Policy Alliance calls for an end in racial profiling and for police departments to promote accountability and transparency by collecting search, citation and arrest data, and using this data to evaluate and reduce racial disparities in enforcement practices.

New York Is Closer Than Ever to Legalizing Weed

Governor Andrew Cuomo ordered a study of recreational pot earlier this month. Advocates and experts think it's just a matter of time now.

Aaron Short

New York is about to have a conversation about what legalizing weed might look like.
Better late than never.

In his annual budget address earlier this month, Governor Andrew Cuomo nodded to possible legalization in nearby states like New Jersey when he proposed the state Department of Health to dig into what readily available, legal pot might mean for New Yorkers.

“Marijuana—things are happening,” the not-exactly-electric Cuomo intoned on January 16, adding, “If it was legalized in Jersey and it was legal in Massachusetts and the federal government allowed it to go ahead, what would that do to New York because it's right in the middle?”

The seemingly minor shift in rhetoric from a notoriously anti-weed governor—Cuomo referred to pot as a "Gateway Drug" less than a year ago—left reform advocates hopeful that New York was finally moving closer to recreational pot legalization. The exact parameters of the forthcoming study remained unclear, and Cuomo has yet to even conditionally embrace the prospect of legalizing marijuana. But it looked increasingly like the example set by neighboring jurisdictions—and the attendant windfall of tax revenue—would prove too tempting to ignore.

“We’re very intrigued and pleased to see the governor call for a study, especially as so many jurisdictions around New York are legalizing,” the Drug Policy Alliance deputy state director, Melissa Moore, told me in an interview. “That’s an important signal to us that he’s more open to this issue in the past. Hopefully, his thinking is evolving."

Cuomo, who admitted pot use as a young man back when he was state attorney general, has a history of moving remarkably slowly on marijuana policy. He presided over the rollout of a notoriously strict (non-smokable) medical weed pilot program in 2014, one that was revised in 2016 so as to be at least a bit more responsive to the needs of patients. (Since then, it should be noted, he tried to reduce criminal penalties for carrying small amounts of pot, and signed a law allowing veterans to use medical pot products for PTSD this past November.)

When Attorney General Jeff Sessions reversed an Obama-era directive encouraging federal prosecutors to leave pot-friendly states alone earlier this month, it threatened to throw a wrench in marijuana reform nationwide. But instead of reeling at the news, officials across the Northeast seem to be digging in their heels, laying down a new marker for what progressive policy looks like in the Trump era.

Massachusetts, still designing regulations for the legal sale and distribution of marijuana as demanded by a 2016 voter referendum, has shown few signs of backing off since Sessions's announcement. And Vermont became the ninth state in the country—and the first by way of its legislature—to legalize recreational pot use, doing so after Sessions made his move. New Jersey’s newly sworn-in Democratic governor Phil Murphy, meanwhile, has made it clear for a while now that he wants to move quickly on legalizing and regulating marijuana sales.

All of this could leave New York—and the famously budget-obsessed Cuomo—to miss out on a massive revenue windfall. Colorado collected nearly $200 million in pot-related revenue in 2016 and has raked in over $500 million total since weed legalization went into effect there in 2014. New Jersey marijuana advocates and experts, meanwhile, have estimated the state could rake in $300 million in tax revenue once pot is legalized.

It also doesn't hurt the cause that Cuomo, widely believed to be mulling a 2020 presidential campaign, lives in state a where weed legalization is more popular than ever. New Yorkers favored legalizing marijuana 62 to 28 in an Emerson College poll conducted in November 2017—up more than ten points from a May 2014 Quinnipiac poll. In fact, the speed with which New York’s neighboring states have been warming to recreational weed caught the Cuomo administration by surprise, one state lawmaker suggested to VICE.

When Cuomo was getting ready to sign the PTSD pot law in November, Diane Savino, the bill’s sponsor and a state senator from Staten Island, warned him he would “have a problem around marijuana," she recalled in an interview.

“I said, ‘The new guy in New Jersey announced he was going to do adult-use marijuana in [the] first 100 days,'" she told me. "'He’s going to give you agita every day. He’s going to announce these things. 'We’re going to have legal marijuana to the left of us, to the right of us and to the north of us literally and figuratively. The pressure on New York to do something on legal marijuana is going to continue to grow.'"

In an emailed statement, Cuomo spokesman Richard Azzopardi told VICE, “As the governor said, everyone has an opinion, but not the facts. As Massachusetts and Vermont recently legalized recreational marijuana as well as other states across the nation, the governor has directed DOH to undertake a study to understand the potential impacts on the criminal justice system, economy and public health." So far, the governor’s office has declined to provide much in the way of details on its desired marijuana study, nor a timetable for when it will be finished. When reached for comment, a state Department of Health Department spokeswoman called questions about the timing of the commission “premature," but did confirm it is slated to cover both potential legalization in New York as well as peripheral effects from legalization in neighboring states.

Savino, for her part, expected Cuomo to act on real pot reform sooner than later despite his past reticence, and possibly even pass a law early in his third term should he win reelection once again this coming November.

“On average, it takes about ten years from medical to adult use, but we’re in a different environment now, and the timeframe has accelerated exponentially,” Savino said. “We’re not going to be able to stop people from crossing state lines. We’re going to be creating felons from our own patients.”

Whenever Cuomo gets serious about recreational marijuana, lawmakers will be ready.

For the past several years, Manhattan state senator Liz Krueger has proposed a marijuana tax and regulation bill modeled on the state liquor law that treats marijuana companies like beverage distributors. In an interview, she offered what she described as a conservative estimate that legalization could produce $500 million in new revenue for the state government, $2 billion in new economic activity, and $300 million in savings for the state’s criminal justice system.

“This is a drug that is less dangerous than alcohol and tobacco and we can tax and regulate it similarly,” she told me. “There is tax revenue to be gained, there are advantages in decreasing criminal activity, and there are enormous savings in not moving thousands of young people of color through the criminal justice system.”