The debate over cannabis rescheduling under the Controlled Substance Act has gained unprecedented momentum across the United States since 2022. But nothing illustrates this shift more vividly than the recent public comment period hosted by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
For the first time, in a compelling show of civic engagement, Americans have voiced their overwhelming support for the rescheduling—or even descheduling—of cannabis. Let’s examine the data collected during the public comment period by Headset regarding Americans’ desires for changes in cannabis laws across the country.
In October 2022, President Biden made an announcement asking the HHS and Attornet General to initiate a process to review how marijuana is scheduled under the CSA:
“No one should be in jail just for using or possessing marijuana. Sending people to prison for possessing marijuana has upended too many lives and incarcerated people for conduct that many states no longer prohibit… Today, I am announcing three steps that I am taking to end this failed approach… Third, I am asking the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Attorney General to initiate the administrative process to review expeditiously how marijuana is scheduled under federal law.”
Surge in Public Engagement for Cannabis Rescheduling
The DEA’s call for public input on cannabis rescheduling drew a staggering 42,000 comments. To provide perspective, Headset, a cannabis data platform, illustrates that it’s comparable to the entire population of Juneau, Alaska, weighing in on this critical issue. This level of engagement not only shatters previous records for DEA proposals but also demonstrates the significant importance of cannabis policy reform to the American public.
The previous record for public comments was set by the highly contentious 2020 telemedicine rules, which drew around 38,000 comments. Most DEA proposals typically receive somewhere between a few hundred to 1,500 comments, even on significant issues like scheduling new substances. The sheer volume of responses—more than tenfold the usual engagement—sends a clear message about the centrality of cannabis policy in public discourse today.
Analyzing these 42,000 comments reveals an overwhelming tide of support for changing cannabis’s current status under federal law. Here are some key statistics Headset found:
- 92.45% of comments were in favor of changing cannabis’s schedule.
- 7.55% were against any change.
- Among those supporting a change:
- 61.7% advocated for the complete descheduling of cannabis.
- 38.3% supported rescheduling to a less restrictive category.
These numbers paint a clear picture—over 9 out of 10 individuals who took the time to comment believe that cannabis should not remain a Schedule I substance. Furthermore, the majority of commenters went beyond the proposed rescheduling to Schedule III, arguing for complete removal from the controlled substances list.
Key Themes Oultined From The Public Comment Period
A significant portion of those supporting rescheduling highlighted the potential medical benefits of cannabis. They pointed out that rescheduling could facilitate more comprehensive research into cannabis’s therapeutic properties, potentially leading to new treatments for a variety of medical conditions.
Proponents also emphasized the need for federal laws to align with state legislation. With many states having already legalized cannabis for medical or recreational use, maintaining its Schedule I status at the federal level creates a conflicting legal landscape.
Advocates for descheduling often cited social justice issues. They argued that rescheduling does not go far enough to address the harm caused by the War on Drugs, particularly in marginalized communities. They see complete descheduling as a crucial step towards rectifying these injustices.
The public comment period also saw detailed input from state-level health departments. For instance, Pennsylvania’s Secretary of Health, Dr. Debra L. Bogen, raised critical questions about the proposed rescheduling.
Her concerns included the impact on existing state medical marijuana programs, DEA licensure requirements, the FDA approval process for cannabis products, research implications, interstate commerce regulations, and reporting to prescription drug monitoring programs.
Rescheduling Process
The timing of this public endorsement is crucial. President Biden’s recent announcement that he will not seek reelection places increased pressure on the administration to deliver on key promises before the end of its term. Rescheduling cannabis could serve as a defining achievement, impacting both the criminal justice and healthcare sectors.
The Department of Justice’s proposal to transfer marijuana to Schedule III follows a recommendation from the Department of Health and Human Services and the DEA. This recommendation acknowledges marijuana’s currently accepted medical use and reassesses its abuse potential and dependence levels.
Historically, drug rescheduling can take several years. However, there are precedents for a quicker timeline. For example, when Health and Human Services recommended rescheduling Marinol from Schedule II to Schedule III in 1998, the process took just 237 days from recommendation to final rule. Given the current political climate and overwhelming public support, there’s a compelling case for accelerating the timeline for cannabis rescheduling.
Despite the clear mandate from public comments, challenges remain. The rescheduling process involves multiple steps, including a potential hearing phase and a final review by the Office of Management and Budget. Additionally, the DEA must ensure compliance with international treaty obligations, particularly the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs.
However, the unprecedented level of public support could potentially expedite the typically lengthy rescheduling process. Swift action on this front would not only fulfill a key campaign promise but could also possibly provide a boost to the Democratic ticket in the upcoming presidential election.
The Push for More than Cannabis Rescheduling, Complete Removal from the CSA
While the proposed rescheduling of cannabis to Schedule III represents a significant step forward, it falls short of what the majority of respondents are calling for. The data reveals that of those supporting change, over half (61.7%) advocate for the complete descheduling of cannabis from the CSA.
When we look closely at the numbers, we see that the current rescheduling proposal would fully satisfy only about 35.4% of all respondents—those who explicitly supported rescheduling. In contrast, 57% are pushing for more aggressive change through complete descheduling.
The overwhelming support for cannabis rescheduling revealed during the DEA comment period sends a powerful message to policymakers. It highlights the profound importance of cannabis policy reform in the United States and shows the need for comprehensive change.
The proposed rescheduling to Schedule III is a step in the right direction, but it may be viewed by many as a half-measure that doesn’t go far enough. The challenge now lies in bridging the gap between this incremental step and the more comprehensive reform that a majority of engaged citizens are calling for.
As the Biden administration navigates its final months, fast-tracking cannabis rescheduling could serve as a powerful legacy, addressing longstanding issues of social justice and medical access. The ball is now in the DEA’s court. With public opinion firmly behind rescheduling and the political stakes higher than ever, all eyes will be on the agency’s next moves.
