[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 205 (Friday, December 4, 2020)]
[House]
[Pages H6819-H6840]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  0915
     MARIJUANA OPPORTUNITY REINVESTMENT AND EXPUNGEMENT ACT OF 2019

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1244, I 
call up the bill (H.R. 3884) to decriminalize and deschedule cannabis, 
to provide for reinvestment in certain persons adversely impacted by 
the War on Drugs, to provide for expungement of certain cannabis 
offenses, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Cuellar). Pursuant to House Resolution 
1244, in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary printed in the bill, an 
amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules 
Committee Print 116-67, modified by the amendment printed in House 
Report 116-607, is adopted, and the bill, as amended, is considered 
read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                               H. R. 3884

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Marijuana Opportunity 
     Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 2020'' or the ``MORE Act 
     of 2020''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds as follows:
       (1) The communities that have been most harmed by cannabis 
     prohibition are benefiting the least from the legal marijuana 
     marketplace.
       (2) A legacy of racial and ethnic injustices, compounded by 
     the disproportionate collateral consequences of 80 years of 
     cannabis prohibition enforcement, now limits participation in 
     the industry.
       (3) 36 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and 
     Guam have adopted laws allowing legal access to cannabis, and 
     15 States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of 
     the Northern Mariana Islands have adopted laws legalizing 
     cannabis for adult recreational use.
       (4) A total of 47 States have reformed their laws 
     pertaining to cannabis despite the Schedule I status of 
     marijuana and its Federal criminalization.
       (5) Legal cannabis sales totaled $9.5 billion in 2017 and 
     are projected to reach $23 billion by 2022.
       (6) According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), 
     enforcing cannabis prohibition laws costs taxpayers 
     approximately $3.6 billion a year.
       (7) The continued enforcement of cannabis prohibition laws 
     results in over 600,000 arrests annually, disproportionately 
     impacting people of color who are almost 4 times more likely 
     to be arrested for cannabis possession than their White 
     counterparts, despite equal rates of use across populations.
       (8) People of color have been historically targeted by 
     discriminatory sentencing practices resulting in Black men 
     receiving drug sentences that are 13.1 percent longer than 
     sentences imposed for White men and Latinos being nearly 6.5 
     times more likely to receive a Federal sentence for cannabis 
     possession than non-Hispanic Whites.
       (9) In 2013, simple cannabis possession was the fourth most 
     common cause of deportation for any offense and the most 
     common cause of deportation for drug law violations.
       (10) Fewer than one-fifth of cannabis business owners 
     identify as minorities and only approximately 4 percent are 
     black.
       (11) Applicants for cannabis licenses are limited by 
     numerous laws, regulations, and exorbitant permit 
     applications, licensing fees, and costs in these States, 
     which can require more than $700,000.
       (12) Historically disproportionate arrest and conviction 
     rates make it particularly difficult for people of color to 
     enter the legal cannabis marketplace, as most States bar 
     these individuals from participating.
       (13) Federal law severely limits access to loans and 
     capital for cannabis businesses, disproportionately impacting 
     minority small business owners.
       (14) Some States and municipalities have taken proactive 
     steps to mitigate inequalities in the legal cannabis 
     marketplace and ensure equal participation in the industry.

     SEC. 3. DECRIMINALIZATION OF CANNABIS.

       (a) Cannabis Removed From Schedule of Controlled 
     Substances.--
       (1) Removal in statute.--Subsection (c) of schedule I of 
     section 202(c) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 
     812) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``(10) Marihuana.''; and
       (B) by striking ``(17) Tetrahydrocannabinols, except for 
     tetrahydrocannabinols in hemp (as defined in section 297A of 
     the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946).''.
       (2) Removal from schedule.--Not later than 180 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, the Attorney General 
     shall finalize a rulemaking under section 201(a)(2) removing 
     marihuana and tetrahydrocannabinols from the schedules of 
     controlled substances. For the purposes of the Controlled 
     Substances Act, marihuana and tetrahydrocannabinols shall 
     each be deemed to be a drug or other substance that does not 
     meet the requirements for inclusion in any schedule. A 
     rulemaking under this paragraph shall be considered to have 
     taken effect as of the date of enactment of this Act for 
     purposes of any offense committed, case pending, conviction 
     entered, and, in the case of a juvenile, any offense 
     committed, case pending, and adjudication of juvenile 
     delinquency entered before, on, or after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (b) Conforming Amendments to Controlled Substances Act.--
     The Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) is 
     amended--
       (1) in section 102(44) (21 U.S.C. 802(44)), by striking 
     ``marihuana,'';
       (2) in section 401(b) (21 U.S.C. 841(b))--
       (A) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A)--

       (I) in clause (vi), by inserting ``or'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (II) by striking clause (vii); and
       (III) by redesignating clause (viii) as clause (vii);

       (ii) in subparagraph (B)--

       (I) in clause (vi), by inserting ``or'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (II) by striking clause (vii); and
       (III) by redesignating clause (viii) as clause (vii);

       (iii) in subparagraph (C), in the first sentence, by 
     striking ``subparagraphs (A), (B), and (D)'' and inserting 
     ``subparagraphs (A) and (B)'';
       (iv) by striking subparagraph (D);
       (v) by redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph (D); 
     and
       (vi) in subparagraph (D)(i), as so redesignated, by 
     striking ``subparagraphs (C) and (D)'' and inserting 
     ``subparagraph (C)'';
       (B) by striking paragraph (4); and
       (C) by redesignating paragraphs (5), (6), and (7) as 
     paragraphs (4), (5), and (6), respectively;
       (3) in section 402(c)(2)(B) (21 U.S.C. 842(c)(2)(B)), by 
     striking ``, marihuana,'';
       (4) in section 403(d)(1) (21 U.S.C. 843(d)(1)), by striking 
     ``, marihuana,'';
       (5) in section 418(a) (21 U.S.C. 859(a)), by striking the 
     last sentence;
       (6) in section 419(a) (21 U.S.C. 860(a)), by striking the 
     last sentence;
       (7) in section 422(d) (21 U.S.C. 863(d))--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking 
     ``marijuana,''; and
       (B) in paragraph (5), by striking ``, such as a marihuana 
     cigarette,''; and
       (8) in section 516(d) (21 U.S.C. 886(d)), by striking 
     ``section 401(b)(6)'' each place the term appears and 
     inserting ``section 401(b)(5)''.
       (c) Other Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) National forest system drug control act of 1986.--The 
     National Forest System Drug Control Act of 1986 (16 U.S.C. 
     559b et seq.) is amended--
       (A) in section 15002(a) (16 U.S.C. 559b(a)) by striking 
     ``marijuana and other'';
       (B) in section 15003(2) (16 U.S.C. 559c(2)) by striking 
     ``marijuana and other''; and
       (C) in section 15004(2) (16 U.S.C. 559d(2)) by striking 
     ``marijuana and other''.
       (2) Interception of communications.--Section 2516 of title 
     18, United States Code, is amended--
       (A) in subsection (1)(e), by striking ``marihuana,''; and
       (B) in subsection (2) by striking ``marihuana''.
       (3) FMCSA provisions.--
       (A) Conforming amendment.--Section 31301(5) of title 49, 
     United States Code, is amended by striking ``section 31306,'' 
     and inserting ``sections 31306, 31306a, and subsections (b) 
     and (c) of section 31310,''.
       (B) Definition.--Section 31306(a) of title 49, United 
     States Code, is amended--

[[Page H6820]]

       (i) by striking ``means any substance'' and inserting the 
     following: ``means--
       ``(A) any substance''; and
       (ii) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; 
     and
       ``(B) any substance not covered under subparagraph (A) that 
     was a substance under such section as of December 1, 2018, 
     and specified by the Secretary of Transportation.''.
       (C) Disqualifications.--Section 31310(b) of title 49, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(3) In this subsection and subsection (c), the term 
     `controlled substance' has the meaning given such term in 
     section 31306(a).''.
       (4) FAA provisions.--Section 45101 of title 49, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (A) by striking ``means any substance'' and inserting the 
     following: ``means--
       ``(A) any substance''; and
       (B) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; and
       ``(B) any substance not covered under subparagraph (A) that 
     was a substance under such section as of December 1, 2018, 
     and specified by the Secretary of Transportation.''.
       (5) FRA provisions.--Section 20140(a) of title 49, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (A) by striking ``means any substance'' and inserting the 
     following: ``means--
       ``(A) any substance''; and
       (B) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; and
       ``(B) any substance not covered under subparagraph (A) that 
     was a substance under such section as of December 1, 2018, 
     and specified by the Secretary of Transportation.''.
       (6) FTA provisions.--Section 5331(a)(1) of title 49, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (A) by striking ``means any substance'' and inserting the 
     following: ``means--
       ``(A) any substance''; and
       (B) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; and
       ``(B) any substance not covered under subparagraph (A) that 
     was a substance under such section as of December 1, 2018, 
     and whose use the Secretary of Transportation decides has a 
     risk to transportation safety.''.
       (d) Retroactivity.--The amendments made by this section to 
     the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) are 
     retroactive and shall apply to any offense committed, case 
     pending, conviction entered, and, in the case of a juvenile, 
     any offense committed, case pending, or adjudication of 
     juvenile delinquency entered before, on, or after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (e) Effect on Other Law.--Nothing in this subtitle shall 
     affect or modify--
       (1) the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301 
     et seq.);
       (2) section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 
     262); or
       (3) the authority of the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and 
     the Secretary of Health and Human Services--
       (A) under--
       (i) the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S. 301 
     et seq.); or
       (ii) section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 
     U.S.C. 262); or
       (B) to promulgate Federal regulations and guidelines that 
     relate to products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived 
     compounds under the Act described in subparagraph (A)(i) or 
     the section described in subparagraph (A)(ii).
       (f) Public Meetings.--Not later than one year after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and 
     Human Services, acting through the Commissioner of Food and 
     Drugs, shall hold not less than one public meeting to address 
     the regulation, safety, manufacturing, product quality, 
     marketing, labeling, and sale of products containing cannabis 
     or cannabis-derived compounds.
       (g) Special Rule for Federal Employee Testing.--Section 503 
     of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1987 (5 U.S.C. 7301 
     note) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(h) Marijuana.--
       ``(1) Continued testing.--Notwithstanding the Marijuana 
     Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 2020 and the 
     amendments made thereby, the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services may continue to include marijuana for purposes of 
     drug testing of Federal employees subject to this section, 
     Executive Order 12564, or other applicable Federal laws and 
     orders.
       ``(2) Definition.--The term `marijuana' has the meaning 
     given to the term `marihuana' in section 102 of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 6 U.S.C. 802) on the day before 
     the date of enactment of the Marijuana Opportunity 
     Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 2020.''.
       (h) Special Rule for Certain Regulations.--
       (1) In general.--The amendments made by this section may 
     not be construed to abridge the authority of the Secretary of 
     Transportation, or the Secretary of the department in which 
     the Coast Guard is operating, to regulate and screen for the 
     use of a controlled substance.
       (2) Controlled substance defined.--In this subsection, the 
     term ``controlled substance'' means--
       (A) any substance covered under section 102 of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802) on the day before 
     the date of enactment of this Act; and
       (B) any substance not covered under subparagraph (A) that 
     was a substance covered under section 102 of the Controlled 
     Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802) on December 1, 2018, and 
     specified by the Secretary of Transportation.

     SEC. 4. DEMOGRAPHIC DATA OF CANNABIS BUSINESS OWNERS AND 
                   EMPLOYEES.

       (a) In General.--The Bureau of Labor Statistics shall 
     regularly compile, maintain, and make public data on the 
     demographics of--
       (1) individuals who are business owners in the cannabis 
     industry; and
       (2) individuals who are employed in the cannabis industry.
       (b) Demographic Data.--The data collected under subsection 
     (a) shall include data regarding--
       (1) age;
       (2) certifications and licenses;
       (3) disability status;
       (4) educational attainment;
       (5) family and marital status;
       (6) nativity;
       (7) race and Hispanic ethnicity;
       (8) school enrollment;
       (9) veteran status; and
       (10) sex.
       (c) Confidentiality.--The name, address, and other 
     identifying information of individuals employed in the 
     cannabis industry shall be kept confidential by the Bureau 
     and not be made available to the public.
       (d) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Cannabis.--The term ``cannabis'' means either marijuana 
     or cannabis as defined under the State law authorizing the 
     sale or use of cannabis in which the individual or entity is 
     located.
       (2) Cannabis industry.--The term ``cannabis industry'' 
     means an individual or entity that is licensed or permitted 
     under a State or local law to engage in commercial cannabis-
     related activity.
       (3) Owner.--The term ``owner'' means an individual or 
     entity that is defined as an owner under the State or local 
     law where the individual or business is licensed or 
     permitted.

     SEC. 5. CREATION OF OPPORTUNITY TRUST FUND AND IMPOSITION OF 
                   TAXES WITH RESPECT TO CANNABIS PRODUCTS.

       (a) Establishment of Trust Fund.--Subchapter A of chapter 
     98 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 9512. OPPORTUNITY TRUST FUND.

       ``(a) Creation of Trust Fund.--There is established in the 
     Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the 
     `Opportunity Trust Fund' (referred to in this section as the 
     `Trust Fund'), consisting of such amounts as may be 
     appropriated or credited to such fund as provided in this 
     section or section 9602(b).
       ``(b) Transfers to Trust Fund.--There are hereby 
     appropriated to the Trust Fund amounts equivalent to the net 
     revenues received in the Treasury from the taxes imposed 
     under chapter 56.
       ``(c) Expenditures.--Amounts in the Trust Fund shall be 
     available, without further appropriation, only as follows:
       ``(1) 50 percent to the Attorney General to carry out 
     section 3052(a) of part OO of the Omnibus Crime Control and 
     Safe Streets Act of 1968.
       ``(2) 10 percent to the Attorney General to carry out 
     section 3052(b) of part OO of the Omnibus Crime Control and 
     Safe Streets Act of 1968.
       ``(3) 20 percent to the Administrator of the Small Business 
     Administration to carry out section 6(b)(1) of the Marijuana 
     Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 2020.
       ``(4) 20 percent to the Administrator of the Small Business 
     Administration to carry out section 6(b)(2) of the Marijuana 
     Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 2020.''.
       (b) Cannabis Revenue and Regulation Act.--Subtitle E of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new chapter:

                    ``CHAPTER 56--CANNABIS PRODUCTS

                ``subchapter a. tax on cannabis products

                    ``subchapter b. occupational tax

                    ``subchapter c. bond and permits

                       ``subchapter d. operations

                       ``subchapter e. penalties

                ``Subchapter A--Tax on Cannabis Products

``Sec. 5901. Imposition of tax.
``Sec. 5902. Definitions.
``Sec. 5903. Liability and method of payment.
``Sec. 5904. Exemption from tax; transfers in bond.
``Sec. 5905. Credit, refund, or drawback of tax.

     ``SEC. 5901. IMPOSITION OF TAX.

       ``(a) Imposition of Tax.--There is hereby imposed on any 
     cannabis product produced in or imported into the United 
     States a tax equal to--
       ``(1) for any such product removed during the first 5 
     calendar years ending after the date on which this chapter 
     becomes effective, the applicable percentage of such 
     product's removal price, and
       ``(2) for any product removed during any calendar year 
     after the calendar years described in paragraph (1), the 
     applicable equivalent amount.
       ``(b) Applicable Percentage.--For purposes of subsection 
     (a)(1), the applicable percentage shall be determined as 
     follows:
       ``(1) For any cannabis product removed during the first 2 
     calendar years ending after the date on which this chapter 
     becomes effective, 5 percent.
       ``(2) For any cannabis product removed during the calendar 
     year after the last calendar year to which paragraph (1) 
     applies, 6 percent.
       ``(3) For any cannabis product removed during the calendar 
     year after the calendar year to which paragraph (2) applies, 
     7 percent.
       ``(4) For any cannabis product removed during the calendar 
     year after the calendar year to which paragraph (3) applies, 
     8 percent.
       ``(c) Applicable Equivalent Amount.--
       ``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a)(2), the 
     term `applicable equivalent amount' means, with respect to 
     any cannabis product removed during any calendar year, an 
     amount equal to--
       ``(A) in the case of any cannabis product not described in 
     subparagraph (B), the product of the applicable rate per 
     ounce multiplied by the number of ounces of such product (and 
     a proportionate tax at the like rate on all fractional parts 
     of an ounce of such product), and

[[Page H6821]]

       ``(B) in the case of any THC-measurable cannabis product, 
     the product of the applicable rate per gram multiplied by the 
     number of grams of tetrahydrocannabinol in such product (and 
     a proportionate tax at the like rate on all fractional parts 
     of a gram of tetrahydrocannabinol in such product).
       ``(2) Applicable rates.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1)(A), the 
     term `applicable rate per ounce' means, with respect to any 
     cannabis product removed during any calendar year, 8 percent 
     of the prevailing sales price of cannabis flowers sold in the 
     United States during the 12-month period ending one calendar 
     quarter before such calendar year, expressed on a per ounce 
     basis, as determined by the Secretary.
       ``(B) THC-measurable cannabis products.--For purposes of 
     paragraph (1)(B), the term `applicable rate per gram' means, 
     with respect to any cannabis product removed during any 
     calendar year, 8 percent of the prevailing sales price of 
     tetrahydrocannabinol sold in the United States during the 12-
     month period ending one calendar quarter before such calendar 
     year, expressed on a per gram basis, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       ``(d) Time of Attachment on Cannabis Products.--The tax 
     under this section shall attach to any cannabis product as 
     soon as such product is in existence as such, whether it be 
     subsequently separated or transferred into any other 
     substance, either in the process of original production or by 
     any subsequent process.

     ``SEC. 5902. DEFINITIONS.

       ``(a) Definitions Related to Cannabis Products.--For 
     purposes of this chapter--
       ``(1) Cannabis product.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     the term `cannabis product' means any article which contains 
     (or consists of) cannabis.
       ``(B) Exceptions.--The term `cannabis product' shall not 
     include an FDA-approved article or industrial hemp.
       ``(C) FDA-approved article.--The term `FDA-approved 
     article' means any article if the producer or importer 
     thereof demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services that such article is--
       ``(i) a drug--

       ``(I) that is approved under section 505 of the Federal 
     Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act or licensed under section 351 of 
     the Public Health Service Act, or
       ``(II) for which an investigational use exemption has been 
     authorized under section 505(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, 
     and Cosmetic Act or under section 351(a) of the Public Health 
     Service Act, or

       ``(ii) a combination product (as described in section 
     503(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act), the 
     constituent parts of which were approved or cleared under 
     section 505, 510(k), or 515 of such Act.
       ``(D) Industrial hemp.--The term `industrial hemp' means 
     the plant Cannabis sativa L. and any part of such plant, 
     whether growing or not, with a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol 
     concentration of not more than 0.3 percent on a dry weight 
     basis.
       ``(2) THC-measurable cannabis product.--The term `THC-
     measurable cannabis product' means any cannabis product--
       ``(A) with respect to which the Secretary has made a 
     determination that the amount of tetrahydrocannabinol in such 
     product can be measured with a high degree of accuracy, or
       ``(B) which is not cannabis flower and the concentration of 
     tetrahydrocannabinol in which is significantly higher than 
     the average such concentration in cannabis flower.
       ``(3) Cannabis.--The term `cannabis' has the meaning given 
     such term under section 102(16) of the Controlled Substances 
     Act (21 U.S.C. 802(16)).
       ``(b) Definitions Related to Cannabis Enterprises.--For 
     purposes of this chapter--
       ``(1) Cannabis enterprise.--The term `cannabis enterprise' 
     means a producer, importer, or export warehouse proprietor.
       ``(2) Producer.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `producer' means any person who 
     plants, cultivates, harvests, grows, manufactures, produces, 
     compounds, converts, processes, prepares, or packages any 
     cannabis product.
       ``(B) Personal use exception.--Subject to regulation 
     prescribed by the Secretary, the term `producer' shall not 
     include any individual otherwise described in subparagraph 
     (A) if the only cannabis product described in such 
     subparagraph with respect to such individual is for personal 
     or family use and not for sale.
       ``(3) Importer.--The term `importer' means any person who--
       ``(A) is in the United States and to whom non-tax-paid 
     cannabis products, produced in a foreign country or a 
     possession of the United States, are shipped or consigned,
       ``(B) removes cannabis products for sale or consumption in 
     the United States from a customs bonded warehouse, or
       ``(C) smuggles or otherwise unlawfully brings any cannabis 
     product into the United States.
       ``(4) Export warehouse proprietor.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `export warehouse proprietor' 
     means any person who operates an export warehouse.
       ``(B) Export warehouse.--The term `export warehouse' means 
     a bonded internal revenue warehouse for the storage of 
     cannabis products, upon which the internal revenue tax has 
     not been paid--
       ``(i) for subsequent shipment to a foreign country or a 
     possession of the United States, or
       ``(ii) for consumption beyond the jurisdiction of the 
     internal revenue laws of the United States.
       ``(5) Cannabis production facility.--The term `cannabis 
     production facility' means an establishment which is 
     qualified under subchapter C to perform any operation for 
     which such qualification is required under such subchapter.
       ``(c) Other Definitions.--For purposes of this chapter--
       ``(1) Produce.--The term `produce' includes any activity 
     described in subsection (b)(2)(A).
       ``(2) Removal; remove.--The terms `removal' or `remove' 
     means--
       ``(A) the transfer of cannabis products from the premises 
     of a producer (or the transfer of such products from the 
     bonded premises of a producer to a non-bonded premises of 
     such producer),
       ``(B) release of such products from customs custody, or
       ``(C) smuggling or other unlawful importation of such 
     products into the United States.
       ``(3) Removal price.--The term `removal price' means--
       ``(A) except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, the 
     price for which the cannabis product is sold in the sale 
     which occurs in connection with the removal of such product,
       ``(B) in the case of any such sale which is described in 
     section 5903(c), the price determined under such section, and
       ``(C) if there is no sale which occurs in connection with 
     such removal, the price which would be determined under 
     section 5903(c) if such product were sold at a price which 
     cannot be determined.

     ``SEC. 5903. LIABILITY AND METHOD OF PAYMENT.

       ``(a) Liability for Tax.--
       ``(1) Original liability.--The producer or importer of any 
     cannabis product shall be liable for the taxes imposed 
     thereon by section 5901.
       ``(2) Transfer of liability.--
       ``(A) In general.--When cannabis products are transferred, 
     without payment of tax, pursuant to subsection (b) or (c) of 
     section 5904--
       ``(i) except as provided in clause (ii), the transferee 
     shall become liable for the tax upon receipt by the 
     transferee of such articles, and the transferor shall 
     thereupon be relieved of their liability for such tax, and
       ``(ii) in the case of cannabis products which are released 
     in bond from customs custody for transfer to the bonded 
     premises of a producer, the transferee shall become liable 
     for the tax on such articles upon release from customs 
     custody, and the importer shall thereupon be relieved of 
     their liability for such tax.
       ``(B) Returned to bond.--All provisions of this chapter 
     applicable to cannabis products in bond shall be applicable 
     to such articles returned to bond upon withdrawal from the 
     market or returned to bond after previous removal for a tax-
     exempt purpose.
       ``(b) Method of Payment of Tax.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Taxes paid on basis of return.--The taxes imposed by 
     section 5901 shall be paid on the basis of return. The 
     Secretary shall, by regulations, prescribe the period or the 
     event to be covered by such return and the information to be 
     furnished on such return.
       ``(B) Application to transferees.--In the case of any 
     transfer to which subsection (a)(2)(A) applies, the tax under 
     section 5901 on the transferee shall (if not otherwise 
     relieved by reason of a subsequent transfer to which such 
     subsection applies) be imposed with respect to the removal of 
     the cannabis product from the bonded premises of the 
     transferee.
       ``(C) Postponement.--Any postponement under this subsection 
     of the payment of taxes determined at the time of removal 
     shall be conditioned upon the filing of such additional 
     bonds, and upon compliance with such requirements, as the 
     Secretary may prescribe for the protection of the revenue. 
     The Secretary may, by regulations, require payment of tax on 
     the basis of a return prior to removal of the cannabis 
     products where a person defaults in the postponed payment of 
     tax on the basis of a return under this subsection or 
     regulations prescribed thereunder.
       ``(D) Administration and penalties.--All administrative and 
     penalty provisions of this title, insofar as applicable, 
     shall apply to any tax imposed by section 5901.
       ``(2) Time for payment of taxes.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this 
     paragraph, in the case of taxes on cannabis products removed 
     during any semimonthly period under bond for deferred payment 
     of tax, the last day for payment of such taxes shall be the 
     14th day after the last day of such semimonthly period.
       ``(B) Imported articles.--In the case of cannabis products 
     which are imported into the United States, the following 
     provisions shall apply:
       ``(i) In general.--The last day for payment of tax shall be 
     the 14th day after the last day of the semimonthly period 
     during which the article is entered into the customs 
     territory of the United States.
       ``(ii) Special rule for entry of warehousing.--Except as 
     provided in clause (iv), in the case of an entry for 
     warehousing, the last day for payment of tax shall not be 
     later than the 14th day after the last day of the semimonthly 
     period during which the article is removed from the first 
     such warehouse.
       ``(iii) Foreign trade zones.--Except as provided in clause 
     (iv) and in regulations prescribed by the Secretary, articles 
     brought into a foreign trade zone shall, notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, be treated for purposes of this 
     subsection as if such zone were a single customs warehouse.
       ``(iv) Exception for articles destined for export.--Clauses 
     (ii) and (iii) shall not apply to any article which is shown 
     to the satisfaction of the Secretary to be destined for 
     export.
       ``(C) Cannabis products brought into the united states from 
     puerto rico.--In the case of cannabis products which are 
     brought into the United States from Puerto Rico and subject 
     to tax under section 7652, the last day for payment

[[Page H6822]]

     of tax shall be the 14th day after the last day of the 
     semimonthly period during which the article is brought into 
     the United States.
       ``(D) Special rule where due date falls on saturday, 
     sunday, or holiday.--Notwithstanding section 7503, if, but 
     for this subparagraph, the due date under this paragraph 
     would fall on a Saturday, Sunday, or a legal holiday (as 
     defined in section 7503), such due date shall be the 
     immediately preceding day which is not a Saturday, Sunday, or 
     such a holiday.
       ``(E) Special rule for unlawfully produced cannabis 
     products.--In the case of any cannabis products produced in 
     the United States at any place other than the premises of a 
     producer that has filed the bond and obtained the permit 
     required under this chapter, tax shall be due and payable 
     immediately upon production.
       ``(3) Payment by electronic fund transfer.--Any person who 
     in any 12-month period, ending December 31, was liable for a 
     gross amount equal to or exceeding $5,000,000 in taxes 
     imposed on cannabis products by section 5901 (or section 
     7652) shall pay such taxes during the succeeding calendar 
     year by electronic fund transfer (as defined in section 
     5061(e)(2)) to a Federal Reserve Bank. Rules similar to the 
     rules of section 5061(e)(3) shall apply to the $5,000,000 
     amount specified in the preceding sentence.
       ``(c) Determination of Price.--
       ``(1) Constructive sale price.--
       ``(A) In general.--If an article is sold directly to 
     consumers, sold on consignment, or sold (otherwise than 
     through an arm's length transaction) at less than the fair 
     market price, or if the price for which the article sold 
     cannot be determined, the tax under section 5901(a) shall be 
     computed on the price for which such articles are sold, in 
     the ordinary course of trade, by producers thereof, as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       ``(B) Arm's length.--
       ``(i) In general.--For purposes of this section, a sale is 
     considered to be made under circumstances otherwise than at 
     arm's length if--

       ``(I) the parties are members of the same controlled group, 
     whether or not such control is actually exercised to 
     influence the sale price, or
       ``(II) the parties are members of a family, as defined in 
     section 267(c)(4), or
       ``(III) the sale is made pursuant to special arrangements 
     between a producer and a purchaser.

       ``(ii) Controlled groups.--

       ``(I) In general.--The term `controlled group' has the 
     meaning given to such term by subsection (a) of section 1563, 
     except that `more than 50 percent' shall be substituted for 
     `at least 80 percent' each place it appears in such 
     subsection.
       ``(II) Controlled groups which include nonincorporated 
     persons.--Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, 
     principles similar to the principles of subclause (I) shall 
     apply to a group of persons under common control where one or 
     more of such persons is not a corporation.

       ``(2) Containers, packing and transportation charges.--In 
     determining, for the purposes of this chapter, the price for 
     which an article is sold, there shall be included any charge 
     for coverings and containers of whatever nature, and any 
     charge incident to placing the article in condition packed 
     ready for shipment, but there shall be excluded the amount of 
     tax imposed by this chapter, whether or not stated as a 
     separate charge. A transportation, delivery, insurance, 
     installation, or other charge (not required by the preceding 
     sentence to be included) shall be excluded from the price 
     only if the amount thereof is established to the satisfaction 
     of the Secretary in accordance with regulations.
       ``(3) Determination of applicable equivalent amounts.--
     Paragraphs (1) and (2) shall apply for purposes of section 
     5901(c) only to the extent that the Secretary determines 
     appropriate.
       ``(d) Partial Payments and Installment Accounts.--
       ``(1) Partial payments.--In the case of--
       ``(A) a contract for the sale of an article wherein it is 
     provided that the price shall be paid by installments and 
     title to the article sold does not pass until a future date 
     notwithstanding partial payment by installments,
       ``(B) a conditional sale, or
       ``(C) a chattel mortgage arrangement wherein it is provided 
     that the sales price shall be paid in installments,
     there shall be paid upon each payment with respect to the 
     article a percentage of such payment equal to the rate of tax 
     in effect on the date such payment is due.
       ``(2) Sales of installment accounts.--If installment 
     accounts, with respect to payments on which tax is being 
     computed as provided in paragraph (1), are sold or otherwise 
     disposed of, then paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect 
     to any subsequent payments on such accounts (other than 
     subsequent payments on returned accounts with respect to 
     which credit or refund is allowable by reason of section 
     6416(b)(5)), but instead--
       ``(A) there shall be paid an amount equal to the difference 
     between--
       ``(i) the tax previously paid on the payments on such 
     installment accounts, and
       ``(ii) the total tax which would be payable if such 
     installment accounts had not been sold or otherwise disposed 
     of (computed as provided in paragraph (1)), except that
       ``(B) if any such sale is pursuant to the order of, or 
     subject to the approval of, a court of competent jurisdiction 
     in a bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding, the amount computed 
     under subparagraph (A) shall not exceed the sum of the 
     amounts computed by multiplying--
       ``(i) the proportionate share of the amount for which such 
     accounts are sold which is allocable to each unpaid 
     installment payment, by
       ``(ii) the rate of tax under this chapter in effect on the 
     date such unpaid installment payment is or was due.
     The sum of the amounts payable under this subsection in 
     respect of the sale of any article shall not exceed the total 
     tax.

     ``SEC. 5904. EXEMPTION FROM TAX; TRANSFERS IN BOND.

       ``(a) Exemption From Tax.--Cannabis products on which the 
     internal revenue tax has not been paid or determined may, 
     subject to such regulations as the Secretary shall prescribe, 
     be withdrawn from the bonded premises of any producer in 
     approved containers free of tax and not for resale for use--
       ``(1) exclusively in scientific research by a laboratory,
       ``(2) by a proprietor of a cannabis production facility in 
     research, development, or testing (other than consumer 
     testing or other market analysis) of processes, systems, 
     materials, or equipment, relating to cannabis or cannabis 
     operations, under such limitations and conditions as to 
     quantities, use, and accountability as the Secretary may by 
     regulations require for the protection of the revenue, or
       ``(3) by the United States or any governmental agency 
     thereof, any State, any political subdivision of a State, or 
     the District of Columbia, for nonconsumption purposes.
       ``(b) Cannabis Products Transferred or Removed in Bond From 
     Domestic Factories and Export Warehouses.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subject to such regulations and under 
     such bonds as the Secretary shall prescribe, a producer or 
     export warehouse proprietor may transfer cannabis products, 
     without payment of tax, to the bonded premises of another 
     producer or export warehouse proprietor, or remove such 
     articles, without payment of tax, for shipment to a foreign 
     country or a possession of the United States, or for 
     consumption beyond the jurisdiction of the internal revenue 
     laws of the United States.
       ``(2) Labeling.--Cannabis products may not be transferred 
     or removed under this subsection unless such products bear 
     such marks, labels, or notices as the Secretary shall by 
     regulations prescribe.
       ``(c) Cannabis Products Released in Bond From Customs 
     Custody.--Cannabis products imported or brought into the 
     United States may be released from customs custody, without 
     payment of tax, for delivery to a producer or export 
     warehouse proprietor if such articles are not put up in 
     packages, in accordance with such regulations and under such 
     bond as the Secretary shall prescribe.
       ``(d) Cannabis Products Exported and Returned.--Cannabis 
     products classifiable under item 9801.00.10 of the Harmonized 
     Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to duty on 
     certain articles previously exported and returned), as in 
     effect on the date of the enactment of the Marijuana 
     Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 2020, may be 
     released from customs custody, without payment of that part 
     of the duty attributable to the internal revenue tax for 
     delivery to the original producer of such cannabis products 
     or to the export warehouse proprietor authorized by such 
     producer to receive such products, in accordance with such 
     regulations and under such bond as the Secretary shall 
     prescribe. Upon such release such products shall be subject 
     to this chapter as if they had not been exported or otherwise 
     removed from internal revenue bond.

     ``SEC. 5905. CREDIT, REFUND, OR DRAWBACK OF TAX.

       ``(a) Credit or Refund.--
       ``(1) In general.--Credit or refund of any tax imposed by 
     this chapter or section 7652 shall be allowed or made 
     (without interest) to the cannabis enterprise on proof 
     satisfactory to the Secretary that the claimant cannabis 
     enterprise has paid the tax on--
       ``(A) cannabis products withdrawn from the market by the 
     claimant, or
       ``(B) such products lost (otherwise than by theft) or 
     destroyed, by fire, casualty, or act of God, while in the 
     possession or ownership of the claimant.
       ``(2) Cannabis products lost or destroyed in bond.--
       ``(A) Extent of loss allowance.--No tax shall be collected 
     in respect of cannabis products lost or destroyed while in 
     bond, except that such tax shall be collected--
       ``(i) in the case of loss by theft, unless the Secretary 
     finds that the theft occurred without connivance, collusion, 
     fraud, or negligence on the part of the proprietor of the 
     cannabis production facility, owner, consignor, consignee, 
     bailee, or carrier, or their employees or agents,
       ``(ii) in the case of voluntary destruction, unless such 
     destruction is carried out as provided in paragraph (3), and
       ``(iii) in the case of an unexplained shortage of cannabis 
     products.
       ``(B) Proof of loss.--In any case in which cannabis 
     products are lost or destroyed, whether by theft or 
     otherwise, the Secretary may require the proprietor of a 
     cannabis production facility or other person liable for the 
     tax to file a claim for relief from the tax and submit proof 
     as to the cause of such loss. In every case where it appears 
     that the loss was by theft, the burden shall be upon the 
     proprietor of the cannabis production facility or other 
     person responsible for the tax under section 5901 to 
     establish to the satisfaction of the Secretary that such loss 
     did not occur as the result of connivance, collusion, fraud, 
     or negligence on the part of the proprietor of the cannabis 
     production facility, owner, consignor, consignee, bailee, or 
     carrier, or their employees or agents.
       ``(C) Refund of tax.--In any case where the tax would not 
     be collectible by virtue of subparagraph (A), but such tax 
     has been paid, the Secretary shall refund such tax.
       ``(D) Limitations.--Except as provided in subparagraph (E), 
     no tax shall be abated, remitted, credited, or refunded under 
     this paragraph where the loss occurred after the tax was 
     determined. The abatement, remission, credit, or refund of 
     taxes provided for by subparagraphs (A)

[[Page H6823]]

     and (C) in the case of loss of cannabis products by theft 
     shall only be allowed to the extent that the claimant is not 
     indemnified against or recompensed in respect of the tax for 
     such loss.
       ``(E) Applicability.--The provisions of this paragraph 
     shall extend to and apply in respect of cannabis products 
     lost after the tax was determined and before completion of 
     the physical removal of the cannabis products from the bonded 
     premises.
       ``(3) Voluntary destruction.--The proprietor of a cannabis 
     production facility or other persons liable for the tax 
     imposed by this chapter or by section 7652 with respect to 
     any cannabis product in bond may voluntarily destroy such 
     products, but only if such destruction is under such 
     supervision and under such regulations as the Secretary may 
     prescribe.
       ``(4) Limitation.--Any claim for credit or refund of tax 
     under this subsection shall be filed within 6 months after 
     the date of the withdrawal from the market, loss, or 
     destruction of the products to which the claim relates, and 
     shall be in such form and contain such information as the 
     Secretary shall by regulations prescribe.
       ``(b) Drawback of Tax.--There shall be an allowance of 
     drawback of tax paid on cannabis products, when shipped from 
     the United States, in accordance with such regulations and 
     upon the filing of such bond as the Secretary shall 
     prescribe.

                    ``Subchapter B--Occupational Tax

``Sec. 5911. Imposition and rate of tax.
``Sec. 5912. Payment of tax.
``Sec. 5913. Provisions relating to liability for occupational taxes.
``Sec. 5914. Application to State laws.

     ``SEC. 5911. IMPOSITION AND RATE OF TAX.

       ``(a) In General.--Any person engaged in business as a 
     producer or an export warehouse proprietor shall pay a tax of 
     $1,000 per year (referred to in this subchapter as an 
     `occupational tax') in respect of each premises at which such 
     business is carried on.
       ``(b) Penalty for Failure To Register.--Any person engaged 
     in business as a producer or an export warehouse proprietor 
     who willfully fails to pay the occupation tax shall be fined 
     not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or 
     both, for each such offense.

     ``SEC. 5912. PAYMENT OF TAX.

       ``(a) Condition Precedent to Carrying on Business.--No 
     person shall be engaged in or carry on any trade or business 
     subject to the occupational tax until such person has paid 
     such tax.
       ``(b) Computation.--
       ``(1) In general.--The occupational tax shall be imposed--
       ``(A) as of on the first day of July in each year, or
       ``(B) on commencing any trade or business on which such tax 
     is imposed.
       ``(2) Period.--In the case of a tax imposed under 
     subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1), the occupational tax shall 
     be reckoned for 1 year, and in the case of subparagraph (B) 
     of such paragraph, it shall be reckoned proportionately, from 
     the first day of the month in which the liability to such tax 
     commenced, to and including the 30th day of June following.
       ``(c) Method of Payment.--
       ``(1) Payment by return.--The occupational tax shall be 
     paid on the basis of a return under such regulations as the 
     Secretary shall prescribe.
       ``(2) Stamp denoting payment of tax.--After receiving a 
     properly executed return and remittance of any occupational 
     tax, the Secretary shall issue to the taxpayer an appropriate 
     stamp as a receipt denoting payment of the tax. This 
     paragraph shall not apply in the case of a return covering 
     liability for a past period.

     ``SEC. 5913. PROVISIONS RELATING TO LIABILITY FOR 
                   OCCUPATIONAL TAXES.

       ``(a) Partners.--Any number of persons doing business in 
     partnership at any one place shall be required to pay a 
     single occupational tax.
       ``(b) Different Businesses of Same Ownership and 
     Location.--Whenever more than one of the pursuits or 
     occupations described in this subchapter are carried on in 
     the same place by the same person at the same time, except as 
     otherwise provided in this subchapter, the occupational tax 
     shall be paid for each according to the rates severally 
     prescribed.
       ``(c) Businesses in More Than One Location.--
       ``(1) Liability for tax.--The payment of the occupational 
     tax shall not exempt from an additional occupational tax the 
     person carrying on a trade or business in any other place 
     than that stated in the records of the Internal Revenue 
     Service.
       ``(2) Storage.--Nothing contained in paragraph (1) shall 
     require imposition of an occupational tax for the storage of 
     cannabis products at a location other than the place where 
     such products are sold or offered for sale.
       ``(3) Place.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     `place' means the entire office, plant or area of the 
     business in any one location under the same proprietorship.
       ``(B) Divisions.--For purposes of this paragraph, any 
     passageways, streets, highways, rail crossings, waterways, or 
     partitions dividing the premises shall not be deemed 
     sufficient separation to require an additional occupational 
     tax, if the various divisions are otherwise contiguous.
       ``(d) Death or Change of Location.--
       ``(1) In general.--In addition to the person who has paid 
     the occupational tax for the carrying on of any business at 
     any place, any person described in paragraph (2) may secure 
     the right to carry on, without incurring any additional 
     occupational tax, the same business at the same place for the 
     remainder of the taxable period for which the occupational 
     tax was paid.
       ``(2) Eligible persons.--The persons described in this 
     paragraph are the following:
       ``(A) The surviving spouse or child, or executor or 
     administrator or other legal representative, of a deceased 
     taxpayer.
       ``(B) A husband or wife succeeding to the business of his 
     or her living spouse.
       ``(C) A receiver or trustee in bankruptcy, or an assignee 
     for benefit of creditors.
       ``(D) The partner or partners remaining after death or 
     withdrawal of a member of a partnership.
       ``(3) Change of location.--When any person moves to any 
     place other than the place for which occupational tax was 
     paid for the carrying on of any business, such person may 
     secure the right to carry on, without incurring additional 
     occupational tax, the same business at the new location for 
     the remainder of the taxable period for which the 
     occupational tax was paid. To secure the right to carry on 
     the business without incurring additional occupational tax, 
     the successor, or the person relocating their business, must 
     register the succession or relocation with the Secretary in 
     accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary.
       ``(e) Federal Agencies or Instrumentalities.--Any tax 
     imposed by this subchapter shall apply to any agency or 
     instrumentality of the United States unless such agency or 
     instrumentality is granted by statute a specific exemption 
     from such tax.

     ``SEC. 5914. APPLICATION TO STATE LAWS.

       ``The payment of any tax imposed by this subchapter for 
     carrying on any trade or business shall not be held to--
       ``(1) exempt any person from any penalty or punishment 
     provided by the laws of any State for carrying on such trade 
     or business within such State, or in any manner to authorize 
     the commencement or continuance of such trade or business 
     contrary to the laws of such State or in places prohibited by 
     municipal law, or
       ``(2) prohibit any State from placing a duty or tax on the 
     same trade or business, for State or other purposes.

                    ``Subchapter C--Bond and Permits

``Sec. 5921. Establishment and bond.
``Sec. 5922. Application for permit.
``Sec. 5923. Permit.

     ``SEC. 5921. ESTABLISHMENT AND BOND.

       ``(a) Prohibition on Production Outside of Bonded Cannabis 
     Production Facility.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as authorized by the Secretary or 
     on the bonded premises of a cannabis production facility duly 
     authorized to produce cannabis products according to law, no 
     cannabis product may planted, cultivated, harvested, grown, 
     manufactured, produced, compounded, converted, processed, 
     prepared, or packaged in any building or on any premises.
       ``(2) Authorized producers only.--No person other than a 
     producer which has filed the bond required under subsection 
     (b) and received a permit described in section 5923 may 
     produce any cannabis product.
       ``(3) Personal use exception.--This subsection shall not 
     apply with respect the activities of an individual who is not 
     treated as a producer by reason of section 5902(b)(2)(B).
       ``(b) Bond.--
       ``(1) When required.--Every person, before commencing 
     business as a producer or an export warehouse proprietor, 
     shall file such bond, conditioned upon compliance with this 
     chapter and regulations issued thereunder, in such form, 
     amount, and manner as the Secretary shall by regulation 
     prescribe. A new or additional bond may be required whenever 
     the Secretary considers such action necessary for the 
     protection of the revenue.
       ``(2) Approval or disapproval.--No person shall engage in 
     such business until he receives notice of approval of such 
     bond. A bond may be disapproved, upon notice to the principal 
     on the bond, if the Secretary determines that the bond is not 
     adequate to protect the revenue.
       ``(3) Cancellation.--Any bond filed hereunder may be 
     canceled, upon notice to the principal on the bond, whenever 
     the Secretary determines that the bond no longer adequately 
     protects the revenue.

     ``SEC. 5922. APPLICATION FOR PERMIT.

       ``(a) In General.--Every person, before commencing business 
     as a cannabis enterprise, and at such other time as the 
     Secretary shall by regulation prescribe, shall make 
     application for the permit provided for in section 5923. The 
     application shall be in such form as the Secretary shall 
     prescribe and shall set forth, truthfully and accurately, the 
     information called for on the form. Such application may be 
     rejected and the permit denied if the Secretary, after notice 
     and opportunity for hearing, finds that--
       ``(1) the premises on which it is proposed to conduct the 
     cannabis enterprise are not adequate to protect the revenue, 
     or
       ``(2) such person (including, in the case of a corporation, 
     any officer, director, or principal stockholder and, in the 
     case of a partnership, a partner)--
       ``(A) is, by reason of their business experience, financial 
     standing, or trade connections or by reason of previous or 
     current legal proceedings involving a felony violation of any 
     other provision of Federal or State criminal law relating to 
     cannabis or cannabis products, not likely to maintain 
     operations in compliance with this chapter, or
       ``(B) has failed to disclose any material information 
     required or made any material false statement in the 
     application therefor.

     ``SEC. 5923. PERMIT.

       ``(a) Issuance.--A person shall not engage in business as a 
     cannabis enterprise without a permit to engage in such 
     business. Such permit, conditioned upon compliance with this 
     chapter and regulations issued thereunder, shall be issued in 
     such form and in such manner as the

[[Page H6824]]

     Secretary shall by regulation prescribe. A new permit may be 
     required at such other time as the Secretary shall by 
     regulation prescribe.
       ``(b) Suspension or Revocation.--
       ``(1) Show cause hearing.--If the Secretary has reason to 
     believe that any person holding a permit--
       ``(A) has not in good faith complied with this chapter, or 
     with any other provision of this title involving intent to 
     defraud,
       ``(B) has violated the conditions of such permit,
       ``(C) has failed to disclose any material information 
     required or made any material false statement in the 
     application for such permit,
       ``(D) has failed to maintain their premises in such manner 
     as to protect the revenue, or
       ``(E) is, by reason of previous or current legal 
     proceedings involving a felony violation of any other 
     provision of Federal or State criminal law relating to 
     cannabis, not likely to maintain operations in compliance 
     with this chapter,
     the Secretary shall issue an order, stating the facts 
     charged, citing such person to show cause why their permit 
     should not be suspended or revoked.
       ``(2) Action following hearing.--If, after hearing, the 
     Secretary finds that such person has not shown cause why 
     their permit should not be suspended or revoked, such permit 
     shall be suspended for such period as the Secretary deems 
     proper or shall be revoked.
       ``(c) Information Reporting.--The Secretary may require--
       ``(1) information reporting by any person issued a permit 
     under this section, and
       ``(2) information reporting by such other persons as the 
     Secretary deems necessary to carry out this chapter.
       ``(d) Inspection or Disclosure of Information.--For rules 
     relating to inspection and disclosure of returns and return 
     information, see section 6103(o).

                       ``Subchapter D--Operations

``Sec. 5931. Inventories, reports, and records.
``Sec. 5932. Packaging and labeling.
``Sec. 5933. Purchase, receipt, possession, or sale of cannabis 
              products after removal.
``Sec. 5934. Restrictions relating to marks, labels, notices, and 
              packages.
``Sec. 5935. Restriction on importation of previously exported cannabis 
              products.

     ``SEC. 5931. INVENTORIES, REPORTS, AND RECORDS.

       ``Every cannabis enterprise shall--
       ``(1) make a true and accurate inventory at the time of 
     commencing business, at the time of concluding business, and 
     at such other times, in such manner and form, and to include 
     such items, as the Secretary shall by regulation prescribe, 
     with such inventories to be subject to verification by any 
     internal revenue officer,
       ``(2) make reports containing such information, in such 
     form, at such times, and for such periods as the Secretary 
     shall by regulation prescribe, and
       ``(3) keep such records in such manner as the Secretary 
     shall by regulation prescribe, with such records to be 
     available for inspection by any internal revenue officer 
     during business hours.

     ``SEC. 5932. PACKAGING AND LABELING.

       ``(a) Packages.--All cannabis products shall, before 
     removal, be put up in such packages as the Secretary shall by 
     regulation prescribe.
       ``(b) Marks, Labels, and Notices.--Every package of 
     cannabis products shall, before removal, bear the marks, 
     labels, and notices if any, that the Secretary by regulation 
     prescribes.
       ``(c) Lottery Features.--No certificate, coupon, or other 
     device purporting to be or to represent a ticket, chance, 
     share, or an interest in, or dependent on, the event of a 
     lottery shall be contained in, attached to, or stamped, 
     marked, written, or printed on any package of cannabis 
     products.
       ``(d) Indecent or Immoral Material Prohibited.--No indecent 
     or immoral picture, print, or representation shall be 
     contained in, attached to, or stamped, marked, written, or 
     printed on any package of cannabis products.
       ``(e) Exceptions.--Subject to regulations prescribed by the 
     Secretary, cannabis products may be exempted from subsections 
     (a) and (b) if such products are--
       ``(1) for experimental purposes, or
       ``(2) transferred to the bonded premises of another 
     producer or export warehouse proprietor or released in bond 
     from customs custody for delivery to a producer.

     ``SEC. 5933. PURCHASE, RECEIPT, POSSESSION, OR SALE OF 
                   CANNABIS PRODUCTS AFTER REMOVAL.

       ``(a) Restriction.--No person shall--
       ``(1) with intent to defraud the United States, purchase, 
     receive, possess, offer for sale, or sell or otherwise 
     dispose of, after removal, any cannabis products--
       ``(A) upon which the tax has not been paid or determined in 
     the manner and at the time prescribed by this chapter or 
     regulations thereunder, or
       ``(B) which, after removal without payment of tax pursuant 
     to section 5904(a), have been diverted from the applicable 
     purpose or use specified in that section,
       ``(2) with intent to defraud the United States, purchase, 
     receive, possess, offer for sale, or sell or otherwise 
     dispose of, after removal, any cannabis products which are 
     not put up in packages as required under section 5932 or 
     which are put up in packages not bearing the marks, labels, 
     and notices, as required under such section, or
       ``(3) otherwise than with intent to defraud the United 
     States, purchase, receive, possess, offer for sale, or sell 
     or otherwise dispose of, after removal, any cannabis products 
     which are not put up in packages as required under section 
     5932 or which are put up in packages not bearing the marks, 
     labels, and notices, as required under such section.
       ``(b) Exception.--Paragraph (3) of subsection (a) shall not 
     prevent the sale or delivery of cannabis products directly to 
     consumers from proper packages, nor apply to such articles 
     when so sold or delivered.
       ``(c) Liability to Tax.--Any person who possesses cannabis 
     products in violation of paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection 
     (a) shall be liable for a tax equal to the tax on such 
     articles.

     ``SEC. 5934. RESTRICTIONS RELATING TO MARKS, LABELS, NOTICES, 
                   AND PACKAGES.

       ``No person shall, with intent to defraud the United 
     States, destroy, obliterate, or detach any mark, label, or 
     notice prescribed or authorized, by this chapter or 
     regulations thereunder, to appear on, or be affixed to, any 
     package of cannabis products before such package is emptied.

     ``SEC. 5935. RESTRICTION ON IMPORTATION OF PREVIOUSLY 
                   EXPORTED CANNABIS PRODUCTS.

       ``(a) Export Labeled Cannabis Products.--
       ``(1) In general.--Cannabis products produced in the United 
     States and labeled for exportation under this chapter--
       ``(A) may be transferred to or removed from the premises of 
     a producer or an export warehouse proprietor only if such 
     articles are being transferred or removed without tax in 
     accordance with section 5904,
       ``(B) may be imported or brought into the United States, 
     after their exportation, only if such articles either are 
     eligible to be released from customs custody with the partial 
     duty exemption provided in section 5904(d) or are returned to 
     the original producer of such article as provided in section 
     5904(c), and
       ``(C) may not be sold or held for sale for domestic 
     consumption in the United States unless such articles are 
     removed from their export packaging and repackaged by the 
     original producer into new packaging that does not contain an 
     export label.
       ``(2) Alterations by persons other than original 
     producer.--This section shall apply to articles labeled for 
     export even if the packaging or the appearance of such 
     packaging to the consumer of such articles has been modified 
     or altered by a person other than the original producer so as 
     to remove or conceal or attempt to remove or conceal 
     (including by the placement of a sticker over) any export 
     label.
       ``(3) Exports include shipments to puerto rico.--For 
     purposes of this section, section 5904(d), section 5941, and 
     such other provisions as the Secretary may specify by 
     regulations, references to exportation shall be treated as 
     including a reference to shipment to the Commonwealth of 
     Puerto Rico.
       ``(b) Export Label.--For purposes of this section, an 
     article is labeled for export or contains an export label if 
     it bears the mark, label, or notice required under section 
     5904(b).

                       ``Subchapter E--Penalties

``Sec. 5941. Civil penalties.
``Sec. 5942. Criminal penalties.

     ``SEC. 5941. CIVIL PENALTIES.

       ``(a) Omitting Things Required or Doing Things Forbidden.--
     Whoever willfully omits, neglects, or refuses to comply with 
     any duty imposed upon them by this chapter, or to do, or 
     cause to be done, any of the things required by this chapter, 
     or does anything prohibited by this chapter, shall in 
     addition to any other penalty provided in this title, be 
     liable to a penalty of $10,000, to be recovered, with costs 
     of suit, in a civil action, except where a penalty under 
     subsection (b) or (c) or under section 6651 or 6653 or part 
     II of subchapter A of chapter 68 may be collected from such 
     person by assessment.
       ``(b) Failure To Pay Tax.--Whoever fails to pay any tax 
     imposed by this chapter at the time prescribed by law or 
     regulations, shall, in addition to any other penalty provided 
     in this title, be liable to a penalty of 10 percent of the 
     tax due but unpaid.
       ``(c) Sale of Cannabis or Cannabis Products for Export.--
       ``(1) Every person who sells, relands, or receives within 
     the jurisdiction of the United States any cannabis products 
     which have been labeled or shipped for exportation under this 
     chapter,
       ``(2) every person who sells or receives such relanded 
     cannabis products, and
       ``(3) every person who aids or abets in such selling, 
     relanding, or receiving,
     shall, in addition to the tax and any other penalty provided 
     in this title, be liable for a penalty equal to the greater 
     of $10,000 or 10 times the amount of the tax imposed by this 
     chapter. All cannabis products relanded within the 
     jurisdiction of the United States shall be forfeited to the 
     United States and destroyed. All vessels, vehicles, and 
     aircraft used in such relanding or in removing such cannabis 
     products from the place where relanded, shall be forfeited to 
     the United States.
       ``(d) Applicability of Section 6665.--The penalties imposed 
     by subsections (b) and (c) shall be assessed, collected, and 
     paid in the same manner as taxes, as provided in section 
     6665(a).
       ``(e) Cross References.--For penalty for failure to make 
     deposits or for overstatement of deposits, see section 6656.

     ``SEC. 5942. CRIMINAL PENALTIES.

       ``(a) Fraudulent Offenses.--Whoever, with intent to defraud 
     the United States--
       ``(1) engages in business as a cannabis enterprise without 
     filing the application and obtaining the permit where 
     required by this chapter or regulations thereunder,
       ``(2) fails to keep or make any record, return, report, or 
     inventory, or keeps or makes any false or fraudulent record, 
     return, report, or inventory, required by this chapter or 
     regulations thereunder,
       ``(3) refuses to pay any tax imposed by this chapter, or 
     attempts in any manner to evade or defeat the tax or the 
     payment thereof,

[[Page H6825]]

       ``(4) sells or otherwise transfers, contrary to this 
     chapter or regulations thereunder, any cannabis products 
     subject to tax under this chapter, or
       ``(5) purchases, receives, or possesses, with intent to 
     redistribute or resell, any cannabis product--
       ``(A) upon which the tax has not been paid or determined in 
     the manner and at the time prescribed by this chapter or 
     regulations thereunder, or
       ``(B) which, without payment of tax pursuant to section 
     5904, have been diverted from the applicable purpose or use 
     specified in that section,
     shall, for each such offense, be fined not more than $10,000, 
     or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
       ``(b) Liability to Tax.--Any person who possesses cannabis 
     products in violation of subsection (a) shall be liable for a 
     tax equal to the tax on such articles.''.
       (c) Study.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, and every 5 years thereafter, the 
     Secretary of the Treasury, or the Secretary's delegate, 
     shall--
       (1) conduct a study concerning the characteristics of the 
     cannabis industry, including the number of persons operating 
     cannabis enterprises at each level of such industry, the 
     volume of sales, the amount of tax collected each year, and 
     the areas of evasion, and
       (2) submit to Congress recommendations to improve the 
     regulation of the industry and the administration of the 
     related tax.
       (d) Annual Reports Regarding Determination of Applicable 
     Rates.--Not later than 6 months before the beginning of each 
     calendar year to which section 5901(a)(2) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 (as added by this section) applies, the 
     Secretary of the Treasury, or the Secretary's delegate, shall 
     make publicly available a detailed description of the 
     methodology which the Secretary anticipates using to 
     determine the applicable rate per ounce and the applicable 
     rate per gram which will apply for such calendar year under 
     section 5901(c)(2) of such Code.
       (e) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 6103(o)(1)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 is amended by striking ``and firearms'' and inserting 
     ``firearms, and cannabis products''.
       (2) The table of chapters for subtitle E of such Code is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new item:

                   ``Chapter 56. Cannabis Products''.

       (3) The table of sections for subchapter A of chapter 98 of 
     such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     item:

``Sec. 9512. Opportunity Trust Tund.''.
       (f) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this 
     subsection, the amendments made by this section shall apply 
     to removals, and applications for permits under section 5922 
     of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as added by subsection 
     (b)), after 180 days after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act.
       (2) Establishment of trust fund.--The amendment made by 
     subsection (a) shall take effect on the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.

     SEC. 6. OPPORTUNITY TRUST FUND PROGRAMS.

       (a) Cannabis Justice Office; Community Reinvestment Grant 
     Program.--
       (1) Cannabis justice office.--Part A of title I of the 
     Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 
     10101 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 109 the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 110. CANNABIS JUSTICE OFFICE.

       ``(a) Establishment.--There is established within the 
     Office of Justice Programs a Cannabis Justice Office.
       ``(b) Director.--The Cannabis Justice Office shall be 
     headed by a Director who shall be appointed by the Assistant 
     Attorney General for the Office of Justice Programs. The 
     Director shall report to the Assistant Attorney General for 
     the Office of Justice Programs. The Director shall award 
     grants and may enter into compacts, cooperative agreements, 
     and contracts on behalf of the Cannabis Justice Office. The 
     Director may not engage in any employment other than that of 
     serving as the Director, nor may the Director hold any office 
     in, or act in any capacity for, any organization, agency, or 
     institution with which the Office makes any contract or other 
     arrangement.
       ``(c) Employees.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Director shall employ as many full-
     time employees as are needed to carry out the duties and 
     functions of the Cannabis Justice Office under subsection 
     (d). Such employees shall be exclusively assigned to the 
     Cannabis Justice Office.
       ``(2) Initial hires.--Not later than 6 months after the 
     date of enactment of this section, the Director shall--
       ``(A) hire no less than one-third of the total number of 
     employees of the Cannabis Justice Office; and
       ``(B) no more than one-half of the employees assigned to 
     the Cannabis Justice Office by term appointment that may 
     after 2 years be converted to career appointment.
       ``(3) Legal counsel.--At least one employee hired for the 
     Cannabis Justice Office shall serve as legal counsel to the 
     Director and shall provide counsel to the Cannabis Justice 
     Office.
       ``(d) Duties and Functions.--The Cannabis Justice Office is 
     authorized to--
       ``(1) administer the Community Reinvestment Grant Program; 
     and
       ``(2) perform such other functions as the Assistant 
     Attorney General for the Office of Justice Programs may 
     delegate, that are consistent with the statutory obligations 
     of this section.''.
       (2) Community reinvestment grant program.--Title I of the 
     Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 
     et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

            ``PART OO--COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT GRANT PROGRAM

     ``SEC. 3052. AUTHORIZATION.

       ``(a) In General.--The Director of the Cannabis Justice 
     Office shall establish and carry out a grant program, known 
     as the `Community Reinvestment Grant Program', to provide 
     eligible entities with funds to administer services for 
     individuals adversely impacted by the War on Drugs, 
     including--
       ``(1) job training;
       ``(2) reentry services;
       ``(3) legal aid for civil and criminal cases, including 
     expungement of cannabis convictions;
       ``(4) literacy programs;
       ``(5) youth recreation or mentoring programs; and
       ``(6) health education programs.
       ``(b) Substance Use Disorder Services.--The Director, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 
     shall provide eligible entities with funds to administer 
     substance use disorder services for individuals adversely 
     impacted by the War on Drugs or connect patients with 
     substance use disorder services. Also eligible for such 
     services are individuals who have been arrested for or 
     convicted of the sale, possession, use, manufacture, or 
     cultivation of a controlled substance other than cannabis 
     (except for a conviction involving distribution to a minor).

     ``SEC. 3053. FUNDING FROM OPPORTUNITY TRUST FUND.

       ``The Director shall carry out the program under this part 
     using funds made available under section 9512(c)(1) and (2) 
     of the Internal Revenue Code.

     ``SEC. 3054. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this part:
       ``(1) The term `cannabis conviction' means a conviction, or 
     adjudication of juvenile delinquency, for a cannabis offense 
     (as such term is defined in section 13 of the Marijuana 
     Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 2020).
       ``(2) The term `eligible entity' means a nonprofit 
     organization, as defined in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code, that is representative of a community or a 
     significant segment of a community with experience in 
     providing relevant services to individuals adversely impacted 
     by the War on Drugs in that community.
       ``(3) The term `individuals adversely impacted by the War 
     on Drugs' has the meaning given that term in section 6 of the 
     Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 
     2020''.''.
       (b) Cannabis Opportunity Program; Equitable Licensing Grant 
     Program.--
       (1) Cannabis opportunity program.--The Administrator of the 
     Small Business Administration shall establish and carry out a 
     program, to be known as the ``Cannabis Opportunity Program'' 
     to provide any eligible State or locality funds to make loans 
     under section 7(m) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     363(m)) to assist small business concerns owned and 
     controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged 
     individuals, as defined in section 8(d)(3)(C) of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(d)(3)(C)) that operate in the 
     cannabis industry.
       (2) Equitable licensing grant program.--The Administrator 
     of the Small Business Administration shall establish and 
     carry out a grant program, to be known as the ``Equitable 
     Licensing Grant Program'', to provide any eligible State or 
     locality funds to develop and implement equitable cannabis 
     licensing programs that minimize barriers to cannabis 
     licensing and employment for individuals adversely impacted 
     by the War on Drugs, provided that each grantee includes in 
     its cannabis licensing program at least four of the 
     following:
       (A) A waiver of cannabis license application fees for 
     individuals who have had an income below 250 percent of the 
     Federal Poverty Level for at least 5 of the past 10 years who 
     are first-time applicants.
       (B) A prohibition on the denial of a cannabis license based 
     on a conviction for a cannabis offense that took place prior 
     to State legalization of cannabis or the date of enactment of 
     this Act, as appropriate.
       (C) A prohibition on criminal conviction restrictions for 
     licensing except with respect to a conviction related to 
     owning and operating a business.
       (D) A prohibition on cannabis license holders engaging in 
     suspicionless cannabis drug testing of their prospective or 
     current employees, except with respect to drug testing for 
     safety-sensitive positions under part 40 of title 49, Code of 
     Federal Regulations.
       (E) The establishment of a cannabis licensing board that is 
     reflective of the racial, ethnic, economic, and gender 
     composition of the State or locality, to serve as an 
     oversight body of the equitable licensing program.
       (3) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       (A) The term ``individual adversely impacted by the War on 
     Drugs'' means an individual--
       (i) who has had an income below 250 percent of the Federal 
     Poverty Level for at least 5 of the past 10 years; and
       (ii) has been arrested for or convicted of the sale, 
     possession, use, manufacture, or cultivation of cannabis 
     (except for a conviction involving distribution to a minor), 
     or whose parent, sibling, spouse, or child has been arrested 
     for or convicted of such an offense.
       (B) The term ``eligible State or locality'' means a State 
     or locality that has taken steps to--
       (i) create an automatic process, at no cost to the 
     individual, for the expungement, destruction, or sealing of 
     criminal records for cannabis offenses; and
       (ii) eliminate violations or other penalties for persons 
     under parole, probation, pre-trial, or other State or local 
     criminal supervision for a cannabis offense.

[[Page H6826]]

       (C) The term ``State'' means each of the several States, 
     the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, any territory or 
     possession of the United States, and any Indian Tribe (as 
     defined in section 201 of Public Law 90-294 (25 U.S.C. 1301) 
     (commonly known as the ``Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968'')).

     SEC. 7. AVAILABILITY OF SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 
                   PROGRAMS AND SERVICES TO CANNABIS-RELATED 
                   LEGITIMATE BUSINESSES AND SERVICE PROVIDERS.

       (a) Definitions Relating to Cannabis-related Legitimate 
     Businesses and Service Providers.--Section 3 of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(ff) Cannabis-related Legitimate Businesses and Service 
     Providers.--In this Act:
       ``(1) Cannabis.--The term `cannabis'--
       ``(A) means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., 
     whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin 
     extracted from any part of such plant; and every compound, 
     manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of 
     such plant, its seeds or resin; and
       ``(B) does not include--
       ``(i) hemp, as defined in section 297A of the Agricultural 
     Marketing Act of 1946;
       ``(ii) the mature stalks of such plant, fiber produced from 
     such stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of such plant, 
     any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, 
     or preparation of such mature stalks (except the resin 
     extracted therefrom), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized 
     seed of such plant which is incapable of germination; or
       ``(iii) any drug product approved under section 505 of the 
     Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or biological product 
     licensed under section 351 of the Public Health Service Act.
       ``(2) Cannabis-related legitimate business.--The term 
     `cannabis-related legitimate business' means a manufacturer, 
     producer, or any person or company that is a small business 
     concern and that--
       ``(A) engages in any activity described in subparagraph (B) 
     pursuant to a law established by a State or a political 
     subdivision of a State, as determined by such State or 
     political sub-division; and
       ``(B) participates in any business or organized activity 
     that involves handling cannabis or cannabis products, 
     including cultivating, producing, manufacturing, selling, 
     transporting, displaying, dispensing, distributing, or 
     purchasing cannabis or cannabis products.
       ``(3) Service provider.--The term `service provider'--
       ``(A) means a business, organization, or other person 
     that--
       ``(i) sells goods or services to a cannabis-related 
     legitimate business; or
       ``(ii) provides any business services, including the sale 
     or lease of real or any other property, legal or other 
     licensed services, or any other ancillary service, relating 
     to cannabis; and
       ``(B) does not include a business, organization, or other 
     person that participates in any business or organized 
     activity that involves handling cannabis or cannabis 
     products, including cultivating, producing, manufacturing, 
     selling, transporting, displaying, dispensing, distributing, 
     or purchasing cannabis or cannabis products.''.
       (b) Small Business Development Centers.--Section 21(c) of 
     the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 648(c)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(9) Services for cannabis-related legitimate businesses 
     and service providers.--A small business development center 
     may not decline to provide services to an otherwise eligible 
     small business concern under this section solely because such 
     concern is a cannabis-related legitimate business or service 
     provider.''.
       (c) Women's Business Centers.--Section 29 of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 656) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(p) Services for Cannabis-related Legitimate Businesses 
     and Service Providers.--A women's business center may not 
     decline to provide services to an otherwise eligible small 
     business concern under this section solely because such 
     concern is a cannabis-related legitimate business or service 
     provider.''.
       (d) Score.--Section 8(b)(1)(B) of the Small Business Act 
     (15 U.S.C. 637(b)(1)(B)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new sentence: ``The head of the SCORE program 
     established under this subparagraph may not decline to 
     provide services to an otherwise eligible small business 
     concern solely because such concern is a cannabis-related 
     legitimate business or service provider.''.
       (e) Veteran Business Outreach Centers.--Section 32 of the 
     Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 657b) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new subsection:
       ``(h) Services for Cannabis-related Legitimate Businesses 
     and Service Providers.--A Veteran Business Outreach Center 
     may not decline to provide services to an otherwise eligible 
     small business concern under this section solely because such 
     concern is a cannabis-related legitimate business or service 
     provider.''.
       (f) 7(a) Loans.--Section 7(a) of the Small Business Act (15 
     U.S.C. 636(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(37) Loans to cannabis-related legitimate businesses and 
     service providers.--The Administrator may not decline to 
     provide a guarantee for a loan under this subsection to an 
     otherwise eligible small business concern solely because such 
     concern is a cannabis-related legitimate business or service 
     provider.''.
       (g) Disaster Loans.--Section 7(b) of the Small Business Act 
     (15 U.S.C. 636(b)) is amended by inserting after paragraph 
     (15) the following new paragraph:
       ``(16) Assistance to cannabis-related legitimate businesses 
     and service providers.--The Administrator may not decline to 
     provide assistance under this subsection to an otherwise 
     eligible borrower solely because such borrower is a cannabis-
     related legitimate business or service provider.''.
       (h) Microloans.--Section 7(m) of the Small Business Act (15 
     U.S.C. 636(m)) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(14) Assistance to cannabis-related legitimate businesses 
     and service providers.--An eligible intermediary may not 
     decline to provide assistance under this subsection to an 
     otherwise eligible borrower solely because such borrower is a 
     cannabis-related legitimate business or service provider.''.
       (i) State or Local Development Company Loans.--Title V of 
     the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 695 et 
     seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``SEC. 511. LOANS TO CANNABIS-RELATED LEGITIMATE BUSINESSES 
                   AND SERVICE PROVIDERS.

       ``The Administrator may not decline to provide a guarantee 
     for a loan under this title to an otherwise eligible State or 
     local development company solely because such State or local 
     development company provides financing to an entity that is a 
     cannabis-related legitimate business or service provider (as 
     defined in section 3(ff) of the Small Business Act).''.

     SEC. 8. NO DISCRIMINATION IN THE PROVISION OF A FEDERAL 
                   PUBLIC BENEFIT ON THE BASIS OF CANNABIS.

       (a) In General.--No person may be denied any Federal public 
     benefit (as such term is defined in section 401(c) of the 
     Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation 
     Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1611(c))) on the basis of any use or 
     possession of cannabis, or on the basis of a conviction or 
     adjudication of juvenile delinquency for a cannabis offense, 
     by that person.
       (b) Security Clearances.--Federal agencies may not use past 
     or present cannabis or marijuana use as criteria for 
     granting, denying, or rescinding a security clearance.

     SEC. 9. NO ADVERSE EFFECT FOR PURPOSES OF THE IMMIGRATION 
                   LAWS.

       (a) In General.--For purposes of the immigration laws (as 
     such term is defined in section 101 of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act), cannabis may not be considered a controlled 
     substance, and an alien may not be denied any benefit or 
     protection under the immigration laws based on any event, 
     including conduct, a finding, an admission, addiction or 
     abuse, an arrest, a juvenile adjudication, or a conviction, 
     relating to cannabis, regardless of whether the event 
     occurred before, on, or after the effective date of this Act.
       (b) Cannabis Defined.--The term ``cannabis''--
       (1) means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., 
     whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin 
     extracted from any part of such plant; and every compound, 
     manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of 
     such plant, its seeds or resin; and
       (2) does not include--
       (A) hemp, as defined in section 297A of the Agricultural 
     Marketing Act of 1946;
       (B) the mature stalks of such plant, fiber produced from 
     such stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of such plant, 
     any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, 
     or preparation of such mature stalks (except the resin 
     extracted therefrom), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized 
     seed of such plant which is incapable of germination; or
       (C) any drug product approved under section 505 of the 
     Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or biological product 
     licensed under section 351 of the Public Health Service Act.
       (c) Conforming Amendments to Immigration and Nationality 
     Act.--The Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et 
     seq.) is amended--
       (1) in section 212(h), by striking ``and subparagraph 
     (A)(i)(II) of such subsection insofar as it relates to a 
     single offense of simple possession of 30 grams or less of 
     marijuana'';
       (2) in section 237(a)(2)(B)(i), by striking ``other than a 
     single offense involving possession for one's own use of 30 
     grams or less of marijuana'';
       (3) in section 101(f)(3), by striking ``(except as such 
     paragraph relates to a single offense of simple possession of 
     30 grams or less of marihuana)'';
       (4) in section 244(c)(2)(A)(iii)(II) by striking ``except 
     for so much of such paragraph as relates to a single offense 
     of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana'';
       (5) in section 245(h)(2)(B) by striking ``(except for so 
     much of such paragraph as related to a single offense of 
     simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana)'';
       (6) in section 210(c)(2)(B)(ii)(III) by striking ``, except 
     for so much of such paragraph as relates to a single offense 
     of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marihuana''; and
       (7) in section 245A(d)(2)(B)(ii)(II) by striking ``, except 
     for so much of such paragraph as relates to a single offense 
     of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marihuana''.

     SEC. 10. RESENTENCING AND EXPUNGEMENT.

       (a) Expungement of Non-violent Federal Cannabis Offense 
     Convictions for Individuals Not Under a Criminal Justice 
     Sentence.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, each Federal district shall 
     conduct a comprehensive review and issue an order expunging 
     each conviction or adjudication of juvenile delinquency for a 
     non-violent Federal cannabis offense entered by each Federal 
     court in the district before the date of enactment of this 
     Act and on or after May 1, 1971. Each Federal court shall 
     also issue an order expunging any arrests associated with 
     each expunged conviction or adjudication of juvenile 
     delinquency.

[[Page H6827]]

       (2) Notification.--To the extent practicable, each Federal 
     district shall notify each individual whose arrest, 
     conviction, or adjudication of delinquency has been expunged 
     pursuant to this subsection that their arrest, conviction, or 
     adjudication of juvenile delinquency has been expunged, and 
     the effect of such expungement.
       (3) Right to petition court for expungement.--At any point 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, any individual with 
     a prior conviction or adjudication of juvenile delinquency 
     for a non-violent Federal cannabis offense, who is not under 
     a criminal justice sentence, may file a motion for 
     expungement. If the expungement of such a conviction or 
     adjudication of juvenile delinquency is required pursuant to 
     this Act, the court shall expunge the conviction or 
     adjudication, and any associated arrests. If the individual 
     is indigent, counsel shall be appointed to represent the 
     individual in any proceedings under this subsection.
       (4) Sealed record.--The court shall seal all records 
     related to a conviction or adjudication of juvenile 
     delinquency that has been expunged under this subsection. 
     Such records may only be made available by further order of 
     the court.
       (b) Sentencing Review for Individuals Under a Criminal 
     Justice Sentence.--
       (1) In general.--For any individual who is under a criminal 
     justice sentence for a non-violent Federal cannabis offense, 
     the court that imposed the sentence shall, on motion of the 
     individual, the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, the 
     attorney for the Government, or the court, conduct a 
     sentencing review hearing. If the individual is indigent, 
     counsel shall be appointed to represent the individual in any 
     sentencing review proceedings under this subsection.
       (2) Potential reduced resentencing.--After a sentencing 
     hearing under paragraph (1), a court shall--
       (A) expunge each conviction or adjudication of juvenile 
     delinquency for a non-violent Federal cannabis offense 
     entered by the court before the date of enactment of this 
     Act, and any associated arrest;
       (B) vacate the existing sentence or disposition of juvenile 
     delinquency and, if applicable, impose any remaining sentence 
     or disposition of juvenile delinquency on the individual as 
     if this Act, and the amendments made by this Act, were in 
     effect at the time the offense was committed; and
       (C) order that all records related to a conviction or 
     adjudication of juvenile delinquency that has been expunged 
     or a sentence or disposition of juvenile delinquency that has 
     been vacated under this Act be sealed and only be made 
     available by further order of the court.
       (c) Effect of Expungement.--An individual who has had an 
     arrest, a conviction, or juvenile delinquency adjudication 
     expunged under this section--
       (1) may treat the arrest, conviction, or adjudication as if 
     it never occurred; and
       (2) shall be immune from any civil or criminal penalties 
     related to perjury, false swearing, or false statements, for 
     a failure to disclose such arrest, conviction, or 
     adjudication.
       (d) Exception.--An individual who at sentencing received an 
     aggravating role adjustment pursuant to United States 
     Sentencing Guideline 3B1.1(a) in relation to a Federal 
     cannabis offense conviction shall not be eligible for 
     expungement of that Federal cannabis offense conviction under 
     this section.
       (e) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) The term ``Federal cannabis offense'' means an offense 
     that is no longer punishable pursuant to this Act or the 
     amendments made under this Act.
       (2) The term ``expunge'' means, with respect to an arrest, 
     a conviction, or a juvenile delinquency adjudication, the 
     removal of the record of such arrest, conviction, or 
     adjudication from each official index or public record.
       (3) The term ``under a criminal justice sentence'' means, 
     with respect to an individual, that the individual is serving 
     a term of probation, parole, supervised release, 
     imprisonment, official detention, pre-release custody, or 
     work release, pursuant to a sentence or disposition of 
     juvenile delinquency imposed on or after the effective date 
     of the Controlled Substances Act (May 1, 1971).
       (f) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States, 
     in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services, shall conduct a demographic study of individuals 
     convicted of a Federal cannabis offense. Such study shall 
     include information about the age, race, ethnicity, sex, and 
     gender identity of those individuals, the type of community 
     such users dwell in, and such other demographic information 
     as the Comptroller General determines should be included.
       (g) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall report to Congress the results of the study 
     conducted under subsection (f).

     SEC. 11. REFERENCES IN EXISTING LAW TO MARIJUANA OR 
                   MARIHUANA.

       Wherever, in the statutes of the United States or in the 
     rulings, regulations, or interpretations of various 
     administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States--
       (1) there appears or may appear the term ``marihuana'' or 
     ``marijuana'', that term shall be struck and the term 
     ``cannabis'' shall be inserted; and
       (2) there appears or may appear the term ``Marihuana'' or 
     ``Marijuana'', that term shall be struck and the term 
     ``Cannabis'' shall be inserted.

     SEC. 12. SEVERABILITY.

       If any provision of this Act or an amendment made by this 
     Act, or any application of such provision to any person or 
     circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder 
     of this Act, the amendments made by this Act, and the 
     application of this Act and the amendments made by this Act 
     to any other person or circumstance shall not be affected.

     SEC. 13. CANNABIS OFFENSE DEFINED.

       For purposes of this Act, the term ``cannabis offense'' 
     means a criminal offense related to cannabis--
       (1) that, under Federal law, is no longer punishable 
     pursuant to this Act or the amendments made under this Act; 
     or
       (2) that, under State law, is no longer an offense or that 
     was designated a lesser offense or for which the penalty was 
     reduced under State law pursuant to or following the adoption 
     of a State law authorizing the sale or use of cannabis.

     SEC. 14. RULEMAKING.

       Unless otherwise provided in this Act, not later than 1 
     year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Department 
     of the Treasury, the Department of Justice, and the Small 
     Business Administration shall issue or amend any rules, 
     standard operating procedures, and other legal or policy 
     guidance necessary to carry out implementation of this Act. 
     After the 1-year period, any publicly issued sub-regulatory 
     guidance, including any compliance guides, manuals, 
     advisories and notices, may not be issued without 60-day 
     notice to appropriate congressional committees. Notice shall 
     include a description and justification for additional 
     guidance.

     SEC. 15. SOCIETAL IMPACT OF MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION STUDY.

       The Comptroller General of the United States shall, not 
     later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     provide to Congress a study that addresses the societal 
     impact of the legalization of recreational cannabis by 
     States, including--
       (1) sick days reported to employers;
       (2) workers compensations claims;
       (3) tax revenue remitted to States resulting from legal 
     marijuana sales;
       (4) changes in government spending related to enforcement 
     actions and court proceedings;
       (5) Federal welfare assistance applications;
       (6) rate of arrests related to methamphetamine possession;
       (7) hospitalization rates related to methamphetamine and 
     narcotics use;
       (8) uses of marijuana and its byproducts for medical 
     purposes;
       (9) uses of marijuana and its byproducts for purposes 
     relating to the health, including the mental health, of 
     veterans;
       (10) arrest rates of individuals driving under the 
     influence or driving while intoxicated by marijuana;
       (11) traffic-related deaths and injuries where the driver 
     is impaired by marijuana;
       (12) arrest of minors for marijuana-related charges;
       (13) violent crime rates;
       (14) school suspensions, expulsions, and law enforcement 
     referrals that are marijuana-related;
       (15) high school dropout rates;
       (16) changes in district-wide and State-wide standardized 
     test scores;
       (17) marijuana-related hospital admissions and poison 
     control calls;
       (18) marijuana-related juvenile admittances into substance 
     rehabilitation facilities and mental health clinics;
       (19) diversion of marijuana into neighboring States and 
     drug seizures in neighboring States;
       (20) marijuana plants grown on public lands in 
     contravention to Federal and State laws; and
       (21) court filings under a State's organized crime 
     statutes.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for 
1 hour equally divided among and controlled by the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary.
  The gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Jordan) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate and find relief in the opportunity 
to speak on behalf of H.R. 3884, the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment 
and Expungement Act of 2020, or the MORE Act of 2020.
  I have great determination for the American people who, with a 
majority of Democrats and Republicans, understand the importance of the 
MORE Act, and I believe it is important to pass a long overdue measure, 
and I encourage the rest of my colleagues to do so as well.
  I don't rise today to promote drug use. I don't rise today to harm 
those young people who are in the beginning of their life.
  I do not rise today to undermine law enforcement. In fact, in 
speaking to a representative of the law enforcement community, 
detailing this legislation, there was a great relief and understanding 
of the fairness and the justice that would be rendered with the passage 
of the MORE Act.
  It has taken us a long time to get here, and I would like to take the 
opportunity to thank all of those who have made it possible for us to 
consider this bill today; in particular, my colleague, our chairman on 
the House Judiciary Committee, the author of this

[[Page H6828]]

bill, Chairman Jerry Nadler. He has worked without ceasing on this 
legislation, as well as two very determined colleagues who have 
continued their advocacy, and they were particularly instrumental in 
getting us here, Congresswoman Barbara Lee and Congressman Earl 
Blumenauer.
  To summarize the provisions of the MORE Act, they fall into two 
categories: First, simply, it would remove marijuana or cannabis from 
the list or schedule of Federally controlled substances. This means 
that, going forward, individuals could no longer be prosecuted 
federally for marijuana offenses.
  This does not mean that marijuana would now be legal in the entire 
United States, as some have tried to argue. It would simply remove the 
Federal Government from interfering with State laws and State 
structures in the business of prosecuting marijuana cases and would 
leave the question of legality to the individual States.
  Those States choosing to decriminalize can do so without ongoing 
interference from the Federal Government; and those States that choose 
to continue to make marijuana illegal can continue to do so as well.
  Second, the bill would establish a taxation structured to collect a 
sales tax on marijuana which, over the course of 5 years, could 
increase from 5 to 8 percent. The funds collected through this tax will 
be used to establish a trust to do good, to reinvest in communities 
ravaged by the war on drugs. I know it firsthand, by living and growing 
up in those communities, those communities of color and those 
communities beyond.
  What I would also say is it would bring banking a relief. Businesses 
who ultimately will come from this legislation, legally, will have the 
legal right and opportunity to secure legal banking relationships. The 
trust fund will be used for rehabilitation and re-entry programs in the 
Department of Justice and for programs in the Small Business 
Administration to ensure that the growing marijuana market is diverse 
and opens up opportunities for entrepreneurship in communities that 
have been adversely impacted by the war on drugs.
  In the last week, in my community, a bright, young individual was 
killed because of marijuana, marijuana sales. A bright light, yes, was 
extinguished in a minute with violence. This is what we want to see 
eliminated. We want a government structure that saves lives.
  Finally, the bill would expunge and seal Federal marijuana arrests 
and convictions and resentence offenders as appropriate, a much-needed 
measure to try to undo the damage that has been done to our communities 
since marijuana was arbitrarily placed on the list of controlled 
substances back in 1970.
  The numbers are staggering but, most of all, the numbers are 
staggering with the imbalance of prosecution of African Americans and 
people of Latinx heritage, Hispanic heritage. What an imbalance. What a 
massive infusion of incarceration across this Nation.
  Thousands of men and women have suffered needlessly from the Federal 
criminalization of marijuana, particularly in communities of color, and 
have born the burden of collateral consequences for those ensnared in 
the criminal legal system that have damaged our society across 
generations. This is unacceptable, and we must change our laws.
  It is time for Congress to catch up with the reforms that States have 
enacted. It is time for Congress to catch up with Americans. Thirty-six 
States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and Guam have adopted 
laws allowing legal access to cannabis. Fifteen States, the District of 
Columbia, and the Northern Mariana Islands have adopted laws legalizing 
cannabis for adult recreational use.
  A total of 47 States have reformed their laws in one form or another 
pertaining to cannabis, despite its Federal criminalization.
  The State legal cannabis industry already employs almost a quarter of 
a million people, and the Federal Government needs to get out of the 
way of State-level decisionmaking for their citizens.
  We need to open the door to research, better banking, and tax laws. 
We need to help fuel economic growth in this industry. We need to save 
lives. We need to help young people. We need to bring our Nation 
together.
  And we need to do this without continuing to spend Federal resources 
on criminalization and unjust incarceration for marijuana offenses.
  We need to pass the MORE Act.
  That is why I support it, and that is why I believe it is important 
for us to unify and support this bill today. And I ask my colleagues to 
do the same.
  Mr. Speaker, as a cosponsor of the legislation and a senior member of 
the Judiciary Committee, and its Subcommittee on Crime, Homeland 
Security, and Terrorism, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3884, the 
``Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 2020,'' or 
``MORE Act of 2020.''
  I support this legislation because it accomplishes three very 
important things.
  First, it removes marijuana, or cannabis, from the list--or the 
schedule--of Federally controlled substances.
  This means that, going forward, individuals could no longer be 
prosecuted, federally, for marijuana offenses.
  To be clear, this does not mean that marijuana would now be legal in 
the entire United States--it would simply remove the Federal government 
from the business of prosecuting marijuana cases and would leave the 
question of legality to the individual States.
  States choosing to decriminalize can do so, without ongoing 
interference from the Federal government, and those states that choose 
to continue to make marijuana illegal can continue to do so, as well.
  Second, the bill sets up a taxation structure to collect a sales tax 
on marijuana, which, over the course of five years would increase from 
five to eight percent.
  The funds collected through this tax will be used to establish a 
trust fund to reinvest in communities ravaged by the War on Drugs and 
in communities of color.
  The trust fund will be used for rehabilitation and reentry programs 
in the Department of Justice and for programs in the Small Business 
Administration to ensure that the burgeoning marijuana market is 
diverse and opens up opportunities for entrepreneurship in communities 
that have been adversely impacted by the War on Drugs.
  Finally, the bill would expunge and seal Federal marijuana 
convictions and resentence offenders, as appropriate--a much-needed 
measure to try to undo the damage that has been done to our communities 
since marijuana was arbitrarily placed on the list of controlled 
substances, back in 1970.
  Mr. Speaker, thousands of men and women have suffered needlessly from 
the federal criminalization of marijuana, particularly in communities 
of color, and have born the burden of the collateral consequences for 
those ensnared in the criminal legal system that have damaged our 
society across generations.
  The racially disproportionate prosecution of marijuana offenses is, 
in fact, a real problem at the federal level, and is not just a problem 
at the state and local level.
  Data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission proves the prosecution of 
cannabis offenses at the federal level disproportionately affects 
minority communities.
  According to the U.S. Sentencing Commission, about 84 percent of the 
more than 2,000 marijuana offenders who were federally sentenced in 
2018 were people of color.
  Only 11 percent were white, even though more than 60 percent of the 
U.S. population is white.
  This is unacceptable and we much change our laws.
  It is time for Congress to catch up with the times and the reforms 
that states are enacting.
  Thirty-six states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and Guam 
have adopted laws allowing legal access to cannabis.
  Fifteen states, the District of Columbia, and the Northern Mariana 
Islands have adopted laws for legalizing cannabis for adult 
recreational use.
  A total of 47 States have reformed their laws in one form or another 
pertaining to cannabis, despite its Federal criminalization.
  Mr. Speaker, the State legal-cannabis industry already employs almost 
a quarter of a million people and the federal government needs to get 
out of the way of state-level decision making for their citizens.
  We need to open the door to research, better banking and tax laws, 
and we need to help fuel economic growth in this industry.
  And we need to do this without continuing to spend federal resources 
on criminalization and unjust incarceration for marijuana offenses.
  In short, Congress needs to pass the MORE Act.
  Mr. Speaker, I will address briefly why certain objections raised 
against the bill lack merit and should be disregarded.
  Some opponents propose merely re-scheduling marijuana (instead of 
descheduling it completely).
  I oppose rescheduling marijuana to a lower schedule, such as Schedule 
III, because that

[[Page H6829]]

would only benefit industry, as cannabis-related businesses could start 
receiving tax breaks that would be prohibited if cannabis remained 
scheduled under Schedules I or II.
  Rescheduling marijuana would do absolutely nothing to address the 
problem of enforcement of marijuana laws.
  The Controlled Substances Act does not distinguish among the 
different schedules for purposes of enforcement and this amendment does 
not even touch the penalties associated with marijuana--including 
draconian mandatory minimums.
  Keeping marijuana on the schedule of controlled substances at all 
will only continue to exacerbate disparities in the criminal justice 
system and further entrench the issues currently presented by federal 
marijuana prohibition, VA doctors will continue to be prohibited from 
prescribing medical marijuana for suffering veterans, and federal 
employees will still be subjected to random workplace drug testing for 
off-the-job marijuana consumption.
  Next, let me address the misconception that decriminalization of 
marijuana at the federal level will lead to an increase in crime.
  In fact, there is every reason to believe it would be the exact 
opposite.
  Studies show that:
  1. Laws allowing adult use of marijuana are not associated with an 
uptick in overall criminal activity.
  2. Medical cannabis regulatory laws are not associated with an uptick 
in overall criminal activity.
  3. Retail cannabis facilities are not positively associated with 
increased criminality and may play a role in the prevention of certain 
crimes such as larceny.
  There is no need to anticipate that federal descheduling of marijuana 
will lead to more crime; states will still be allowed to leave in place 
their criminal laws and regulations related to marijuana, if they 
desire.
  Mr. Speaker, what is now largely a cash business will finally have 
access to banking, which will reduce the potential that lawfully 
compliant businesses become targets for crime.
  In fact, for this very reason, decriminalizing marijuana at the 
federal level will enhance public safety.
  Additionally, Mr. Speaker, veterans consume marijuana at rates far 
higher than the general population, and many vets report substituting 
alcohol and prescription drugs with medicinal marijuana.
  Veterans often report using cannabis to treat symptoms of chronic 
pain and mood disorders, like post-traumatic stress. In fact, marijuana 
used for medical purposes can help veterans ease their reliance on 
prescription and non-prescription opioids for pain relief.
  And the clinical data support the use of cannabis treatment for these 
indications. Descheduling will allow VA doctors to prescribe marijuana 
without fear of punishment, and it will allow the choice to be with 
doctors and patients, where it belongs.
  Descheduling marijuana, as this bill would do, will greatly benefit 
our veterans.
  Let me discuss briefly the expungement provisions in the legislation.
  The expungement provisions relate only to marijuana offenses, which 
are not per se violent offenses.
  Punishment for other offenses committed simultaneously (or, for that 
matter, at any other time) would remain in place.
  In the past several years, Congress has undertaken significant 
efforts to address the injustices inherent in our system of criminal 
justice.
  Criminal justice reform has been a bipartisan pursuit.
  Expungement is a critical component of any legislation seeking to 
address the disparities in our criminal justice system.
  This is especially true in the context of marijuana arrests, 
prosecutions, and convictions, which disproportionately affect 
overcriminalized communities of color.
  These are the communities that today continue to suffer most from the 
consequences of our failed drug policies.
  There are two different kinds of expungement processes established by 
the MORE Act.
  For those individuals who are in prison on a marijuana conviction or 
still under some form of federal court supervision, expungement takes 
place by way of resentencing, under the watch of a federal judge who 
will reevaluate whether, based on the person's conviction or 
convictions, it is appropriate to expunge or recalculate his or her 
sentence.
  For those individuals who have completely finished serving their 
sentences and are no longer under court supervision, expungement would 
help give them a fresh start--again, consistent with the principles of 
criminal justice reform we have espoused in a bipartisan manner.
  The collateral consequences suffered by those with marijuana 
convictions are numerous and vast and they are the direct result of the 
unfair and unwise placement of marijuana on Schedule I.
  We can help undo the harm by expunging federal marijuana convictions 
in the manner set forth in the MORE Act.
  Mr. Speaker, in voting to pass the MORE Act, this body will promoting 
public health and safety and delivering restorative justice.
  I urge all Members to join me in voting to pass H.R. 3884, the 
``Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 2020.'
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
                                         House of Representatives,


                                  Committee on Small Business,

                                Washington, DC, February 19, 2020.
     Hon. Jerrold Nadler,
     Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
     House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Nadler: I am writing to you concerning H.R. 
     3884, the ``Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and 
     Expungement Act of 2019.'' Thank you for consulting with the 
     Committee on Small Business regarding the matters in H.R. 
     3884 that fall within the Committee's jurisdiction.
       As a result of your consultation with us on this measure 
     and in order to expeditiously move the bill to the floor, I 
     forego further consideration of H.R. 3884. The Committee on 
     Small Business takes this action with our mutual 
     understanding that we do not waive any jurisdiction over the 
     subject matter contained in this or similar legislation, and 
     the Committee will be appropriately consulted and involved as 
     the bill or similar legislation moves forward so that we may 
     address any remaining issues that fall within our 
     jurisdiction. Further, I request your support for the 
     appointment of an appropriate number of conferees from the 
     Committee on Small Business during any House-Senate 
     conference involving this or similar legislation.
       Finally, I would appreciate your response to this letter 
     confirming our understanding regarding H.R. 3884 and would 
     ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be 
     included in the Committee Report and the Congressional Record 
     during floor consideration of the measure. Thank you for the 
     cooperative spirit in which you have worked regarding this 
     matter and others between our respective committees.
           Sincerely,
                                               Nydia M. Velazquez,
     Chairwoman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                                   Committee on the Judiciary,

                                    Washington, DC, July 13, 2020.
     Hon. Nydia M. Velazquez,
     Chairwoman, Committee on Small Business,
     House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairwoman Velazquez: I am writing to you concerning 
     H.R. 3884, the ``Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and 
     Expungement Act of 2019'' (the ``MORE Act of 2019''). You 
     wrote me a letter concerning this legislation on February 19, 
     2020.
       I appreciate your willingness to work cooperatively on this 
     legislation. I recognize that the bill contains provisions 
     that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Small 
     Business. I acknowledge that your Committee will not formally 
     consider H.R. 3884 and agree that the inaction of your 
     Committee with respect to the bill does not waive any future 
     jurisdictional claim over the matters contained in H.R. 3884 
     which fall within your Committee's Rule X jurisdiction.
       I will ensure that our exchange of letters is included in 
     the Congressional Record during floor consideration of the 
     bill. I appreciate your cooperation regarding this 
     legislation and look forward to continuing to work with you 
     as this measure moves through the legislative process.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Jerrold Nadler,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                            Committee on Oversight and Reform,

                               Washington, DC, September 21, 2020.
     Hon. Jerrold Nadler,
     Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
     House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Nadler: I am writing to you concerning H.R. 
     3884, the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement 
     Act of 2019. There are certain provisions in the legislation 
     which fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on 
     Oversight and Reform.
       In the interest of permitting your Committee to proceed 
     expeditiously on this bill, I am willing to waive this 
     Committee's right to sequential referral. I do so with the 
     understanding that by waiving consideration of the bill, the 
     Committee on Oversight and Reform does not waive any future 
     jurisdictional claim over the subject matters contained in 
     the bill which fall within its Rule X jurisdiction. I request 
     that you urge the Speaker to name Members of this Committee 
     to any conference committee which is named to consider such 
     provisions.
       Please place this letter into the Congressional Record 
     during consideration of the measure on the House floor. Thank 
     you for the cooperative spirit in which you have worked 
     regarding this matter and others between our respective 
     Committees.
           Sincerely,
                                               Carolyn B. Maloney,
                                                       Chairwoman.

[[Page H6830]]

     
                                  ____
                                         House of Representatives,


                                   Committee on the Judiciary,

                               Washington, DC, September 21, 2020.
     Hon. Carolyn B. Maloney,
     Chairwoman, Committee on Oversight and Reform, House of 
         Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairwoman Maloney: I am writing to you concerning 
     H.R. 3884, the ``Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and 
     Expungement Act of 2019'' (the ``MORE Act of 2019'').
       I appreciate your willingness to work cooperatively on this 
     legislation. I recognize that the bill contains provisions 
     that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on 
     Oversight and Reform. I acknowledge that your Committee will 
     not formally consider H.R. 3884 and agree that the inaction 
     of your Committee with respect to the bill does not waive any 
     future jurisdictional claim over the matters contained in 
     H.R. 3884 which fall within your Committee's Rule X 
     jurisdiction.
       I will ensure that our exchange of letters is included in 
     the Congressional Record during floor consideration of the 
     bill. I appreciate your cooperation regarding this 
     legislation and look forward to continuing to work with you 
     as this measure moves through the legislative process.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Jerrold Nadler,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                               Committee on Natural Resources,

                                Washington, DC, November 17, 2020.
     Hon. Jerrold Nadler,
     Chair, Committee on the Judiciary,
     House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chair Nadler: In recognition of the goal of expediting 
     consideration of H.R. 3884, the ``Marijuana Opportunity 
     Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 2019,'' the Committee on 
     Natural Resources agrees to waive formal consideration of the 
     bill as to provisions that fall within the Rule X 
     jurisdiction of the Committee on Natural Resources.
       The Committee on Natural Resources takes this action with 
     the mutual understanding that, in doing so, we do not waive 
     any jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or 
     similar legislation, and that the Committee will be 
     appropriately consulted and involved as the bill or similar 
     legislation moves forward so that we may address any 
     remaining issues within our jurisdiction. Our Committee also 
     reserves the right to seek appointment of conferees to any 
     House-Senate conference involving this or similar 
     legislation.
       Thank you for agreeing to include our exchange of letters 
     in the Congressional Record. I appreciate your cooperation 
     regarding this legislation and look forward to continuing to 
     work with you as this measure moves through the legislative 
     process.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Raul M. Grijalva,
      Chair, House Natural Resources Committee.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                                   Committee on the Judiciary,

                                Washington, DC, November 18, 2020.
     Hon. Raul M. Grijalva,
     Chairman Committee on Natural Resources,
     House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Grijalva: I am writing to you concerning H.R. 
     3884, the ``Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and 
     Expungement Act of 2019'' (the ``MORE Act of 2019'').
       I appreciate your willingness to work cooperatively on this 
     legislation. I recognize that the bill contains provisions 
     that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Natural 
     Resources. I acknowledge that your Committee will not 
     formally consider H.R. 3884 and agree that the inaction of 
     your Committee with respect to the bill does not waive any 
     future jurisdictional claim over the matters contained in 
     H.R. 3884 which fall within your Committee's Rule X 
     jurisdiction.
       I will ensure that our exchange of letters is included in 
     the Congressional Record during floor consideration of the 
     bill. I appreciate your cooperation regarding this 
     legislation and look forward to continuing to work with you 
     as this measure moves through the legislative process
           Sincerely,
                                                   Jerrold Nadler,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                             Committee on Education and Labor,

                                Washington, DC, November 24, 2020.
      Hon. Jerrold L. Nadler,
      Chairman, House Committee on the Judiciary,
      House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Chairman Nadler: I write concerning H.R. 3884, the 
     Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 
     2019. This bill was primarily referred to the Committee on 
     the Judiciary, and additionally to the Committee on Education 
     and Labor. As a result of Leadership and the Committee on 
     Judiciary having consulted with me concerning this bill 
     generally, I agree to forgo formal consideration of the bill 
     so the bill may proceed expeditiously to the House floor.
       The Committee on Education and Labor takes this action with 
     our mutual understanding that by forgoing formal 
     consideration of H.R. 3884, we do not waive any jurisdiction 
     over the subject matter contained in this or similar 
     legislation, and we will be appropriately consulted and 
     involved as the bill or similar legislation moves forward so 
     we may address any remaining issues within our Rule X 
     jurisdiction. I also request that you support my request to 
     name members of the Committee on Education and Labor to any 
     conference committee to consider such provisions.
       Finally, I would appreciate a response confirming this 
     understanding and ask that a copy of our exchange of letters 
     on this matter be included in the committee report for H.R. 
     3884 or in the Congressional Record during floor 
     consideration thereof.
           Sincerely,
                                        Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                                   Committee on the Judiciary,

                                Washington, DC, November 24, 2020.
     Hon. Bobby Scott,
     Chairman, House Committee on Education and Labor, Washington, 
         DC.
       Dear Chairman Scott: I am writing to you concerning H.R. 
     3884, the ``Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and 
     Expungement Act of 2019'' (the ``MORE Act of 2019'').
       I appreciate your willingness to work cooperatively on this 
     legislation. I recognize that the bill contains provisions 
     that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on 
     Education and Labor. I acknowledge that your Committee will 
     not formally consider H.R. 3884 and agree that the inaction 
     of your Committee with respect to the bill does not waive any 
     future jurisdictional claim over the matters contained in 
     H.R. 3884 which fall within your Committee's Rule X 
     jurisdiction.
       I will ensure that our exchange of letters is included in 
     the Congressional Record during floor consideration of the 
     bill. I appreciate your cooperation regarding this 
     legislation and look forward to continuing to work with you 
     as this measure moves through the legislative process.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Jerrold Nadler,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                      Committee on Ways and Means,


                                     House of Representatives,

                                Washington, DC, November 27, 2020.
     Hon. Jerrold Nadler,
     Chairman, Committee on Judiciary,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Nadler: In recognition of the desire to 
     expedite consideration of H.R. 3884, the Marijuana 
     Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 2019, the 
     Committee on Ways and Means agrees to waive formal 
     consideration of the bill as to provisions that fall within 
     the rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means.
       The Committee on Ways and Means takes this action with the 
     mutual understanding that we do not waive any jurisdiction 
     over the subject matter contained in this or similar 
     legislation, and the Committee will be appropriately 
     consulted and involved as the bill or similar legislation 
     moves forward so that we may address any remaining issues 
     within our jurisdiction. The Committee also reserves the 
     right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of 
     conferees to any House-Senate conference involving this or 
     similar legislation.
       Finally, I would appreciate your response to this letter 
     confirming this understanding and would ask that a copy of 
     our exchange of letter on this matter be included in the 
     Congressional Record during floor consideration of H.R. 3884.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Richard E. Neal,
     Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                                   Committee on the Judiciary,

                                Washington, DC, November 30, 2020.
     Hon. Richard Neal,
     Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means,
     House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Neal: I am writing to you concerning H.R. 
     3884, the ``Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and 
     Expungement Act of 2019'' (the ``MORE Act of 2019'').
       I appreciate your willingness to work cooperatively on this 
     legislation. I recognize that the bill contains provisions 
     that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways 
     and Means. I acknowledge that your Committee will not 
     formally consider H.R. 3884 and agree that the inaction of 
     your Committee with respect to the bill does not waive any 
     future jurisdictional claim over the matters contained in 
     H.R. 3884 which fall within your Committee's Rule X 
     jurisdiction.
       I will ensure that our exchange of letters is included in 
     the Congressional Record during floor consideration of the 
     bill. I appreciate your cooperation regarding this 
     legislation and look forward to continuing to work with you 
     as this measure moves through the legislative process.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Jerrold Nadler,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                             Committee on Energy and Commerce,

                                Washington, DC, November 30, 2020.
     Hon. Jerrold Nadler,
     Chair, Committee on Judiciary,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Nadler: I write concerning H.R. 3884, the 
     ``Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungemnent Act of 
     2019,'' which was additionally referred to the Committee on 
     Energy and Commerce.
       In recognition of the desire to expedite consideration of 
     H.R. 3884, the Committee on

[[Page H6831]]

     Energy and Commerce agrees to waive formal consideration of 
     the bill as to provisions that fall within the rule X 
     jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The 
     Committee takes this action with the mutual understanding 
     that we do not waive any jurisdiction over the subject matter 
     contained in this or similar legislation, and that the 
     Committee will be appropriately consulted and involved as 
     this bill or similar legislation moves forward so that we may 
     address any remaining issues within our jurisdiction. I also 
     request that you support my request to name members of the 
     Committee on Energy and Commerce to any conference committee 
     to consider such provisions.
       Finally, I would appreciate the inclusion of this letter 
     into the Congressional Record during floor consideration of 
     H.R. 3884.
           Sincerely,
                                               Frank Pallone, Jr.,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                                   Committee on the Judiciary,

                                 Washington, DC. December 1, 2020.
     Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr.,
     Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
     House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Pallone: I am writing to you concerning H.R. 
     3884, the ``Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and 
     Expungement Act of 2019'' (the ``MORE Act of 2019'').
       I appreciate your willingness to work cooperatively on this 
     legislation. I recognize that the bill contains provisions 
     that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy 
     and Commerce. I acknowledge that your Committee will not 
     formally consider H.R. 3884 and agree that the inaction of 
     your Committee with respect to the bill does not waive any 
     future jurisdictional claim over the matters contained in 
     H.R. 3884 which fall within your Committee's Rule X 
     jurisdiction.
        I will ensure that our exchange of letters is included in 
     the Congressional Record during floor consideration of the 
     bill. I appreciate your cooperation regarding this 
     legislation and look forward to continuing to work with you 
     as this measure moves through the legislative process
           Sincerely,
                                                   Jerrold Nadler,
                                                         Chairman.

  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from the 
State of North Carolina (Mr. Murphy), the good doctor.
  Mr. MURPHY of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition 
of H.R. 3884, the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement 
Act.
  As a practicing physician for over 30 years, this bill deeply 
troubles me, especially with its researched implications for our youth 
population.
  Marijuana is one of the most abused substances on this planet. And I 
will say, I am sympathetic to those who use marijuana for pain relief; 
I really am. It has been clinically proven to have activity in this 
area.
  That said: A July 2020 study from the National Library of Medicine 
concluded that the THC component of cannabis can be the main culprit in 
psychosis and schizophrenia. A 2018 study from Duke University, in 
fact, showed a five-time increase in psychosis among chronic cannabis 
users.
  The U.S. Surgeon General, Dr. Jerome Adams, agreed that there are 
serious health risks associated with the use of marijuana in 
adolescence and in pregnancy.
  The bill fails to set any standards to prevent marijuana, THC 
concentrates, vaping products, or edibles from getting into the hands 
of teenagers and young adults whose brains are still developing.
  The MORE Act doesn't help prevent the distribution of marijuana to 
minors. It disrespects States' rights, fails to prevent violence and 
the use of firearms in growing and distributing marijuana and, lastly, 
it allows for the potential of marijuana revenue to fund criminal 
organizations, gangs, or cartels.
  I have been to the border and have personally seen what smuggling 
operations this legislation might allow.
  Yes, legalizing weed would create revenue from taxes, but at what 
cost? Do we then start legalizing cocaine?
  Marijuana is a gateway drug; make no mistake about that. It 
undoubtedly leads to further and much more dangerous drug use.
  And while I do believe that medical marijuana can have some activity 
in chronic pain or those with cancer, this bill simply goes way too 
far. I will vote against it on the House floor, and I urge my 
colleagues to do the same.


                             General Leave

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks and insert extraneous material on H.R. 3884.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, marijuana is not a gateway drug. There is ample 
scientific evidence demonstrating that the use of marijuana does not 
cause the use of other illicit substances. And according to the 
National Institute on Drug Abuse, the majority of people who are 
marijuana users do not go on to use other, harder substances.
  The bill does not have any provision to sell marijuana to children.
  Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Johnson), a distinguished member of the House Judiciary 
Committee.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the MORE 
Act. The war on drugs targeting communities of color, primarily, has 
resulted in the advent of the prison industrial complex that has fed on 
and consumed the lives of countless individuals and families. Too many 
Black and Brown children in our country have grown up without a parent 
because of government-sponsored crony capitalism which saw profits and 
policies that put people in prison rather than dealing with drug abuse 
as a public health issue.
  The criminalization of marijuana was used to disenfranchise an entire 
generation of Black men and women. The MORE Act is an important step 
forward toward more enlightened policy. I am proud to vote in favor of 
this bill, and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.
  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Gaetz).
  Mr. GAETZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  The MORE Act is flawed. It uses cannabis policy to do a great deal of 
social engineering to create new taxes and new programs and 
redistribution of assets.
  But I am here as the only Republican cosponsor of the MORE Act, and I 
am voting for it because the Federal Government has lied to the people 
of this country about marijuana for a generation.
  We have seen a generation, particularly of Black and Brown youth, 
locked up for offenses that should not have resulted in any 
incarceration whatsoever.
  I am also deeply troubled by the current policy of the Federal 
Government that inhibits research into cannabis, research that could 
unlock cures and help people live better lives.
  My Republican colleagues today will make a number of arguments 
against this bill, but those arguments are overwhelmingly losing with 
the American people. In every State where cannabis reform was on the 
ballot in this country, it passed. It passed with overwhelming support.
  As a matter of fact, the only thing that I know that is more popular 
than getting out of the war on drugs is getting out of the war in 
Afghanistan. But if we were measuring the success in the war on drugs, 
it would be hard to conclude anything other than the fact that drugs 
have won because the American people do not support the policies of 
incarceration, limited research, limited choice, and particularly 
constraining medical application.

                              {time}  0930

  We are here in a time when many people in our country are suffering. 
They are in pain. It is documented that States with medical cannabis 
programs see a reduction in the prescribing of opioids and in the 
number of opioid abuses and deaths. We have held hearings in the House 
Judiciary Committee where people in our government must confess that 
this is, in fact, true, that the more we give people access to medical 
cannabis programs, the more we see a blunting of this horrible scourge 
of opioid addiction and opioid abuse.
  We talk all the time on the right about the need to empower people 
and empower States. Right now, the Federal policy on cannabis 
constrains our people. It limits our States. I would only hope that in 
the 117th Congress, after this bill invariably dies in the Senate, we 
will actually come back and

[[Page H6832]]

pass the STATES Act because it acknowledges that we have screwed this 
up in the Federal Government.
  While we have screwed it up, States have taken action. They have 
designed programs in the way that our great Federal system promises. If 
we were to pass the STATES Act, then best practices would emerge, 
States that developed applicable programs for their people would be 
replicable, and we would see better policies.
  I am going to vote for the MORE Act. It won't pass the Senate and it 
won't become law, but then we should come back in the 117th Congress, 
and we should truly do more for our people.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, let me first thank the gentleman from Florida for making 
this a bipartisan bill. I thank him for his insight, and I know that we 
will have many opportunities to work together.
  I might add, if we pass the MORE Act, we will allow veterans, 
hospitals, and doctors to be engaged in research to help our returning 
soldiers and veterans who are suffering from a variety of diseases that 
may be impacted by marijuana use.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Jeffries), a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee and chair 
of the Democratic Caucus.
  Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentlewoman from 
Texas for yielding.
  The failed war on drugs first began almost 50 years ago, when Richard 
Nixon declared drug abuse public enemy number one. At the time there 
were less than 200,000 people incarcerated in America. Today, there are 
2.3 million, disproportionately Black and Latino. Many of those who 
have been incarcerated over the years were imprisoned for nonviolent 
drug offenses, including possession of marijuana.
  The United States incarcerates more people than any other country in 
the world. We have ruined lives, families, and communities. It is a 
stain on our democracy.
  The possession of marijuana is done in equal, if not greater, numbers 
by White Americans when compared to Black Americans. Yet in community 
after community after community, Blacks and Latinos make up 
approximately 75 to 80 percent of the arrests and prosecutions.
  How can that be?
  Marijuana use is either socially acceptable behavior or it is 
criminal conduct, but it can't be socially acceptable behavior in some 
neighborhoods and criminal conduct in other neighborhoods when the 
dividing line is race. That is why we must pass the MORE Act, 
decriminalize marijuana in America, and bring to light the principle of 
liberty and justice for all.
  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I was all over the State of Ohio in the recent campaign. 
I was all over the country. I was in Georgia, Florida, Wisconsin, 
Pennsylvania, and Texas, all over the place. Not once--not once--did an 
American citizen come up to me and say: Do you know what? The first 
thing I hope the Congress does after this election, the first major 
piece of legislation I hope the Congress takes up after this election 
is to legalize marijuana.
  Not once did that happen.
  But this bill does more than that. This bill says it is not enough 
just to legalize marijuana. They want taxpayers to pay for it. This 
bill sets up a grant program. This is the marijuana business 
infrastructure bill. It sets up an office in the Department of 
Justice--a special office in the Department of Justice--for the 
marijuana industry. Grant dollars, taxpayer dollars are going to this 
industry.
  I didn't have anyone tell me: Do you know what? I hope the first big 
bill the Democrats do after this session is to give my tax dollars to 
the marijuana industry.
  That is exactly what has happened here. But, frankly, this shouldn't 
surprise us. Think about what the Democrats did earlier this week. 
Their first big hearing--actually, their first hearing--since the 
election in the Judiciary Committee was Wednesday in the Crime, 
Terrorism, and Homeland Security Subcommittee. It was a hearing about 
letting criminals out of prison early because of the COVID issue--
letting criminals out early in an environment where violent crime is 
increasing.
  We know that, this summer, aggravated assaults are up 14 percent and 
homicides are up 53 percent. Democrat mayors and city councils around 
the country in our major urban areas in that environment are defunding 
the police. So in that overall environment where homicides are up, 
aggravated assaults are up, and there are less cops on the street, they 
want to release criminals early.
  I want to read from a letter that Mr. Nadler and Congresswoman Bass 
sent to the Attorney General back in March:

       We urge you to use every tool at your disposal to release 
     as many prisoners as possible to protect from COVID-19.

  They go on to further to state--and this is the part that is scary:

       What you do with individuals who are high risk of 
     contracting COVID-19, who are not in low- or minimum-security 
     facilities, who have been convicted of serious offenses, we 
     urge you to consider that even these individuals in these 
     categories be assessed for release.

  Mr. Speaker, so even the most violent criminals they were looking at 
and they were encouraging the Attorney General to release on our 
streets.
  Oh, and just like with this marijuana bill, they want your tax 
dollars to pay for a grant program to the States to release criminals 
early--even the most violent criminals. In an environment where violent 
crime is up, where our Democrat mayors are defunding their police and 
taking cops off the street, they want to release criminals early and, 
oh, your tax dollars pay for it. Mr. Speaker, that is what they want to 
do.
  Now they say: Oh, by the way, it is not just enough that your tax 
dollars go to States to release criminals early in that environment 
when they are defunding the police and violent crime is up, we also 
want you to pay for the marijuana industry.
  You have got to be kidding me, Mr. Speaker. You have got to be 
kidding me. They started the week off having a hearing on paying States 
to release criminals out of our jails, and now they are going to end 
the week by saying that taxpayers pay for the marijuana industry.
  This is crazy. This is exactly what they want to do. Think about this 
for a second, Mr. Speaker. Think about a small business owner. Let's 
just pick Portland. A small business owner in Portland, who paid their 
local taxes, who this summer had their business destroyed because 
Democrat leaders in that city would not protect their business, now 
Democrats in Congress are saying: Oh, we want your Federal tax dollars 
to be used to release criminals early and to buttress the marijuana 
industry.
  Such a deal for the taxpayer. That is what the Democrats have 
prioritized this week in the United States Congress. It is ridiculous.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, it is interesting my good friend has been in different 
places than we have been in the House Judiciary Committee, but he 
remains my good friend.
  Obviously, our hearing this week was on the devastation of COVID-19 
in the Nation's Federal prisons, lives that are lost and lives that 
could be lost if strong structures are not put in place. That is our 
job.
  I think the other point that should be made is that we will be made 
safer by this legislation. I can't explain to him the life that I have 
led, the neighborhood that I lived in, the amazing loss of young lives 
over marijuana because it was illegal. As we watched not only the life 
lost in bloodshed, but the life lost in incarceration--imbalanced 
incarceration, huge sentences--the loss of opportunity, of college, of 
housing, and of jobs.
  We are crying out for relief. Interestingly enough, two out of three 
Americans say marijuana should be legal, including a majority of both 
Democrats and Republicans.
  Finally, the taxation is on those who use marijuana. It is not on the 
small business person, it is on those who use and buy marijuana. So I 
hope that we can move forward on what the American people want us to 
do.

[[Page H6833]]

  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island 
(Mr. Cicilline), who is a distinguished member of the House Judiciary 
Committee.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, wars are costly, and the war on marijuana 
is no exception. This war has derailed lives. It has led to lost jobs 
and housing. It has torn families apart. The cost of the war on 
marijuana has disproportionately fallen on the backs of Blacks and 
Latino people.
  As White entrepreneurs across the country support their families by 
running businesses selling marijuana, many Black and Latino people are 
spending time behind bars and criminalized for doing the same.
  In Rhode Island, a Black person was 3.3 times more likely to be 
arrested for possessing marijuana than a White person in 2018, even 
though Black and White people use marijuana at similar rates.
  Immigrants have been deported simply for using marijuana in States 
that permit its use and despite never being convicted of a crime.
  Targeting low-level marijuana-related offenders with harsh penalties 
has done little to make our communities safer. The MORE Act ends the 
criminalization of marijuana. It protects the 36 States, including 
Rhode Island, that have led the way on marijuana policy and legalized 
it for medicinal purposes.
  People convicted of marijuana-related charges are often denied access 
to social programs or even the ability to take out student loans to 
further their education and careers. The MORE Act helps fix that.
  This legislation redirects resources away from prosecution of 
marijuana and toward community investments and public health solutions. 
It establishes an opportunity trust fund that provides resources for 
those who have marijuana-related convictions, including job training 
and substance abuse treatment. It moves us closer toward racial equity 
by allowing expungement of nonviolent marijuana convictions.
  The MORE Act provides restorative justice by providing SBA loans to 
assist small businesses, especially small businesses controlled by 
socially and economically disadvantaged people.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Nadler for his leadership and for 
introducing the MORE Act. I am proud to be a cosponsor, and I urge my 
colleagues to vote in support of this historic legislation.
  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would just point out the American Medical Association 
put out a letter 2 days ago saying they oppose this legislation for the 
reasons that Dr. Murphy highlighted in his opening remarks.
  I would also just, again, point out what the Democrats on the 
Judiciary Committee did on Wednesday. It was about releasing criminals 
from prisons early.
  Again, just to read from the letter that the chairman of the 
Judiciary Committee sent to the Attorney General of the United States 
on March 30, 2020, he says. . . . who have been convicted of serious 
     offenses or who have high pattern risk scores, we urge you 
     to consider that even these individuals in these 
     categories be assessed for release.

  I don't know how you can say it any plainer, Mr. Speaker. These are 
some of the most dangerous people in our Federal prison system. They 
wanted the Attorney General to look at releasing them into the public. 
That is how they started the week. They are going to end the week by 
decriminalizing marijuana and giving American tax dollars to 
businessowners to further the marijuana industry.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina 
(Mr. Bishop).
  Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman from Texas' comment that the MORE Act 
would make us safer calls for a specific response.
  As Representative Jordan just said, the fact that the MORE Act is on 
the floor at this time epitomizes Democrats' misplaced priorities. But 
it also puts on display their inclination to reckless disregard of 
consequences.
  Just like the clarion call to defund the police, followed rapidly by 
astonished surprise over the ensuing surge in violence, Democrats' rush 
to legalize marijuana without any heed or response to the rising 
epidemic of drug driving across the country would mean more dead and 
injured Americans on our highways.
  Consider this: since 2013, in Washington State, the number of fatal 
crash drivers who tested positive for THC has more than doubled. In 
Vermont, since 2010, fatal crashes linked to marijuana use have 
skyrocketed by 173 percent following that State's decriminalization. 
Forty-seven percent of Oregonians who died in a car crash in 2018 
tested positive for marijuana, according to the Oregon State Police. 
More Indiana drivers in deadly car crashes test positive for drugs than 
for alcohol.
  The data is clear: when governments liberalize marijuana laws, 
motorists and passengers die.

                              {time}  0945

  Law enforcement tells us they lack a reliable roadside test to detect 
marijuana use or a uniform standard to measure marijuana toxicity, yet 
our defund-the-police Democrat colleagues rush to change the status quo 
across the entire country while refusing even to consider my 
commonsense amendment that would require the Department of 
Transportation to develop and prescribe best practices for testing 
drivers suspected of marijuana impairment.
  My amendment would help law enforcement keep people safe, but 
Democrats would rather prioritize criminals. A North Carolina sheriff 
recently called drug driving ``one of the leading killers in our 
State.'' Just like Democrats' efforts to defund police, the MORE Act's 
unintended consequences will include increased danger for our families.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support Americans' safety by 
voting against this bill.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is 
remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Texas has 17 minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Ohio has 17 minutes remaining, also.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me indicate that this legislation 
does not take away any of the responsibilities of the Department of 
Transportation in its regulatory authority, and the facts belie any 
worries regarding road safety.
  According to a 2018 study of the National Bureau of Economic 
Research, States that have legalized marijuana have not experienced 
significantly different rates of marijuana- or alcohol-related traffic 
fatalities.
  All of the State laws dealing with driving under the influence 
remain. Operating a motor vehicle under the influence of marijuana is 
still illegal in every State--we insist on that--and even in these 
States that have legalized the substance, and the MORE Act leaves these 
in place.
  Mr. Speaker, we need to talk about the many deaths that have occurred 
because of the violence over illegal marijuana. I have seen it. We have 
seen it. We have lost lives in their future, and we have lost them to 
their families.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
California (Mr. Correa), a member of the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. CORREA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for leading. I thank 
Chairman Nadler for his leadership in this issue and thank him, also, 
for including my amendment that calls for a study of cannabis as an 
alternative medicine for our veterans.
  More than half of all Americans live in a State where cannabis is 
legal. Let's align Federal cannabis laws with the will of the people.
  And let's take full advantage of the medical benefits of cannabis. We 
know that medical cannabis is good for treating things such as 
seizures, glaucoma, chronic pain, and PTSD, and veterans prefer 
cannabis over opioids.
  Let me repeat. Veterans prefer cannabis over opioids to treat the 
invisible wounds that they bring back from the battlefield.
  Other nations, like Israel, export cannabis products. Let's unleash 
America's free enterprise system to take full advantage of the 
commercial benefits of cannabis.
  Let's get busy and do the will of the people. Let's pass the MORE 
Act.

[[Page H6834]]

  

  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
  Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio for yielding. 
I will talk about what I view as a massive confusion in this bill.
  We have heard arguments this morning, already, that States are 
regulating this, and I believe, ultimately, that is where this 
regulation, domestically, should be: within the States.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill ostensibly deregulating cannabis imposes a 
Federal tax, Federal agencies, Federal oversight. You are not de-
federalizing marijuana; you are just changing the regulatory structure 
in which you control marijuana. That is interesting to me, and I find 
it very disingenuous in some ways.
  Mr. Speaker, what it also does is it obviates Congress' 
constitutional obligation to manage or oversee interstate commerce. 
That is what this bill does. It obviates that, while you are throwing a 
Federal tax on all these folks.
  That is a bit of a problem, but it goes to an enhanced problem. As 
long as we have the massive and growing social welfare state that we 
have today, we will incur whatever detriment comes from the 
criminalization, nationally, of marijuana.
  We must, in my opinion, have a serious discussion on this and not a 
congeries, a bill that is a congeries, a mishmash of ideas and hopes 
instead of data-driven science.
  As the gentleman from North Carolina just iterated to us, it is a 
problem. If you have prosecuted or defended--and I did both, and I 
defended for many years. My specialty, the area that I focused on, was 
drunk and drug driving cases. It is a problem, and it is exacerbated by 
the decriminalization and legitimization of marijuana use in the 
States.
  This bill does not address that appropriately. This bill does not do 
anything more than provide a different mishmash of Federal laws over 
marijuana regulation.
  I am hoping for a serious dialogue sometime about an issue.
  Mr. Speaker, I have to just close by saying this. When I heard 
someone say that all the States that have passed this have done so 
overwhelmingly, Arizona rejected it three times before barely passing 
it this time--barely passing it this time--and that is an election that 
is being contested even right now in the courts.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I would hope my good friend would not 
be in opposition to the ability for there to be research on the use of 
marijuana, as well substance abuse, and as well to provide a healing 
and a restoration of these broken communities that have suffered the 
plague of marijuana arrests, incarceration, and prosecution. That is 
what we are doing in the MORE Act.

  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania 
(Ms. Dean).
  Ms. DEAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my dear colleague.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3884, the MORE Act.
  Since the war on drugs began, the Nation's prison population 
increased from 300,000 to a staggering 2.2 million people behind bars. 
In the decade between 2001 and 2010, 8.2 million people were arrested 
on marijuana charges. Nearly 90 percent of those arrests were for 
simply having marijuana.
  Most troubling is the fact that, despite equal use rates, Black 
Americans are four times more likely than White Americans to be 
arrested for marijuana.
  People of color have disproportionately borne the burdens of these 
draconian policies, facing longer prison sentences and the lifetime 
economic consequences of having a criminal record. Generations of Black 
and Hispanic communities have suffered--families ripped apart, 
businesses shuddered, educations unfinished. This is neither law nor 
order; it is injustice.
  Mr. Speaker, we have an opportunity here to right our wrongs. The 
MORE Act is a sweeping effort for equity to our criminal justice system 
by removing marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act and requiring 
Federal courts to expunge prior convictions. The bill goes a long way 
to reduce racial disparities that plague our criminal justice system. 
Marijuana reform is long overdue.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for bringing the bill forward.
  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Stauber), a former police officer who has seen firsthand 
what drugs can do to individuals and to communities.
  Mr. STAUBER. Mr. Speaker, Mike's Western Cafe, a family-run diner for 
38 years, closed its doors in Duluth, Minnesota, for good on October 7.
  On October 25, Waters of Superior, an art gallery and boutique, went 
out of business.
  On the 27th of last month, Grandma's in the Park Bar and Grill, a 
local watering hole in Hibbing, Minnesota, was forced to call it quits.
  And after 10 years in business, the Duluth Candy Company is closing 
up shop for good on December 31.
  These are just a few stories of so many real people, real small 
business owners in my district who are losing their livelihoods due to 
effects of the COVID-19 closures. Yet here we are today, with mere days 
left in the year to get something done for the American people who are 
suffering, and Speaker Pelosi has brought up a drug legalization bill 
as mom-and-pop shops close for good, as families remain uncertain where 
their next paycheck is coming from, as children struggle to receive 
their education, and as childcare facilities close. As seniors remain 
isolated from their families, this is their solution: a drug 
legalization bill.
  Mr. Speaker, my friends on the other side of the aisle like to point 
out that they have passed the Heroes Act, so they claim they have done 
their part. The Heroes Act was filled with so many partisan wish-list 
items that it was embarrassing.
  In fact, Speaker Pelosi is so obsessed with pushing drug legalization 
efforts forward, she even puts provisions in the Heroes Act--if you can 
believe this--a new annual study on diversity and inclusion within the 
marijuana industry.
  Come on, man. Families are losing their livelihood. People are 
hurting.
  Mr. Speaker, Speaker Pelosi's answers to these families is: ``It is 
out of our hands.''
  It is not out of our hands. We have the responsibility and 
opportunity to provide relief to the American people. We have the power 
to do better and work harder and be better than this.
  It is time we think about the real needs of our constituents and get 
back to work on legislation that matters. Our priority should not be 
legalizing drugs or banning tigers; it must be bipartisan, targeted 
COVID-19 relief.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time each side 
has remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Texas has 13\1/2\ 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Ohio has 11 minutes remaining.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, you know what I am most--how should I 
say it?--honestly grateful for in the backdrop of Thanksgiving? That we 
had a Speaker of the House who never stopped negotiating and trying to 
find relief for the dying Americans and those suffering from COVID-19 
with a major infusion of dollars almost 8 months ago. I am grateful for 
that.
  I am grateful that we are now in the midst, if you will--late, but 
engaging--of negotiations, and that we are committed not to leave this 
place, not to go home for any holidays before we provide relief for the 
American people. I am grateful for that. That is going to happen.
  So it is important to note that work is going on, led by our Speaker, 
and we hope that we will have the right partner to be able to save the 
lives of the American people who are now suffering from COVID-19. The 
MORE Act also saves lives.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Lee), distinguished member of the Committee on Appropriations and 
one of the strongest advocates for the MORE Act to save lives, to help 
young people.

                              {time}  1000

  Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, let me reemphasize what the 
gentlewoman just said. I was so proud to vote for the Heroes Act twice 
nearly 8 months ago. I think that we have to move forward and continue 
to negotiate, and, hopefully, we will get some

[[Page H6835]]

votes on the other side of the aisle to help save lives and to help 
save businesses and to help our economic recovery. But I was proud to 
have voted for that twice already.
  Thank you to Congresswoman Jackson Lee for her tremendous leadership 
in bringing this bill to the floor, the Marijuana Opportunity 
Reinvestment and Expungement Act, the MORE Act. Let me thank Chairman 
Nadler and our fellow co-chair of the Cannabis Caucus, Congressman Earl 
Blumenauer, our respective staffs, and everyone for their effort, 
including the House Judiciary staff, for your hard work and for helping 
to bring this bill together to the floor.
  Also, I have to call your attention to the advocates for their 
dedication to educating the public on this issue. This bill is an 
important racial justice measure. It is the product of years of work by 
so many activists and advocates and young people, and it is long 
overdue.
  Yes, I have worked to end the war on drugs for many years. The MORE 
Act includes my legislation, the Marijuana Justice Act and the REFER 
Act, which are the first marijuana racial justice bills introduced in 
Congress.
  This landmark legislation would end the Federal prohibition and 
decriminalize cannabis nationwide by removing it from the list of 
controlled substances, which is a major step, mind you, a major step 
toward ending the unjust war on drugs and racial inequities which are 
central to these laws.
  This bill will facilitate expungement of low-level Federal cannabis 
convictions, create pathways for lucrative legal cannabis business 
ownership opportunities for communities of color, and provide critical 
resources for those most devastated by the war on drugs, for 
restorative justice to repair this damage.
  I refer you to the letter by the chair of our Ways and Means 
Committee, Mr. Richard Neal, and I would just like to read a portion of 
his statement as it relates to a Ways and Means tax issue, which Mr. 
Blumenauer is going to discuss a little further.
  Mr. Neal has addressed an issue that came to our attention as an 
exclusion in this measure and made a commitment, and he says that he 
looks forward to continuing to work with the measure's sponsors and 
other committees of jurisdiction to achieve an effective tax regime 
that supports a vibrant legal market and provides individuals most 
affected by this war on drugs the opportunity to fully participate in 
this emerging economy.
  I want to thank the chair of the Ways and Means Committee for 
agreeing to help us fix several provisions of this important bill.
  Make no mistake: This is a major racial justice bill. According to 
the ACLU, Black Americans are nearly four times more likely to be 
arrested for cannabis-related crimes than White Americans.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, Black and Brown people are 
targeted more frequently than White Americans, despite equal rates of 
use.
  Additionally, prison sentences for Black and Brown people are more 
likely to be lengthier than White people. Black men receive sentences 
over 13 percent longer than White men, and nearly 80 percent of people 
in Federal prisons for drug offenses are Black or Latino. So it is time 
to end these unjust laws which shatter the lives of so many young 
people of color.
  I tell you, colleagues, we have got to give our young people a second 
chance. So please vote ``yes'' on this bill to help us move our 
unfinished business of liberty and justice for all forward. We have got 
to begin to really provide racial justice, crack these chains of 
systemic racism and this mass incarceration judicial system.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge an ``aye'' vote.
  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Mississippi (Mr. Palazzo).
  Mr. PALAZZO. Mr. Speaker, yesterday was big cats. Today it is big 
cannabis. When is it time for real COVID relief? When is it time for us 
to help our constituents, our small businesses, our struggling and 
exhausted frontline workers, and teachers?
  To legalize marijuana or not is one thing; to pass a bill that has no 
recourse for States that don't want mass legalization, which totals 35 
states, is irresponsible. To not limit or regulate potency is 
carelessness. To not do anything to regulate advertising, which proved 
to be an issue with vaping when the industry targeted kids and teens, 
is negligent. To not provide funding for the FDA or USDA to manage the 
regulatory framework is reckless.
  Take marijuana out of the scenario. None of us would support a 
reckless, negligent, careless, and irresponsible bill.
  This flawed legislation is not time sensitive, does not require 
consideration this week, and should not take priority over the very 
serious and real issues facing our country.
  There are real external threats facing our Nation. We should focus on 
strengthening America and not weakening it. There is a lot to be done 
before the end of the year, and Congress must be focused on rebuilding 
our economy and restoring our way of life.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), one of the determined and strong advocates for 
this legislation, a distinguished member of the Ways and Means 
Committee.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I just heard my friend from Mississippi 
talk about, you know, we shouldn't be dealing with things like this 
because the time is not right. His voters just approved medical 
marijuana, one of five States that approved it. Arizona didn't barely 
pass it; it was 60 percent.
  We are not rushing to legalize marijuana; the American people have 
already done that. We are here because Congress has failed to deal with 
the disastrous war on drugs and do its part for the over 50 million 
regular marijuana users in every one of your districts.
  We are here because we failed the parents of babies with extreme 
seizure disorders and why 10 States have stepped up, because the only 
thing that stops those babies from being tortured is medical cannabis. 
That is why 10 states have approved provisions like that.
  We are here because Congress has failed to deal with our veterans, 
whose wounds, seen and unseen, will give them opioids, but we don't 
deal with giving them access to something, as Representative Correa 
pointed out, dealing with medical cannabis, which is safer than the 
opioids we give them, and they suffer opioid deaths at a higher rate 
than the general population.
  We are here because Congress has failed with research. We want to 
have a test for impairment. The 150,000 drivers for beer and wine 
wholesalers want to be able to test. But Congress has stood in the way 
of research. There is plenty of money; we don't have the authority to 
do it.
  Speaking of small business, we are here because the Senate has failed 
to follow through on a $17 billion industry that doesn't have access to 
financial services. It is an invitation to money laundering, to theft, 
to tax evasion, for an industry that is pitched by my friend's fellow 
Ohioan John Boehner, who is now a spokesman for the industry.
  I have worked on this issue for 47 years. I, too, have traveled the 
country. I have never met an American who feels that this industry 
should pay its taxes with shopping bags full of $20 bills.
  We are here because we have failed our children. Children in each of 
your districts can get a joint easier than they can get a six-pack of 
beer, because no neighborhood drug dealer checks for ID. They don't 
have a license to lose. That is why we want to have a system that 
regulates, to protect our children. Right now, kids are not protected. 
They are victims to a black market that you allow to continue.
  We are here because we have failed three generations of Black and 
Brown young people, whose lives can be ruined or lost by selective 
enforcement of these laws. This legislation will end that disaster.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

[[Page H6836]]

  

  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, it is time for Congress to step up and 
do its part. We need to catch up with the rest of the American people.
  I want to thank Stephanie Phillips, Tara Sulzen, Willie Smith, Julia 
Pomeroy, Amber Ray, Laura Thrift, Jason Little, David Skillman, people 
who have been working with me on this for a decade.
  I am proud that we are at this moment, and I am proud that we are 
going to have an opportunity to approve the MORE Act and for Congress 
to step up and do its job so we catch up to your constituents.
  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Missouri (Mrs. Hartzler).
  Mrs. HARTZLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the MORE 
Act, which legalizes marijuana across the United States.
  As a mother and a former public schoolteacher, I am appalled at this 
legislation's disregard for the health and safety of our children, 
schools, and families. I am also shocked and appalled by the previous 
speaker's claim that this legislation is good for children and using 
children as an excuse to pass this bill and legalize it across this 
country.
  The MORE Act would grant the marijuana industry unfettered access to 
our Nation's youth by allowing the sale of edibles and flavored 
marijuana vapes and permitting marijuana businesses to be located 
within 1,000 feet of schools, daycares, private kindergartens, public 
parks, and recreational facilities.
  The bill also opens the floodgates for advertising high potency and 
extremely dangerous products on TV and social media, a place where our 
kids are spending countless hours every day.
  We need to consider three critical points before voting today:
  First, research has shown that people who use marijuana at a young 
age are more prone to addictive habits later in life as it activates 
the pleasure center receptors of the brain.
  Second, long-term marijuana use has been linked by research to mental 
illness such as hallucinations, temporary paranoia, depression, 
suicidal thoughts, violent behavior, and schizophrenia.
  And, third, these findings were serious enough to lead the U.S. 
Surgeon General to declare an advisory for marijuana use, emphasizing 
that: ``Recent increases in access to marijuana and in its potency, 
along with misperceptions of safety of marijuana endanger our most 
precious resource, our Nation's youth.''
  The House should be discussing a responsible COVID relief package to 
aid the American people during the pandemic. Instead, my colleagues on 
the other side of the aisle are focusing on legalizing marijuana. Where 
are our priorities?
  The MORE Act completely undermines current research and health 
warnings and puts our children in danger. I call on my colleagues to 
vote ``no'' on this irresponsible and dangerous bill.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.

  Mr. Speaker, let me just say that the aggressive enforcement of 
marijuana possession laws needlessly ensnares hundreds of thousands of 
people into the criminal justice system and wastes billions of taxpayer 
dollars. I can assure you that States are able to protect our children, 
which we will discuss in a later moment.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. 
Velazquez), the chairwoman of the Small Business Committee.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation 
because it will restore justice to our most marginalized communities, 
and it will boost our economy.
  I thank Speaker Pelosi, Chairman Nadler, and my fellow chairs, for 
bringing this legislation to the floor today. The MORE Act takes 
meaningful action to address systemic injustices by removing cannabis 
from its current classification as a schedule I drug and incentivizing 
States to expunge low-level possession records.
  As chair of the Small Business Committee, I am proud to have 
championed measures included in the bill that will expand capital 
access and Federal small business development resources to the cannabis 
sector.
  We cannot forget that while communities of color have 
disproportionately suffered from the so-called war on drugs, they have 
also been locked out of traditional capital markets. That is why the 
MORE Act is the best legislation to advance progress on this issue, and 
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes''.

                              {time}  1015

  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the time.
  Mr. Speaker, much of the debate we have heard today has been about 
criminal justice and the child safety implications of this bill. But I 
would like to focus on the troubling aspect of this bill in the tax 
title.
  This bill would create a new Federal tax on marijuana, starting at 5 
percent in the first year and escalating to 8 percent after 5 years. We 
always hear about tax parity in this Chamber, yet the treatment of 
these products compared to tobacco are vastly different--vastly 
different.
  Let me say again, though, that this bill taxes marijuana, which has 
the potential to impact society really in unknown ways or at least in 
ways that we should all be concerned about, but at less than half the 
tax rate of a pack of cigarettes.
  Once these taxes are created, rather than treating them as general 
revenue where they could actually help defray the costs associated with 
the Department of the Treasury's newly created obligation to regulate 
marijuana growers, importers, and retailers, the bill would actually 
divert tax revenue into four brand-new government programs, including 
one to create subsidies for businesses.
  This bill creates new criminal penalties for failure to pay the 
taxes. So, this isn't criminal justice reform. It is actually creating 
different types of penalties and criminalization and would likely lead 
to jail for small-time dealers for tax evasion instead of for selling 
their product.
  Mr. Speaker, I don't support the underlying purposes of this bill, 
the legalization itself nationwide, but even if I did, I can't support 
the terribly flawed design, in terms of taxation, and the overall form 
of this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, we have been waiting for months for Democrats to get 
serious about COVID relief, focusing on safely reopening our economy 
and helping folks who need it the most. Yet, here we are today, talking 
about a legalization bill yet again. This is a bad bill at the wrong 
time. I urge opposition.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the amount of time 
remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Texas has 4 minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Ohio has 5\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis), a distinguished member of the Ways and 
Means Committee.
  Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the 
MORE Act, which allows the Federal Government to begin to catch up with 
the 47 States, like Illinois, which have already reformed their 
marijuana use laws in one way or the other.
  Mass incarceration, which disproportionately affects Black and Brown 
citizens, has been aided and abetted by marijuana laws, which result in 
more than 600,000 arrests annually. The expungement provisions in this 
legislation will allow hundreds of thousands of individuals to get 
their records expunged so that they can more enthusiastically pursue 
legitimate jobs and work to take care of themselves and their families.
  The MORE Act is an idea whose time has come. I urge that we vote 
``yes.''
  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman 
from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), the distinguished chair of the 
Oversight and Reform Committee.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the 
gentlewoman for her leadership and for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the MORE Act. I applaud my 
colleagues,

[[Page H6837]]

Chairman Nadler and Vice President-elect Harris, for their leadership. 
It is past time that Congress answers the call for reform for low-level 
marijuana conviction justice.
  This sweeping legislation would officially remove cannabis from the 
list of federally controlled harmful substances, protect medical 
cannabis businesses, and expunge low-level marijuana convictions that 
have disproportionately harmed people and communities of color.
  The MORE Act would also help those whose convictions are overturned 
through an opportunity trust fund that would provide job training, 
reentry assistance, and legal aid. If we are serious about criminal 
justice reform, we need to get rid of the antiquated cannabis laws that 
disproportionately harm people of color. The MORE Act would do just 
that.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote.
  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman 
from Hawaii (Ms. Gabbard).
  Ms. GABBARD. Mr. Speaker, finally, this is a historic moment that so 
many here and across the country have been working toward, to take this 
step to end America's destructive and costly war on drugs that has 
turned everyday Americans into criminals and torn families apart, 
ruining so many people's lives.
  This legislation removes cannabis from the Controlled Substances Act, 
frees States to regulate it as they choose, and encourages research 
into the medicinal qualities of this plant that we all already know are 
changing people's lives and saving people's lives. It also applies 
retroactively, expunging prior convictions and records, freeing a 
generation of people from the shackles of this failed war on drugs.
  Mr. Speaker, the bottom line is this vote is about freedom. It is 
freedom of choice for every American to make their own decisions for 
themselves without fear of the government coming and arresting them.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill. The Senate 
should pass it quickly so we can send it to the President for his 
signature.

  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, House Democrats started the week off with a hearing on 
letting criminals out of jail early. They end the week with a bill 
legalizing drugs. And they want the American taxpayers to pay for both 
programs.
  They introduced a bill earlier in the year to give grant dollars to 
States to let criminals out of jail early, even violent ones, according 
to the letter Mr. Nadler and Chairwoman Bass sent to the Attorney 
General. Now, they want to create a trust fund in this bill to give 
grants to the marijuana industry and finance the marijuana industry.
  Mr. Speaker, these are the actions the Democrats take, the first 
actions they take after a national election. Go figure. Maybe that is 
why they lost 27 out of 27 toss-up seats around the country. Maybe that 
is why our party almost took back the majority.
  That is what they choose to focus on at a time when you have Democrat 
leaders around the country defunding the police, locking down 
businesses, destroying small businesses all over our Nation. This is 
what they choose to focus on. This is what they choose to focus on.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the legislation, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, let me indicate very quickly that every 37 seconds, 
between 2001 and 2010, there were 8 million arrests, every 37 seconds, 
for marijuana. We spent $3.6 billion on the war on marijuana, and it 
has not worked. We do today what saves lives.
  We know that States are going to be able to continue to protect their 
children, and this does not undermine the ability of Congress to 
protect children as well. In every State that has legalized marijuana, 
they have developed a comprehensive set of regulations to protect 
consumers.
  We also recognize that this issue of vaping is not generated by 
marijuana use. With a comprehensive structure, we will be able to 
protect children and not be selling marijuana to children. Those who 
have died in our communities may now live. As well, we will further 
understand the importance of a structure that is about restoration of 
justice. The imbalance against people of color has been a tragedy.
  Mr. Speaker, the MORE Act is crucial to be able to pass, and I ask my 
colleagues to do so vigorously as we also fight COVID-19.
  Mr. Speaker, before I close, I would like to thank the following 
Members and committee and Member staff for their outstanding work on 
the MORE Act: Joe Graupensperger, Milagros Cisneros, Christine Leonard, 
Barbara Lee, Earl Blumenauer, Nydia Velazquez, and Frank Pallone.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, today's House Consideration of the MORE Act 
marks an important step in mitigating the impacts of the historically 
racist war on drugs. This legislation will reform our federal criminal 
laws while also making investments in and empowering communities of 
color and those adversely affected by current unjust policies.
  The MORE Act makes important changes to federal law by removing 
marijuana, or cannabis, from the list of federally controlled 
substances. This change to federal law does not undermine the ability 
of states to apply their criminal laws as they see fit. Instead it 
makes marijuana a federally regulated substance that is subject to the 
FDA's regulatory authority and federal taxation. The excise tax that is 
established by the bill is similar to those for alcohol and tobacco.
  By creating a legal marijuana market that is subject to federal 
taxation, this legislation also creates an opportunity trust fund that 
will increase opportunities or individuals and communities affected by 
the war on drugs. The opportunity trust fund will fund programs such as 
job training, reentry services, and substance abuse disorder services, 
as well as assistance to small businesses owned by socially and 
economically disadvantaged individuals.
  I thank my colleague, Representative Blumenauer, for his tireless 
leadership on this issue. As this bill continues through the 
legislative process, I look forward to continuing to work with the 
measure's sponsors and the other committees of jurisdiction to achieve 
an effective tax regime that supports a vibrant legal market and 
provides individuals most affected by the war on drugs the opportunity 
to fully participate in this emerging economy.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have introduced H.R. 3884, the 
``Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 2020,'' or 
the ``MORE Act of 2020.''
  This long overdue legislation would reverse the failed policy of 
criminalizing marijuana on the federal level and would take steps to 
address the heavy toll this policy has taken across the country, 
particularly on communities of color.
  The MORE Act would make three important changes to federal law:
  (1) remove marijuana, or cannabis, from the list of federally 
controlled substances;
  (2) authorize the provision of resources, funded by an excise tax on 
marijuana, to address the needs of communities that have been seriously 
impacted by the War on Drugs, including increasing the participation of 
communities of color in the burgeoning cannabis market; and
  (3) provide for the expungement of Federal marijuana convictions and 
arrests.
  For far too long, we have treated marijuana as a criminal justice 
problem instead of as a matter of personal choice and public health. 
Whatever one's views are on the use of marijuana for recreational or 
medicinal use, the policy of arrests, prosecution, and incarceration at 
the Federal level has proven unwise and unjust.
  This issue is not new to Congress. There have been many Members who 
have introduced bills upon which provisions in this bill are based. For 
instance, Representative Barbara Lee has sponsored bills that are the 
foundation of key provisions of the MORE Act, and I thank her for her 
longstanding leadership on this issue. Representative Earl Blumenauer 
has also been an indefatigable advocate and has supported everything we 
have done to get to where we are today. I thank him, as well.
  Federal action on this issue would follow the growing recognition in 
the states that the status quo is unacceptable. Despite the federal 
government's continuing criminalization of marijuana, 36 states and the 
District of Columbia have legalized medical cannabis. Fifteen states 
and the District of Columbia have legalized cannabis for adult 
recreational use.
  I have long believed that the criminalization of marijuana has been a 
mistake, and the racially disparate enforcement of marijuana laws has 
only compounded this mistake, with serious consequences, particularly 
for communities of color.
  Marijuana is one of the oldest agricultural commodities not grown for 
food, and it has

[[Page H6838]]

been used medicinally all over the world since at least 2700 B.C., but 
its criminalization is a relatively recent phenomenon.
  The use of marijuana, which most likely originated in Asia, later 
spread to Europe, and made its way to the Americas when the Jamestown 
settlers brought it with them across the Atlantic. The cannabis plant 
has been widely grown in the United States and was used as a component 
in fabrics during the middle of the 19th century. During that time 
period, cannabis was also widely used as a treatment for a multitude of 
ailments, including muscle spasms, headaches, cramps, asthma, and 
diabetes.
  It was only in the early part of the 20th century that marijuana 
began to be criminalized in the United States--mainly because of 
misinformation and hysteria, based at least in part on racially-biased 
stereotypes connecting marijuana use and people of color, particularly 
African-Americans and Latinos. In 1970, when President Nixon announced 
the War on Drugs and signed the Controlled Substances Act into law, the 
federal government placed marijuana on Schedule I, the most restrictive 
schedule that is attached to the most serious criminal penalties, 
where--unfairly and unjustifiably--it has remained ever since.
  As a consequence of this decision, thousands of individuals--
overwhelmingly people of color--have been subjected, by the federal 
government, to unjust prison sentences for marijuana offenses. It is 
time for this manifest injustice to end. The MORE Act would remove 
marijuana from Schedule I and the Controlled Substances Act altogether, 
thereby decriminalizing it at the Federal level.
  This is only fair, particularly because the same racial animus 
motivating the enactment of marijuana laws also led to racially 
disproportionate enforcement of such laws, which has had a substantial, 
negative impact on communities of color. In fact, nationwide, the 
communities that have been most harmed by marijuana enforcement are 
benefitting the least from the legal marijuana marketplace.
  The MORE Act would address some of these negative impacts, by 
establishing an Opportunity Trust Fund within the Department of 
Treasury to fund programs within the Department of Justice and the 
Small Business Administration to empower communities of color and those 
adversely impacted by the War on Drugs. These programs would provide 
services to individuals, including job training, reentry services and 
substance use disorder services; provide funds for loans to assist 
small businesses that are owned and controlled by socially and 
economically disadvantaged individuals; and provide resources for 
programs that minimize barriers to marijuana licensing and employment 
for individuals adversely impacted by the War on Drugs.
  The collateral consequences of a conviction for marijuana 
possession--and even sometimes for a mere arrest--can be devastating. 
For those saddled with a criminal conviction, it can be difficult or 
impossible to vote, to obtain educational loans, to get a job, to 
maintain a professional license, to secure housing, to receive 
government assistance, or even to adopt a child.
  These exclusions create an often-permanent second-class status for 
millions of Americans. This is unacceptable and counterproductive, 
especially in light of the disproportionate impact that enforcement of 
marijuana laws has had on communities of color. The MORE Act recognizes 
this injustice and addresses these harmful effects by expunging and 
sealing federal convictions and arrests for marijuana offenses.
  It is not surprising that over the past two decades, public support 
for legalizing marijuana has surged. In the most recent Pew Research 
Center poll--which was released at the end of 2019--67 percent of 
Americans now back marijuana legalization, up from 62 percent in Pew's 
2018 poll. And just this November, there were ballot measures 
pertaining to marijuana in several states; they were all approved by 
voters. Indeed, the states have led the way--and continue to lead the 
way--on marijuana, but our federal laws have not kept pace with the 
obvious need for change. We need to catch up because the public 
supports reform and because it is the right thing to do.
  In my view, applying criminal penalties, with their attendant 
collateral consequences for marijuana offenses is unjust and harmful to 
our society. The MORE Act comprehensively addresses this injustice, and 
I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill today.
  Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the 
Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act of 2019 or the 
MORE Act. This landmark legislation is long overdue. It will 
descheudule marijuana, provide expungement for previous offenders, 
clarify that those previously convicted of marijuana related offenses 
would be eligible for federal benefits, and will establish an excise 
tax system on marijuana to invest in communities disproportionately 
affected by our failed marijuana policy.
  I have been working on this issue since I was first elected to the 
Tennessee General Assembly in 1982. In this Congress, I have sponsored 
the CARERS Act to provide legal certainty for those using medicinal 
marijuana allowed under state law and the Fresh Start Act which 
provides a pathway for expungement for these types of offenses.
  The history of marijuana as a Schedule-I drug is one full of bias and 
discrimination. This policy has served its racist purposes, targeting 
communities of color and disproportionately incarcerating people of 
color.
  The War on Drugs has been a resounding failure, especially regarding 
cannabis. About 700,000 Americans each year are arrested for cannabis 
related offenses. Despite similar usage rates, there are nearly four 
Black Americans arrested for a cannabis-related offense for every white 
American. In my district, the situation is even worse. According to a 
2013 ACLU study, in Shelby County, 83.2 percent of people arrested for 
cannabis offenses were Black, which the report cited as one of the 
highest county-level statistics in the nation. These arrests and 
convictions have long term impacts. Those with criminal records are 
limited from receiving federal benefits including SNAP, housing 
benefits, and Pell Grants. Our policy is exactly backward. We should be 
supporting those susceptible to substance abuse, not punishing them.
  This bill rights an historic wrong and invests in the communities 
most harmed. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bill. I 
thank Chairman Nadler for his leadership on this important issue.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, this vote on the Marijuana Opportunity 
Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act of 2020 is a historic moment 
for the millions of Americans caught in the tentacles of the failed 
``war on drugs''. In the midst of growing national dialogue on unjust 
law enforcement practices, the MORE Act first and foremost centers 
racial justice and comprehensively addresses cannabis prohibition. I am 
pleased that the MORE Act has remained a critical component of House 
Democrats' plan for addressing systemic racism and advancing criminal 
justice reform. We owe it to the American people to pass this bill and 
I strongly support this legislation.
  In 1970, Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) to 
establish a comprehensive federal drug policy. As part of that bill, 
Congress placed a broad range of drugs among five Schedules, based on 
the relative harms of those drugs. Cannabis was placed--temporarily, it 
seemed--in Schedule I, while a commission studied the plant to make an 
informed recommendation about how it should be treated. Two years 
later, the commission recommended that marijuana be removed from 
Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. However, for the past 50 
years, that recommendation has been ignored, resulting in a decades-
long war on cannabis that has damaged tens of millions of American 
lives.
  This racially motived policy has led to one of the most shameful 
episodes in criminal justice and race relations in America: the 
deliberate targeting of Black Americans for selective application of 
our cannabis laws. Too often, cases of low-level cannabis possession 
escalate to police violence, and Black Americans regularly face 
mistreatment at the hands of police because of cannabis.
  More than 99 percent of the American population will soon live in a 
state where cannabis is legally accessible to some degree yet arrests 
for cannabis possession continue in huge numbers. In 2018, the highest 
number of arrests were for drug offenses, with cannabis arrests 
accounting for more drug arrests in the U.S. than any other drug class. 
At almost 700,000, police made more cannabis arrests than all violent 
crimes combined.
  More concerning than the sheer number of arrests, is the racially 
biased enforcement of cannabis laws that is so evident in the stark 
disparity in arrest rates between Black and white people for cannabis 
possession. Despite similar rates of use, on average, Black people are 
almost four times more likely than white people to be arrested for 
marijuana. This difference can reach more than 20, 30, 40, or even 50 
times at the county level.
  People of color are often robbed of their dignity in perpetuity, 
because having a felony conviction can impact the ability to get an 
education, secure gainful employment, or vote. Ironically, as the 
emerging cannabis market blossoms, the cards are frequently stacked 
against the very people most victimized by the ``war on drugs,'' who 
now want to become entrepreneurs in the legal cannabis market. After 
centuries of systemic discrimination in housing, employment, and 
education, Black Americans are far less likely to have or be able to 
raise the kind of money needed to get involved in the legal market. 
Additionally, disproportionate arrest and conviction rates make it 
particularly difficult for people of color to enter the legal cannabis 
marketplace, as most states bar these individuals from participating. 
Minorities, and Black Americans specifically, are now largely missing 
out on the economic

[[Page H6839]]

opportunities created by legalization. Sadly, fewer than one-fifth of 
cannabis business owners identify as minorities and only approximately 
four percent are Black.
  The American people have recognized the need to reverse this tragic 
mistake. A recent Gallup survey showed that more than two-thirds of 
Americans believe that cannabis should be legal. This groundswell of 
public support has translated into actual changes in state law. We now 
have 15 states, plus the District of Columbia, that have legalized 
cannabis for all adults. Moreover, there are 36 states in which medical 
cannabis laws allow patients to legally enjoy the benefits of the full 
spectrum of the cannabis plant. Some states and municipalities have 
taken proactive steps to mitigate inequalities in the legal cannabis 
marketplace and ensure equal participation in the emerging market.
  The dichotomy between state and federal cannabis laws is the direct 
result of Congress ignoring the recommendations of experts nearly 50 
years ago. The emperors who made and have kept cannabis illegal at the 
federal level were wearing no clothes--and the American people have 
called it out. We are now embarrassing ourselves by sitting by and 
doing nothing. This bill would not force states to make cannabis legal. 
If a state like Idaho wants to continue arresting people for cannabis, 
they will have that ability, as much as I may disagree with that 
decision. But by removing cannabis from the CSA, which is what this 
bill will do, we can remove this one tool of oppression. We can ensure 
that individuals who are acting in compliance with sensible state 
cannabis laws will not be in violation of federal law, while expanding 
cannabis research, broadening access to our veterans, and opening up 
banking opportunities.
  No bill is perfect, and the MORE Act contains a provision that is 
contrary to our legislative intent. Without hesitation, I am committed 
to correcting this language to ensure that the millions of Americans, 
especially Black and Latino people, who have been most harmed by 
cannabis prohibition can participate equally in this emerging industry. 
Equity, inclusion and opportunity are fundamental values that must be 
at the center of all federal cannabis legislation. This is not the end 
of the story, it's the beginning of the next chapter. This is a fight 
for racial justice, economic justice, and freedom. This policy is long-
overdue.
  I have been working on this issue longer than any other politician in 
America, and I am thrilled that we are here today. I want to thank 
Congresswoman Barbara Lee and her staff, Samira Damavandi and Gregory 
Adams, who have worked tirelessly to advance racial justice on this 
issue. I also want to thank the many advocates, businesses, and 
individuals who have helped us champion the end of cannabis 
prohibition. Lastly, I want to thank my team both past and present: 
Willie Smith, Laura Thrift, Amber Ray, Danielle Cohen, Sean Ryan, David 
Skillman, Stephanie Phillips, and Tara Sulzen.
  This is a momentous moment and I am eager for the day this bill is 
signed into law.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 1244, the previous question is ordered 
on the bill, as amended.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                           Motion to Recommit

  Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentlewoman opposed to the bill?
  Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the bill in its current 
form.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

        Mrs. Lesko moves to recommit the bill H.R. 3884 to the 
     Committee on the Judiciary with instructions to report the 
     same back to the House forthwith with the following 
     amendment:
        Add, at the end of section 3, the following:
        (h) Rule of Construction.--Notwithstanding the provisions 
     of this Act and the amendments made by this Act, an employer 
     may test an employee or applicant for cannabis use to ensure 
     workplace and public safety.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from 
Arizona (Mrs. Lesko) is recognized for 5 minutes in support of her 
motion.
  Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic, 
House Democrats are rushing to pass a sweeping marijuana legalization 
bill without considering the unintended consequences the legislation 
will have on workplace and public safety.
  According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, studies have 
suggested specific links between marijuana use and adverse consequences 
in the workplace, such as increased risk for injuries or accidents.
  According to the Federal Government's own workplace safety experts at 
the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, or NIOSH, 
other studies of cannabis use have demonstrated effects that include 
sedation, disorientation, impaired judgment, lack of concentration, and 
slowed fine motor skills. As my Democratic colleagues often say, we 
need to follow the science.
  Currently, it is common practice for employers in industries such as 
construction and warehouse logistics to enact zero-tolerance drug 
policies that include a prohibition on marijuana usage to protect 
workers by ensuring a safe workplace and to comply with Federal law. 
Unlike on-demand evaluations of alcohol usage, there currently is no 
adequate real-time intoxication testing technology for marijuana 
impairment.
  By removing marijuana from the list of scheduled substances in the 
Controlled Substance Act, the underlying bill will place unnecessary 
burdens on private employers and will needlessly jeopardize workplace 
and public safety and health.
  For instance, the removal of marijuana from the CSA creates legal 
jeopardy for employers who are authorized under the Americans with 
Disabilities Act to test for illegal drug use while such authorization 
does not extend to legal drugs.

                              {time}  1030

  My motion to recommit adds specific language to the bill to affirm an 
employer's right to test job applicants and employees to ensure 
workplace and public safety.
  Legalization of marijuana at the State level has already created 
complex challenges for employers wishing to maintain a drug-free 
workplace while abiding by relevant employment laws.
  The bill before us today, which declassifies marijuana as an illegal 
drug, would only further complicate employers' compliance obligations 
and liability risks and reduce workplace safety around the country.
  A last-minute Democrat amendment added to H.R. 3884 recognizes the 
right of the Federal Government to test its employees and workers in 
safety-sensitive positions covered by the Department of Transportation 
regulations, such as pilots and railroad operators. However, the bill 
omits the same protections for private-sector employers in other high-
hazard industries not covered by DOT regulations.
  If we adopt this motion, we will address legal ambiguities that may 
arise from removing marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act and 
affirm private employers' right to drug test employees in order to keep 
their workplaces and the public safe.
  This is not a gotcha moment. It is not playing politics. My motion to 
recommit is a genuine attempt to improve the bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge its passage, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the 
motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, I would call my 
distinguished friend from Arizona's attention--whose constituents just 
approved legalization with a 60 percent margin--to the Rules Committee 
Print, which includes new provisions to ensure that employees working 
in safety-sensitive transportation positions regulated by the Federal 
Government would still be tested for illegal or unauthorized use of 
alcohol, marijuana, or other substances.
  Now, to be clear, no one wants to have people who are in these 
sensitive positions to be operating equipment, but there are several 
problems with the gentlewoman's position.
  First and foremost, as I pointed out in the course of my 
presentation, because the Federal Government interferes with the 
research in cannabis, and has for 50 years, there is no good test for 
impairment.
  Right now, I have heard from employers across the country, who are 
deeply concerned because as they test, and there is a trace of 
marijuana in the system, it continues for 30 days; long after there is 
any impairment. So we

[[Page H6840]]

are having people's jobs jeopardized because we haven't done the 
research that would allow us to have a good test.
  The MORE Act, in the form that it is here, besides having the 
provisions that allow the testing to take place, would strip away the 
Federal Government interference with the research so that we can have a 
test that takes place.
  It is important for employers to be able to have this test. Employers 
want to be able to deal with their employees fairly, and they don't 
have a good test now. So people are losing their jobs. They can't fill 
other jobs because applicants fail drug tests.
  It is not that we don't test, the fact is we don't have a good test. 
And the Federal prohibition on research stands in the way of this. It 
is yet another example of the failed prohibition on cannabis and its 
unintended consequences. It prevents being able to make progress to be 
able to have effective tests and use them where they are needed.
  My friends talk about people having traces of marijuana in their 
system in terms of driving stops. There is no indication that just 
because there is a trace that that impaired their operation. We don't 
have the tests.
  That is why we need the MORE Act. That is why we need to reject the 
motion to recommit. Unless and until we do the research to be able to 
have effective tests to be able to deal with impairment, we are just 
chasing our tails. It doesn't solve the problem, and it avoids being 
able to take care of it.
  I strongly urge rejecting this motion to recommit, passing the MORE 
Act so we can do the research, have the tests that employers and 
employees want and deserve so we get out of this never-never land of 
speculation and be able to actually tell the circumstances and give 
people a guidance to be able to get the result that I think we all 
want.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution 
965, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question 
are postponed.

                          ____________________