Rescheduling, Farm Bill trigger cannabis industry lobbying blitz
Encouraged by the first tangible steps toward federal marijuana reform in a generation – and threatened by hemp-derived competitors – MJ companies are spending more than ever to win friends and influence lawmakers in Congress, an analysis of federal lobbying disclosures shows.
Congressional lobbyists working for plant-touching companies deeply involved in the marijuana or hemp industries reported spending a little less than $4 million during the first half of 2024, according to forms due at the end of the July, the most recent reporting period available.
That’s up from $2.4 million over the same time period a year ago.
The current spike echoes a flurry of lobbying in late 2022, when marijuana banking reform appeared close to the finish line in a lame-duck congressional session.
But this increase is more pronounced.
Lobbyists and industry players told MJBizDaily the increase reflects the potential impact of additional pending legislation, including the Farm Bill, as well as heightened interest in the Biden administration’s efforts to reschedule marijuana and, as a result, a lifting of the Internal Revenue Code Section 280E tax burden.
“The general trend is that there is definitely a growing recognition that it’s more of a bipartisan issue,” said Charlie Panfil, who leads controlled substances-related lobbying at The Daschle Group, a Washington, D.C.-based public policy agency headed by former Democratic Senate Majority leader Tom Daschle.
“I also think there’s a lot of interest from other industries beside your core cannabis industry,” Panfil added.
More resources beyond money
To that end, neither spending figure is a full depiction of all the resources directed at influencing federal lawmakers’ opinions toward marijuana.
How much time or energy is spent on cannabis banking or other marijuana matters compared to other issues is not reflected in disclosure forms filed by major political players with marijuana interests – such as tobacco giant Altria Client Services or alcohol monolith Anheuser-Busch.
But over the past year, members of Congress have heard from a host of varied interests on cannabis-related issues.
These include major insurance companies and credit unions as well as lobbyists representing state and local governments such as Colorado Gov. Jared Polis; Humboldt County, California; and the Sergeants Benevolent Association of New York City, records show.
‘Bang for the buck’?
The impact of all those efforts is questionable considering:
The current session of Congress appears set to end without either banking reform or a new Farm Bill, the latter meaning the so-called “loophole” allowing intoxicating hemp-derived products to be sold online in most of the U.S. will persist.
Congress’ influence over the Department of Justice-controlled rescheduling process is minimal.
Section 280E still applies until marijuana rescheduling is final, and most observers agree the DOJ is immune to lobbyist pressure.
Advocates point out that lawmakers such as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer have publicly expressed support for marijuana descheduling, including writing letters to that effect to Drug Enforcement Administration chief Anne Milgram.
Still, support for reform isn’t quite the same as accomplishing it.
“Action over words is really what we’re looking for,” said Morgan Paxhia, a co-founder and managing director of California-based cannabis investment fund Poseidon Asset Management.
“I give companies credit for continuing to try to push, but dollars are so precious,” he added.
“And doing so in a year where the odds of progress are so limited … that’s why I don’t know if you’re getting bang for the buck this year.”
In a sign of both their financial muscle as well as the stakes involved, individual marijuana multistate operators and advocacy organizations compromised of MSOs wield the most spending power in Washington, D.C.
Records show the top spender by far is Chicago-based MSO Cresco Labs.
So far in 2024, Cresco has spent $1.24 million on in-house lobbyists and to retain major government-relations firms such as Denver-based Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, which also contacts members of Congress about marijuana banking on behalf of credit unions.
That’s a huge increase from the $250,000 Cresco reported spending over the first two quarters of 2023, but it continues a trend that began a year ago.
Cresco reported spending $510,000 in the third quarter of 2023 – the same time frame when the Department of Health and Human Services announced it was recommending marijuana be rescheduled.
The MSO spent another $640,000 in the final quarter of 2023, when many stakeholders believed Schumer, the Democratic Senate Majority Leader, would call marijuana banking reform for a floor vote.
But that vote didn’t materialize, in part because of flagging Republican support for the SAFER Banking Act.
Cresco declined MJBizDaily requests for comment.
The second-biggest spender on marijuana lobbying efforts is New York City-based MSO Curaleaf Holdings, records show.
Curaleaf is spending $290,000 per quarter, including:
$140,000 on its in-house lobbyist.
$80,000 to retain Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck.
$70,000 for the services of business-advisory firm Cozen O’Connor Public Strategies.
A Curaleaf spokesperson did not respond to MJBizDaily‘s request for comment.
Money better spent?
In some cases, the marijuana industry’s spending rivals that of major corporations.
For example, the $80,000 that Cresco Labs paid Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck equals what the McDonald’s Corp. paid that firm in the same quarter.
But the cannabis industry’s increased spending also represents the extra complexities companies face under federal marijuana law.
In a twist, several observers said, this might incentivize K Street to take its time solving such problems.
The longer they persist, the longer cannabis firms must pay lobbyists.
This dynamic is playing out in the hubbub over the Farm Bill.
Lawmakers are hearing from hemp companies seeking to preserve the status quo and also taking meetings with marijuana firms eager to prohibit hemp-derived cannabinoids.
That dissent within a sector that outsiders see as related, not cutthroat competitors, encourages most lawmakers to look for other issues to champion, multiple D.C. insiders said.
“That’s the challenge when you have differing interests: big companies and small companies,” Poseidon’s Paxhia said.
Another challenge, he added: “How do we become a top-of-the-list item when we have all these other issues?”
Put another way: Marijuana policy is much more involved than whether to legalize or not.
And that nuance is still lost on much of a Capitol Hill contingent with many other pressing concerns, a situation that’s unlikely to change no matter how much money is spent and effort expended.
Still, advocates said, cannabis companies have a choice: Spend limited capital on questionable political returns or cut back on their D.C. presence and risk fading into the background.
“‘If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu,'” said The Daschle Group’s Panfil, offering a well-worn nugget of D.C. wisdom.
Chris Roberts can be reached at chris.roberts@mjbizdaily.com.
Originally posted on MJ BIZ Daily.
