co-author of "tierney comes c-span's washington c-span's w, with every day with news and policy issues that. for national autism awareness month, we discussed autism spectrum disorder. and on our spotlight on magazines segment, we featured sojourner's magazine. ofdiscuss media coverage president trump. be sure to watch c-span's washington journal live 7:00 a.m. eastern saturday morning. join the discussion. >> international cannabis policy summit was held earlier today in washington dc.

speakers included members of congress and former naacp president and candidate for governor, then jealous. this is just over three hours. -- ben jealous. >> [applause] >> good morning. my name is caroline phillips and it is my honor to welcome you to the inaugural cannabis policy summit. here we are at the annenberg theater, and it is hard to believe how far we have come as a community in a few short years. i would like to thank our presiding sponsor. >> [applause] >> it is businesses like his that make it possible for us

together like conversations the one we are going to have today. i would like to thank and acknowledge the 32 nonprofit groups that ar part of an canada's festival steering committee. for years they have worked together to educate and inform the general public about waste to talk about canada's policy reform. launchedrs ago i national canada's festival alongside a group of activists business and dedicated volunteers. we agreed it was time to bring the conversation about cannabis legalization and the fight for the rights of patients, business owners, and the victims of the failed war on drugs to washington, d.c. as activists, we are accustomed to talking about the issues that matter to us must. but i and many others in this room believe that our message is

even stronger when we convene together as unlikely allies. voices comesus of together, it is even stronger ried the decisions are vaired and the opinions are diverse. today we gather because we know it is time for a new approach to cannabis policy, an approach that brings together people all over the political spectrum ready for sensible cannabis policy reform. our first speaker knows a few things about reform and political action. she also knows a few things about cannabis. it is my great pleasure to welcome to the stage new york times best selling author, andked media contributor, former deputy chief of staff to alyssant barack obama

mastromonaco. >> [applause] alyssa: hi everyone. i always come prepared. i am so excited to be here today, because i love pot. >> [cheering] alyssa: i recently read an article called "sophisticated and stoned." i do not think i am sophisticated, but i do believe i am successful. i suffer from irritable bowel syndrome. for all the years i was able to smoke, i did not suffer. and did not realize i had it. it took the edge off minors which trigger my stomach. for all of the years pot was not an available option, because i worked in the white house, i drink wine and took xanax to take the edge off.

i also gained weight and had chronic dry mouth syndrome. marijuana helped me to sleep and keeps me more even. i am more creative and i only use it at home. i am a small example of the positive impact of making pot available, weather for pain management or anti-inflammatory properties, it has been used to treat or lessen the effects of alzheimer's disease, hiv-aids, arthritis and crohn's disease. in a trial, use of medical marijuana extract showed a 50% reduction in seizures in adults and children diagnosed with epilepsy. the national institutes of thc/cbd may be helpful in treating mental illness and addictions. recreational marijuana is legal in nine states. is legal in 29na states and the district of columbia. it is considered one of the world's largest cash crops. there is a chance to ease the

use of opioids for pain management, and gives the chance for pot entrepreneurs to thrive. with that comes change, to imagine startups, to actively create an industry that looks like america, an industry where women and underrepresented communities can thrive. to date, i have not heard anyone more systemically owes -- more us essentially illustrate the case than cynthia nixon in new york. simply said there are a lot of good reasons for legalizing marijuana, but for me it comes down to this. we have to stop putting people of color in jail for something people white -- something white people do with impunity. >> [applause] alyssa: everyone should be following her.

she said ending the adjustment of putting prisoners for marijuana is the start, but we have to expunge prior convictions, particularly for nonviolent offenders for marijuana use. the victory of legalizing pot for recreational use, of freeing the weed won't be a victory if the people using the drug are not redeemed in the process. >> [applause] alyssa: so now we move to some videos. videos. senator tulsi gabbard wasn't supposed to be here this morning, but due to an emergency in her district, she sent a video, which will be followed by congressman barbara lee. senator tulsi gabbard has been leading the waysenator tulsi gan leading the way to federally

decriminalize marijuana. she introduced a bipartisan bill, the ending federal marijuana prohibition act, which seeks to reform outdated and widely problematic laws by similarly declare lysing marijuana. she ha diffic -- she has called on the fda to remove marijuana as a schedule one drug. dealing on this list means valuable and critical research to the health benefits of marijuana, which range from reducing anxiety to halting the growth of cancer cells, will not happen at the pace that should be required. the reforms tulsi is seeking our common sense, creek conservancy and reduce -- create certainty and reduce inconsistencies and federal law. aloha, senator gabbard. >> [applause] >> aloha. thank you to the national cannabis festival for hosting this weekend policy summit, and for your work to organize and advocate for long-overdue

reforms. i hope to be there with you this weekend, but my district has just gone through record-breaking rainfalls and landslides that have displaced hundreds of people, that have wiped out businesses and homes and roads. by theing to be back time you see this message, where many of my residents are without water or electricity. keep them in your mind as recovery is still underway. the importance of your participation in this critical t discussion cannot be overstated. our archaic and nonsensical laws on cannabis are turning everyday americans into criminals, ruining their lives, tearing their families apart, and wasting huge amounts of taxpayer dollars to arrest, and prosecute, and incarcerate people for marijuana use, a

substance that has been proven again to be less dangerous than alcohol, both for consumers and for those around them. in my home state of hawaii alone, we again to be less send hundreds of inmates out of state every year due to prison overcrowding, the large majority of which are due to nonviolent drug charges. what is at stake is so much more important than what any one person or any politician may think about cannabis, or whether or not they choose to use send f inmates out of it. the physical and social impacts of sending people to jail and turning them into criminals for the use of cannabis havingare devastating ripple effects on communities across the country. to speak of the fact that researchers are finding more and more that there are lower incidences of opioid related deaths in states that have legalized marijuana. in congress i have introduced a bipartisan piece of legislation

that would end federal prohibition of marijuana and take it off the federal controlled substances list. we are continuing to gain support from colleagues in both parties, not really what we need is for each of you to keep the pressure on, to share personal about and experiences why this action is so important. call your lawmaker, send them in email, hold them accountable, because we need to make this change now. about why meantime, i am working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to provide certainty for businesses who, right now, face contradictory regulations between individual states and federal statute that affected their bottom line and ability to operate. for example, bankers and insurance companies fear the threat of federal prosecution, especially under this attorney

general, in states where marijuana has been legalized, either for medical or nonmedical use. there is so much more we can and must do to change the policies in the country that reflect where the majority of people are, and defeat unfounded fears with facts, science, and the freedom of choice. thank you for your commitment to making this happen, and for putting in the work so we can build a better, more free future together. aloha. >> [applause] >> hi, i am congresswoman barbara lee, and i am proud to california's 13th district in congress. it is my pleasure to welcome you to today's timely discussion on equity in the cannabis industry. first i would like to thank the national cannabis festival for

bringing everyone together. today is an opportunity to tackle some of the most pressing challenges in the cannabis foremost among these challenges is the inclusion and equity for communities of color. we all know the war on drugs has been a colossal failure that destroyed lives and targeted communities of color. as we move forward, we need restorative justice to rebuild the lives that were shattered. i'm incredibly proud of my district, california's east bay, for leading the way. by focusing on uplifting entrepreneurs opening legal cannabis businesses, oakland and berkeley have become models for the industry. i'm trying to end the remaining vestiges of the failed war on drugs.

my bill would end the wrongful federal interference in the cannabis industry. together, we can and will pass these comprehensive, necessary and overdue reforms. thank you for your work. i wish you all a productive and successful summit. [applause] >> we are back. hi, everyone. this is our panel on amplifying equity in the cannabis industry. we have three guests with us today. the managing director of hyper ventures, the cfo of and tech acquisition and she has an mba

from yale and was named one of the most powerful women in cannabis. [applause] dr. shonda messias, also an mba and phd, former cell biologist who works for the number one dispensary in washington, d.c. and she has four kids. she has a lot happening. sadly, delegate cheryl glenn couldn't be here from maryland. she sent a letter. first, she is very sorry she can't be here. as legal cannabis arrives maryland come i'm committed to

ensuring communities of color are represented among the new business owners. i'm delighted to know this conversation is being treated with seriousness. in august 2016, the maryland medical cannabis commission issued 50 licenses. not a single one was a person of color. something unfathomable to me. in september 2016, the legislative black caucus of maryland announced a plan to introduce emergency legislation to address the lack of diversity in the cannabis licensed distribution. in april of 2017, a bill that promise to seven additional growing licenses -- died in the final minutes of the general assembly. what happened at the maryland state that they was an orchestrated plan to defeat the bill.

for generations, people of color happened disproportionately impacted by cannabis prohibition in this country. but don of legal cannabis has created millionaires while others happen persecuted -- have been prosecuted. i joined with my colleagues to say no more. we spoke out and raised awareness and demanded action. just a few weeks ago, the house and senate reached an agreement approving a measure that would allow maryland to issue new licenses for growing or processing marijuana in ways that assure racial diversity. i'm proud that maryland is finally acknowledging and taking the steps to create a more diverse industry. we must remain vigilant. while i cannot be with you today, this conversation is being presented by a knowledgeable and capable group of professionals and advocates. thank you for all that you are doing. [applause] ok, ladies. my first question is for you --

the cannabis industry is the fastest-growing major industry in the united states. according to forbes, the industry is expected to grow from $9.2 billion this year to $47.3 billion by 2027. as the managing director of hyper ventures, tell us what qualities you are looking for in a business and what women and minorities can do to break in. >> with hyper ventures specifically, we focus on businesses that are more infrastructure based. their building the foundation of the industry that we believe will be important now and as we move into federal legalization, which we are all waiting for. we look for businesses that are scalable. it's hard to scale because of human's appellate rules -- because of municipality rules. some examples, we have a compliance platform we are

invested in that allows businesses that are licensed holders to stay compliant within their business. we are looking for things like we are looking for things like that that will create more transparency around the industry. data is very important. being able to show various levels of government that we can provide this information and provide a safer industry that can really help people in the future -- a lot of the points we've already brought up, there is this disproportionate allocation of resources to various populations and populations that have traditionally been associated with cannabis are shut out to a

certain extent. there are a lot of groups that are focused on social equity. a great example is the hood incubator out of oakland, bringing people who worked in the black market or didn't have the resources to get a license or put up a retail dispensary, giving them the resources -- they are amazing resources to create this community around groups that are trying to move the needle. we really need to focus on not shutting out those communities. >> as the chairwoman, it's our mission to help women get into the industry and also minorities. it's going to be very strategic to put both women and minorities on the public platform so there's awareness around the

wonderful technologies, the innovations and the businesses that we can offer this industry. often, i've seen that we have women and minorities that have these unbelievable ideas that can really add to the existing industry but because of the barriers, they don't get access into this industry. those are the things we are trying to equip them with, the necessary tools they need to break in. the major barrier we face is finances. you have to have money to get into this industry. >> when you guys saw that john boehner was added to the board of a cannabis company, was that encouraging, like becoming mainstream, or are you like are you kidding me? it was a mixed bag. how did you guys feel about it? >> it's about economic

empowerment. we see the disproportion of white men carrying this industry. we know how lucrative this industry will be. the discouragement of keeping other people out of it is very important. what is power defined by? money. i'm going out there every day, encouraging minorities and women to go out and get their technology and businesses things so they can have the opportunity to gather that type of empowerment. power by money. then we can truly change the narrative and be on equal

footing so we don't need to implement diversity protocols in corporate america or inclusion protocols. [applause] >> i think that i was a bit torn about the news. on one side, it's great to see more people supporting industry. on the other side, i would like to see other faces, supporting people coming from the path we are not expecting -- i want to see more women and people of color on board. that's our job. we feel strongly about that, bringing those people forward and telling their stories, helping them get funding and telling those narratives. it's great to see people jumping on the bandwagon. we are trying to create that path. there has to be a balance. >> i definitely had mixed feelings.

good on him, but, you know, things for jumping on the bandwagon. according to a study, only 26% of executives in industry are women. there's a culture that is steeped in stoner stereotypes and women often play the role of bandwagon. according to a study, only 26% temptress in the branding materials. only one of two african-american women in industry -- we could be better at diversifying the licenses. tell us the hurdles you've seen for women and some effective studies for combating them? >> i talk to women about entering this space.

we are not supported financially to enter this space. a lot of people are not ready to invest in the cannabis industry. even though we have the technology to do it, we have to go beyond the call of duty. when i thought about entering this industry, as lucrative as it might have been in 2012, as a minority woman, it was well known at the time that if someone is going to be prosecuted, it would be someone who looks like myself. when i think of the narrative that was instilled in me, we are scared of prosecution, we are afraid of being targeted because we have been historically. we have to change the narrative to have examples of women and minorities that are entering

this industry and doing phenomenal. we have certain cases of that. i think about jesse martin in oregon. we have won the james in denver -- wanda james in denver. we have a 27 page legislation that is ideal for minority participation. first, we have to change the narrative and ask minorities and women to engage with us. two, we have to find ways to be funded so we can bring these technologies to the forefront. from there, i had to go through a second mortgage to support my own business because i couldn't get someone to believe in me. i believed in myself. i'm asking you all to do the same thing. [applause] >> do you guys have examples of

current programs that are working now? how can people replicate them and make them successful? >> there's some different initiatives going on in california. hood saw the need for it. they weren't seeing it in legislation. now, we are seeing in california, in l.a., a part of that is looking at how we expunge past criminal records for something that is legal now. san francisco is doing something similar. seattle is doing something similar. it is an amazing step forward. at the same time, these are really small, dealing with hundreds of people. we needed to hit millions. as we see these models come to light, when need to start replicating them and making them

significantly larger. a lot of people who have previously been incarcerated, they don't have the resources to go out there and get their records expunged. if i had a record, i don't know if i would know what to do. putting resources behind that, making the information more public, funding others who are willing to give their time to make this happen -- it is costly. we have to build that into our policies and legislation across the states in order to make that happen. it's unfair that people who may have been caught for possession decades ago, today, that would be legal. overwhelmingly, those populations are black and brown. the impact will keep compounding over the years if we don't do something about it.

>> i know washington, d.c., we had a second round of dispensary applications that opened up. bailout allowed extra points for those that are minority participants -- they allowed extra points for those that are minority participants. that's how we can increase equity in our program. there's a difference between the different applicants. because of our challenges, we do need different handicaps. a lot of people who are qualified are being discounted because we have prior criminal records. they are the ones who established the industry, saw the need for it and now, they are being excluded. washington has been a great example of making sure minority ownership is important. i've seen different legislation throughout. the change occurs with the regulatory board and the legislation. you have to support us and we have to be in those rooms to be able to ensure our voices are being heard and we can change

the policies before they are put before us. >> can you tell everybody more about women grow and successes you've had leading that group? >> it's been wonderful. i've been the chairman of the board since february. i was the market leader prior to that. in three markets -- maryland, d.c. and ohio. what i've seen in three different markets -- one is an established one, one is an emerging one and one hasn't started. for women in those groups who are the caregivers of their households, their communities, have been able to change the have been able to change the narrative about using medical marijuana in their communities. we are the ones who run our households.

when you empower these women to do these things, this is amazing. i've seen businesses emerge. i've seen advocacy increase significantly among their populations. i smiled because women in this group is so imperative for our children. women who been fighting for their children with epilepsy or autism or cancer, etc., i appreciate what you are doing because you are saving lives. when i think about what has transpired through working with women grow, i know we've been able to change the narrative of what's going on in the united states and i'm grateful for that. >> we are talking about children, but with our aging population, veterans, it's having a huge impact on those committees. when we see everything that's happening with the opioid epidemic, this could really have an impact on that. similar to how we deal with people suffering from cancer or epilepsy -- that is a huge area we need to focus on as well. >> couple of weeks ago, i was

talking to a group of people about this panel. i said that i thought expunging records of people who had been imprisoned for marijuana possession or use -- letting people out of prison and expunging the records, same as when dna technology became more sophisticated, the technology came, science matured and we know that person didn't commit a crime -- it was surprising to me how people were triggered, they didn't think about it that way. >> it has left the community devastated. the handicap is there.

how do you help them rebuild their lives after all this time they've had taken away or the opportunities? we are trying to create this narrative. what do we do now knowing what has been done to our community? >> i had some thoughts about current affairs. one of my questions for you guys when jeff sessions said the federal government would prosecute anyone in possession of or selling marijuana, in that moment, was there a chilling effect on the industry? did you feel people recoil? did you feel people bounce back to where they were years ago? >> there was definitely fear.

it was january 4. i was getting messages left and right. panic was setting in. once i went in and read his remarks, i felt great about it. he was empowering attorney generals to say make the rules for your states. people in states where it's already legal, it's business as usual. the frustration is the headline risk and fear it puts into the industry. businesses are trying to operate and stay aboveboard and pay taxes, which the government makes difficult to do. they have a cash heavy business, not allowing businesses to write off certain costs. and was a 48 hour period when all of the businesses i work with were like, what's happening? people were just like, you know, business as usual. we will operate as we have been.

we will do what we think is right and see what happens. the stocks rebounded by monday. it continues to remind us that we live in this gray space and cannabis. on any given day -- my bank account could get shut down. we take a lot of burden on ourselves. your own credit is being run. on any given day, my bank account could be seized. that is the risk we run. we really believe in the industry. we believe we are doing the right thing. we believe there's more to do in this space. >> i cannot agree more. january 4, the first thing i said, out of all the people who have

dispensaries, they are going to come after me. i was so scared. one of my going to do with my four children now? this is not about them. this is about patient access to health care and my true authentic self. i'm going to stand up for our rights. there was the downside of it. the upside of it, there was all this awareness that was brought to the forefront. everyone was having conversations about medical marijuana, medical marijuana policies, the use of cannabis. it really hit mainstream america and brought our issues to light. even though it was a scary feeling inside, it was also one that i could never pay for that amount of advertising. . it did us all well in a sense. >> i never would have thought of

it that way. thank you, mr. sessions, for the free publicity. as women of color, what are the biggest personal hurdles you faced? to clarify for the audience -- what are some of the hurdles you had to overcome? >> i will take a deep breath. i have been publicly ostracized at times for being a dispensary owner. i've been called a drug dealer, i've been told that i am an unfit parent. i've faced a lot of scrutiny. i consider myself a highly educated professional. i've worked for fortune 500 companies. i worked at howard university for years.

i'm very proud of who i am and the professionals who have also held many patents, bringing a lot of validity of who i am as a scientist to this space. to have someone say something derogatory like you're a drug dealer and an unfit parent, it is hurtful. for my own sake, i come back to my community. the national holistic healing center, i see my 2000 plus patients and they tell me you've changed my life, i say the national holistic healing it's ok, you can call me a drug dealer. in front of these patients, i've made their lives better and i will continue to do so. [applause]

>> i hold no patents. that is a hard act to follow. i would joke like, yeah, i'm a a drug dealer. >> a drug dealer from yale. >> we entered the space kind of early. a lot of people weren't doing it the way they do now. it was kind of taboo. am i essentially taking this expense of degree and lighting -- expensive degree and lighting it on fire? the support i got from my professors and even my own family, there was something there. i was interested in the medical side of the business. my grandfather had been suffering from cancer during my second year of business school.

you go through all the google wormholes and find all the different treatments and come across cannabis pretty quickly. my family lived in ohio. my mother text me and my sister and said, "do you guys know where to get marijuana?" do you think this is a test? yes, i do know where to get it. i wouldn't want to get that for my grandfather. you know where to get black market, but i wouldn't trust that. people were starting -- understanding the benefits from it. i was frustrated that you couldn't just get access to something that was going to help someone. the last couple of months of his

life, he just wanted to become purple. you couldn't get it -- he just wanted to be comfortable. you couldn't get it. my passion constantly pushes me. i'm proud of being able to be a woman in this space, being a minority woman and people reaching out like how do i do this, how can i follow in your footsteps. it's amazing that there are people who want to continue to do this. i'm proud to help others and to these populations along.

>> what steps can be taken at the state level to ensure equal access? what can people look for on ballots? what can they do? >> i'm going to start with getting involved in your community. there's different advocacy groups. there's norml and others here today. there are other marijuana policy projects. there are so many ways. we can start with the groups who are currently advocating for us now. they are the ones that can help empower us. so we need support. industries, in what they are doing, to make sure that we are empowered. also, we need more activism. we need to know what we want in terms of legislation. this is where i default back to the ncba, on their website, there's 27 pages of legislation. wonderful. but if you are a minority, you would want implemented.

so we have that written out. again, it's like having the power, which is money, to have our voices heard in the legislation process. that is still our challenge. we are deficient in those resources to have that voice heard. >> i think it's really important that those two are creating the legislation and implement in these laws. they need to start looking like the broader population. to your point about making sure it is local and getting involved locally and making sure we are amplifying those candidates who are from those commuters or are -- from those communities. or in support of them. a lot of the legislation we've seen in the past, it's created by people who have no idea what those communities are going through. we need to have more people of color and women involved.

they understand those issues more. we need to do more to position those people within the space. >> do you guys think cannabis policy will play a big role in 2020? >> absolutely. if it doesn't, it should. we make sure that it does. >> a call to action. >> yes. i was going to say, it definitely will have a place. when you said that, i know there's a lot of women that treat their children with cannabis. presently, i know that ace is working on legislation with that so the parents don't have to take their children off cannabis -- off-campus, administer medicine because they are in a drug-free zone and then bring them back. so children who are facing different ailments like epilepsy or multiple sclerosis or autism, they already have a stigma. the parents can't be working nine to five, because halfway

through the day, they have to take their children off-site to treat them, then bring them on. i think that we need to make it normalized. who werehat people actually brought into power in 2020, would be those who recognize the needs of the community, including women and like you said, the older population. because, we are the sandwich generation. we have elders we are taking care of and our children. we need things to work for us. >> one last question before we turn to q&a. where do you guys see the industry in 10 years? where do you want it to be?

>> i really feel like the industry in 10 years will be completely open. cannabis is going to be normalized to a very high degree. that's why i'm pushing so hard for minority and women participation now. the people who enter at this round will have the opportunity to grow and learn from their mistakes, and be the leaders of the future. in order for that to happen, the seeds have to be planted. i believe it will be a wide-open, free-market. >> cannabis in 10 years will look a lot like other industries. what is fascinating to me about it, is that it is really a mix of all of these different industries. there is consumer packaged goods, big pharma, big alcohol and the total health and wellness side of it too, which sits between adult use recreational, and medical. thewe are starting to see tip of the iceberg and all of those elements right now, and that will keep going. regardless of whether or not we have federal legalization, the tide has already turned. you can't put it back in the bottle at this point. this is happening. and i think we will see more

states supporting it and learning from each other and other countries. , mean, we have canada federally legalizing adult recreational by the end of this year there we had we will learn from these different groups. 10 years from now, for me, it's hard to imagine what this looks like. being at this stage, but i know that is going to be so much better and so much more accessible to the communities that need it. at least i hope that's where it's going to be. we are going to work to do that. host: thank you, guys. questions? you can raise your hand and i will call on you. you, sir. the question is, is the cost of participating going up or going down or staying the same? >> for me, it is going up. and i say that because it is now getting more competitive. there's more people willing to enter this space because the narrative has changed. so you have to have an

application, you have to show proof of funds, and you have to have summer to locate, real estate. those are three moving triggers. the application, getting a professionally done can writing you from $50,000 to real $150,000. estates can run you 25 to $50,000, which is typically required in most states at the time of application. so you have to keep paying rent on that location, while you wait for the decision to be made. then come up proof of funds, they want to know if you can sustain the business. have on that, some people a minimum of $2 million. the average now is hitting about $50 million. so there is a true barrier to entering the industry. not to say that i can't be done, but you have to work on those things early and find creative ways and solutions to get around

those barriers. add to that, on the financing side of it, for businesses out there looking for funding now, it is much more competitive because there are more businesses operating in the same space. a couple of years ago, you may have been able to have a great powerpoint deck and get funding. and it is not like that anymore. you have to really show proof of concept or bootstrap it getting it into market. just because there's so much out there. people are really excited about the industry. it's getting more competitive. that you should be deterred at all, there was just more work that has to go into the foundation. collaborating and creating partnerships with groups, i really encourage that. i think that is how you get sort of essentially like a syndicate, to going to something together. >> one other point, there is a lot of ancillary businesses that don't touch the plants that have

a low barrier to market. so what i am encouraging his those individuals, the ancillary businesses to really focus on what innovations they have to bring to the marketplace. because, you don't have the same hurdles that we would have come other plant-touching individuals. so, yes, if you touch the plant, there's a big misconception that you are making all this money. 280-e, we arewith making very little, just holding the place until the market opens up. the place i would focus on would be in those ancillary businesses that are doing phenomenal. >> next question. >> what's your thoughts of what happened in washington state --

where the medical and recreational markets were combined? these see that potentially happening in other states moving forward? >> the question was, what do we think about washington state? washington state used to have a recreational and medical market and they have merged into one cannabis market. me, as a professional in this industry, i don't believe there is a difference in the two. are ak all of them medical market. i think access is just recreational. we feel people can come in and get medicine. medicine is medicine, which is all medicinal. when people say recreational, they are coming in because they don't understand they are treating the underlying issue. so when you use a medicine or any substance, you are trying to address something. you may not be cognizant of what

you are trying to address. that's why it's important to have consultants or people you work with to guide you through the process in the medical market. proper you can have the strain or alignment for whatever ailment you have. that is the key. i feel like it is all medicinal. the medical program walks you through it to get overall wellness and health. whereas recreational, you are treating yourself, but you may not be equipped with the education to be able to do so. so, that is where i see a lot of people who say they had a bad experience, that is where it is coming from. because you are treating yourself, and you don't know how. you don't know the best methods for consumption. you don't understand the strength and the dosage. you just know that you want to feel better, and you think that this strain will do it for everything, and a dozen. it is very much a medicine with a particular science behind it. [applause]

host: next question. >> i'm wondering if there are venture funds or accelerators operating in this space or doing things to prioritize women and minorities. >> a big focus of mine, looking at our portfolio and all the different businesses in the space, we try to get from a hiring perspective women and minorities into these businesses. we have board seats on the lot of them. we work with a lot of different capacities. you are not just an investor, you tend to be a partner in a lot of regards. being able to influence that side of the business. on the other side, you see more more this desire to coach different groups. i may see a venture plan that is maybe not something we would like to gived i

feedback and say, here's how you can move this business along. or, i will have people pitch to me and help them with their pitch. i big barrier also is that a lot of people are first-time entrepreneurs or they haven't gone through the funding process. it's not a fun process. you get through 150 no's before your first yes. it is a really difficult process. so it is something that we really like to do, and we really hope that we see other funds doing as well, because i think that is how you can help these various populations move forward. host: yes, ma'am? >> i have a question for both. based on what you just said, what are your tips you can give? i think, often times the challenges are seeking funding and the capital. what tips can you offer those? >> a big part of it is getting that feedback and seeking out that feedback. going to groups like women grow

or other venture funds. not everyone will give you the time, but you have to keep pushing for that, trying to get that feedback. people you know in the space, people you admire or think would be helpful, reach out to them. i think the number of people that i reached out to early on, one out of 10 would respond. and that is fine. the quiz when you get the feedback, it is important. because that is how you continue to improve. people have asked. if you are ready for it. i offer constructive criticism. that's how we all get better. utilizing these groups is a great stepping stone. and also, be willing to put yourself out there and ask people for feedback, that help will be really important. >> what lessons have you learned? what would you do differently based on where the country is

-- your dispensary is now, as opposed to where you were when you first started? what would you do differently? >> oh boy, that is so loaded. i say that because, -- my hesitation in answering that truthfully is i had no idea how many barriers that i had to overcome, whether they were financial, real estate. i paid real estate for two years, and my landlord said, you know what? i am taking your lease back. these are the realities of the industry, operationally and i had one cultivator who ran two strains, and i had six others in my market that refused to sell to me. so it has been unbelievable in terms of having tenacity to

continue to do this. but when it is your passion, you have no choice. so what i say is that i would not have done anything differently, because i had to learn those lessons. , toin order for me to grow go or i would go in the future, those are the lessons where i will know what to do and what not to do in the future. so i embrace it. know how i fell on my knees and just asked god to give me the strength to carry on. that is the real part of it. [applause] >> there are so many different terms and definitions. ?" t is "minority i only ask that because, as a black lesbian woman, i also know some german-americans and jewish-americans, and just white people, caucasians.

and they have fallen on hard times, just like other people who would be a minority. do not get me wrong, because it is easier because they can walk into the room and -- woman canall white walk into her room and we are still black women. so what is your definition of "minority?" host: the question is, what does the term minority in this case mean? what does it refer to, and what does it encompass? >> for me, it is any population that has essentially been disproportionately impacted or does not have access to what a majority does. you know? it often does fall on race, unfortunately, but to your point, there are others who would not be on the surface minority populations, but would

be very, very much impacted by this. anybody who has disproportionate access. i am a south asian, my family and i would, consider that to be a minority group within this as well, but in i.t., you don't think that way. [laughter] actually, telle me if i am wrong, but in parts of california, it is actually done by income. low income is considered a form of minority protection, consideration of. >> exactly. i agree completely with you. i think it is those that have access basedted upon their gender, race or social-economic level. host: we have time for one more question. and i can see you. [laughter]

my name is rose, i am a veteran. >> i am a veteran who is a single mom, i have twin girls who will be 11 years old in a few weeks. either pills was and being in bed, and not getting my kids to school on time, or not getting the job and reducing my income and having to pay out-of-pocket, and insurance -- because insurance does not pay for cannabis. to pay 300 to $400 a month for medical cannabis that i love. [indiscernible] but it takes a huge economic hit. and i am not the only there are one. a lot of women out there who are single parents.

so what type of impact have you seen -- [laughter] >> so, to repeat the question as well as i can, rose is from the cannabis correlation. she is asking -- cannabis is not covered by insurance, but is the only thing that works for her, and how do you deal with that financial impact? >> as a dispensary owner, i find this all the time. -- i encounter this all the time. i actually fight for my patients. i go to my cultivators and upond lower pricing based purchasing and passing the cost savings to the patient. it is a real issue, and, yes, you are a veteran woman, but i have seen minority populations with urban posttraumatic stress disorder. i have seen so many elements in the veterans population, period,

that the patients, the cte, the suicidal rate, the opioid issue i face every day, and having access to the medicine knowing that you cannot really pay for it, and you are taking it from somewhere else. that is one of the things that "women grow" is taking on as a challenge to address. give subsidies to family that suffers for that reason alone. there is not another way for me to answer that because we know that we do not have insurance -- >> my question was, what was the impact you are seeing in these families? >> most soccer moms are happy. [laughter] so, micro-dosing using a tincture, they might put it in a little water bottle and is just sip on it while their children are in soccer practice. i mean, the quality of life --

they are able to go into their children's lives and engage with them. so i have seen more bonding, seeing relationships don't. seen withhat i have veterans, that they are now able to have meaningful relationships with other people, because no, all of their anxiety is taken away. it allows that one-on-one type of interaction again. it is so beautiful when you embrace the cannabis community, because we are just about love, and it is an amazing thing. i have seen tremendous effects with my women. i think most women that i see, believe it or not, their major symptom is anxiety. once with a cbd product that releases that, they can engage in life again, and it is like a renewal, a second chance.

the flipside side of that is i get what we call -- i will make our patients are remorseful that they did not have access to this. that they wasted five years of their lives, and they feel it can they had this medicine, the course of their future would have been completely different. so i have to deal with one, administering the medicine, and, two, dealing with the repercussions, because they are upset now, because it did not have the access before. we try to keep it in perspective for them, but that remorse is really a genuine issue that we have to deal with. it is just a misfortune that we have to go through. but the success of the medicine has been so incredible that it is still overshadowing that remorse. >> thank you, guys. [applause]

there go thank you. -- >> thank you. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> i am experiencing technical difficulties. i'm sorry. i serve as the director of "d.c. vote" in we'd like statehood. [applause]

i'm thrilled to be here as part of the national cannabis policy festival summit. congress has blocked our medicinal marijuana laws, our ability to tax adult marijuana. and regulate adult use of marijuana. congress even went so far as to stop us from counting our own votes. with all fights for justice and equality, we call on our allies to lift us up and empower our efforts. it is my privilege to introduce a longtime advocate for statehood and an ally of d.c. vote. betsy cavendish serves as a general council to our mayor, muriel bowser. previously, she has held leadership roles within organizations vital to moving the cause of justice forward. as a member of the board for the alliance of justice and the nationalesident of the appleseed network, a network of centers of the public interest. she is a leader across the united states, and it is my

privilege to introduce to you betsy cavendish. [applause] ms. cavendish: thank you, and thank you, d.c. vote, and thank you to the organizers of the summit on 4/20. good morning, conferees and celebrants. i am glad to be with you today, subbing in for mayor muriel bowser, and welcome to washington. i hope everybody who is here who does not know this city of 700,000 persons will enjoy our neighborhoods, restaurants, parks, and cultural life. as we like to say, washington, dc is a great place to live, work and light. -- work and play. i would like to make three points in connection with today's event. first, to echo bo, everyone should be an advocate for d.c. statehood. how might you ask, does statehood have anything to do with cannabis? people from all over the country face a complicated legal environment where marijuana is a controlled substance, illegal

federally, but it may be legal under various state regimes under medical or recreational use. but here in washington, because we do not have statehood, congress places extra controls on our budgets and laws. that is, cannabis is extra complicated legally here in the district of columbia. congress has forbidden washington dc from further relaxing penalties for marijuana following our to criminalization law and initiative 71, which legalized home growing and home use of marijuana. our overlords have forbidden us from having a legal regime to regulate, tax and salop recreational marijuana safely and on our own terms. if washington dc were a state, the constitution would make federal intrusion unique to the district unconstitutional.

but some members of congress to puff of their conservative credentials, vote on such matters such as loosening our gun laws, increasing barriers to women's access to abortion services, curtailing the methods we used to beat the hiv-aids epidemic, interfering with death with dignity laws, and they have succeeded in barring washington d c from having a legal regime for recreational use of cannabis. so we are in a peculiar situation here legally. it is legal to grow a few marijuana plants at home in the district, and legal for adults to possess modest quantities of marijuana. you can have it, you can smoke it, you can grow it, but you cannot buy it. because washington dc is some members of congress favorite chew toy, we have a bigger black and gray market here than we would have if we were a state. please join us in calling for an end to this subordinate status

for washington, d.c. we, the voters of washington, d.c., voted overwhelmingly for statehood in 2016. the ball is in congress' court, and for this reason, i hope you support washington, d.c., in our request for statehood, among many others. you care about autonomy, and we do to. let's have some numbers here. today is 4/20, and our special number in washington is 51, for the 51st state. can i hear anybody say " 4! " with me?with >> 4! 20 451!" my second point relates to my first point. if we had a legal sales regime for recreational marijuana, the district could better support

cannabis user health and safety. no longer would a shady dealer cut marijuana with pcp or a fatal dose of fentanyl. advocates are fond of saying no one has died of cannabis, but that does not mean they have died of using it when it is mingled with far dangerous substances. many advocates tout the medical uses of marijuana, but any benefits can be offset if marijuana is grown with harmful pesticides or becomes moldy or fertilizers are ingested and inhaled. a tightly regulated regime would help users have confidence they are not inhaling cannabis with a side of mold or eating organic brownies tainted with fertilizers. my third point is that i hope proponents of legal cannabis will emphasize that when and where marijuana is legal to use, and the use should be responsible and fully informed about consequences, including legal consequences. drugged driving is dangerous. applicants in well-paying jobs in fields such as being an electrician will be rejected if

they have cannabinoids in their urine. in washington, be aware that much of the land here is federal and there are handfuls of law enforcement agents other than our mpd. so, thank you very much for inviting the mayor to speak. stay safe, and please support our quest for statehood. [applause] representative perlmutter: hi, i'm ed perlmutter, a congressman from colorado. i want to welcome you to washington, and thank you for letting the bridges make in your national cannabis policy summit. i wish i could be there with you today, but i want to thank you for organizing and gathering here to help us in congress gets the laws, the federal laws, to align with state laws. so many states are allowing for businesses like yours to properly operate in their

states, but the federal law is in conflict with that. particularly, we see that in the tax code and in banking laws. and i served on the financial services committee which involves the banks, credit unions, and i am working on a law that says if you are a business that is legitimate in your state, you ought to be able to have normal financial services, credit cards, payroll accounts, checking accounts, those kinds of normal business type accounts. but because of the federal law not being in sync with state laws, we see a lot of conflicts. we are trying to straighten that out. your visit to washington, your policy summit will help us get the laws so that they make some sense. i want to thank you for being here today. good luck at your policy conference.

and enjoy yourself while you are here in d.c. thank you very much. [applause] ms. rutter: good morning. my name is michelle rutter. i'm with the national cannabis industry association. founded in 2010, the national cannabis industry association seeks to represent a responsible and sustainable cannabis industry. ncia is leading the unified and coordinated campaign to ensure this emerging business industry is treated fairly under federal law. our priorities include reforming federal law to allow for cannabis-related business to access traditional financial services, such as banking, and alleviating tax penalties, which you're about to hear about from our panelists today. in addition, ncia seeks to connect, educate, and advocate for more than 1500 member businesses across the country. today, i'm happy to welcome john fasman to moderate our panel. john is a washington

correspondent for "the economist." he is also an author of two novels that has been translated into more than a dozen languages, and another book was a finalist for the new york public library's lines fiction award. please welcome john and our esteemed panelists to the stage. [applause] mr. fasman: good morning. my name is john fasman. i have to plug our paper before we start. we have supported drug

legalization since 1988 when it was considered a fringe, irresponsible position. i'm very glad to see the world is catching up. today's panel is cannabis and -- is about cannabis and tax fairness. this subject received good news lately. colorado senator cory gardner said that president trump promised to support congressional efforts to protect states that have legalized marijuana, and chuck schumer has announced he is proposing a bill to decriminalize cannabis at federal level. that puts him at odds with jeff sessions, one of america's last dedicated drug warriors, but we will talk about what this means for the industry. and i have a great panel to discuss this with me. we have michelle minton, from a libertarian think tank. we have john kagia, who focuses on the cannabis industry globally.

we have john hudak, deputy director for the center of public management at the brookings institution. we have neal levine, and we have grover norquist, the president of americans for tax reform. michelle, let's start with you. and let's start with a very basic question. most americans support legalization. why is it not yet legal? ms. minton: well, what it comes down to is incentive. when you are asked if you support drug legalization, over 50% will say yes when it comes to recreational. about 80% say when it comes to medical. few of them are willing to go to a representative saying i will not vote to you if you do not legalize marijuana. however, there are a small minority of people in the republican side who have a lot of money who will say i will not fund you if you support marijuana legalization.

so, it's easier for politicians to keep their heads down, but my numbers -- there are at least 50 people in the house who have already voted for some kind of marijuana innovation bill. -- marijuana legalization bill. there are another 25 or so who have voted in a way that makes them think some kind of bill they would be likely to vote for, and there are an unknown number of people who are quietly pro marijuana. in particular on the republican side, there are a lot of republicans who say they believe in state's rights, but there those types of people like paul ryan who should support descheduling marijuana. taking it out of the controlled substances act. paul ryan has been pretty anti-marijuana legalization. however, he has started to soften a little bit. the chuck schumer bill has come up.

it's likely he will go on with the tide. in the last year, we have seen so many bills that makes me think the pressure is starting to shift, the incentives are starting to shift, but it is still easier for a politician to keep their head down on an issue until it becomes an election problem. mr. fasman: if you were betting, and the cory gardner bill, chuck schumer bill came to the house and senate floor, would they pass? i should ask, what are the chances they could go to the floor? and what are the chances of they would pass? ms. minton: schumer's bill, good chance. gardner's bill, less of a chance. leadership has for the most part taken a pretty anti-pro-marijuana position. you also have mitch mcconnell, who just introduced last week a hemp legalization bill, and pelosi said that she might eventually consider legalization of marijuana. her voting has been pretty good. she voted to make it legal for

veterans, for rohrbacher farms, which stopped the department for going after the states where it is legal. i think the schumer bill has a good chance, and the gardner bill has gotten a lot of support. i think it has slightly less of a chance because of his rank. but they both have a good shot. mr. fasman: marijuana is still illegal at the federal level. are we surprised we have not seen more federal marijuana prosecutions? i imagine a sort of an ambitious young d.a. in denver, seattle, who wants to impress jeff sessions. why have we not had someone go after someone on the federal level? ms. minton: it is high-stakes for jeff sessions. up until last year, we had rohrabacher handicapping us. them from going after legal marijuana. when they start going after it if that happens, they open the , door for the courts to considering this. it also puts more pressure on

politicians to finally do something. if the states start legalizing it and the federal government and the department of justice do not interfere, voters, the 60% or 80% you say it wants to be legal are fairly content. if the justice department starts prosecuting mom-and-pop shops, people get angry and it moves up on their hierarchy of important issues when they go to vote. mr. fasman: if we were to see a crackdown on the business, you think there would be a push toward full legalization? ms. minton: and i think sessions understands that. he is playing on the idea that what he really wants to do is not so much throw people in jail, although he definitely wants to throw people in jail, he always wants to do that, but what he wants is to take their money also. what he really wants is to create a killing effect in the states. he wants to stop the progress and the other states by threatening to prosecute state legislatures that are often very hesitant to do anything when

they don't know what the federal government is going to do. they think we will legalize it and we will have to deal with all these prosecutions. maybe we should hang back and wait until we have clarification from the federal government. so i think that's what he is trying to bully these states not moving forward into the a legalization effort. mr. fasman: last week you mentioned there was a sports betting case for the supreme court that could have ramifications for the cannabis business. what is the case and what are the ramifications? ms. minton: now it is murphy vs. ncaa, the case is new jersey wants to legalize cannabis. -- legalize a sports gambling. there is a federal law that's been around since 1992 that says if you didn't have a law then you can't do it now ever. new jersey says that is now unconstitutional. federal government cannot tell state legislatures what to do. they can tell us individuals,

they can say, marijuana is illegal, and states should not be able to legalize it because of the supremacy clause. but that's not what the gambling law did. it specifically is addressed at the state legislature. this is one of those things where should new jersey win, the federal government would not tell states what to do. it would bolster the case for a legalization of marijuana. it would not be a clincher, but it would definitely raise the profile of the idea of federalism. mr. fasman: 280e, to give the audience a brief explanation, what does it do and why is it there? the tax law, the law forbidding -- the law that bars marijuana businesses from claiming tax deductions? ms. minton: that is what you are going to have to ask the tax experts. mr. fasman: tell me where the sports betting case is now. is it before the supreme court?

ms. minton: the court heard arguments in december. i was there. a surprising number of justices seemed sympathetic to new jersey and very aggressive toward the the federal government because heard initor general front of the government and they did not seem to buy his argument. we are waiting. any day we could get a decision, any day up until june 25. mr. fasman: john, let's turn to you. we have a better picture of the landscape. tell us about cannabis consumption. what are the trend lines? what are the demand lines you are seeing? >> the three broadly speaking trends that are converging and why we're are we are seeing this momentum behind cannabis, support for legalization. nationally, 64% of americans now support adult use or recreational use, between 80 to 90% support medical authorization. speaking, they say

this is one of the fastest evolving social issues, moving more quickly than gay marriage. if you recall five or six years ago that gay marriage would be contentious and divisive issue, it sort of became mainstream and normalized. we see cannabis moving more quickly than that. the second is that not only a support for legalization growing, but the number of cannabis users and consumers is growing very quickly. currently, at least based on the government's most recent national survey and drug use, 22.4 million americans, one in 10 americans consumes cannabis regularly. six percent since 2009. regular cannabis consumers come

,- consumers, your neighbors your coworkers, your friends. and then third is, in the legal markets, cannabis businesses is selling an extraordinarily large volume of cannabis. last year, we estimate national sales top $8 billion. 2018, we are forecasting sales will reach $12 billion. by 2020, that goes up to $17 billion. by 2025, in states that are just currently legal, you are looking at a $25 billion market. that doesn't include any new states being sold. that is just sales to medical patients and recreational consumers. it's a huge market, and it is a huge market that is not creating new cannabis consumers. it's just moving them into the

legal market. i just looked at the statistics last night. since 2011, cannabis else at our borders have fallen to 800,000 pounds as the legal markets have stood up domestically and americans have stopped and dramatically turned away from cannabis being imported. so you are seeing this recognition that when cannabis is legal, most consumers -- as long as the pricing is right -- would prefer to get it through legal channels because you get better quality and more options. you get a good selection of portfolio products. and it feels like a regular, commercial activity. it feels like purchasing anything else you would in the consumer economy. and to your point about would happen if enforcement and fits were to enforce it, we suspect

that if in communities people have access to equal cannabis -- getting that taken away well blessed a starter reduction in the having them in the first place. once you have a chance to not feel like a criminal if you are a cannabis consumer -- and yet large portion of americans consuming it legally, by legalizing it, you take away the criminal element. most people are not going to want to go back to that black market, which is why the push back is an aggressive type of action and would be so strong. >> you mentioned the number growing. among who is a growing faster? is a growing among suburban americans? >> good question. a couple of ways to think about it. historically men have consumed cannabis twice more than women -- historically you have seen

much greater cannabis use among much younger age groups, under 35 consume cannabis twice the over 55.hose but you're seeing greater rates thedoption amongst all populations. one of the reasons is because of the product forms of cannabis that is available. if cannabis is legalized -- in the pre-legal markets, a majority of smokers who smoke and joints or pipes, they have investment in infrastructure to develop new products forms. the quality of edibles, you have products that take away the consumption element of smoking.

so, with increased r&d going into product forms, and the decriminalization, markets yet decriminalization of than legal markets, you have communities who say i do not have to smoke it, i can apply a lotion to treat my arthritis. being much more willing to entertain it, particularly as health care costs are skyrocketing and people are looking for alternatives. you mentioned in nos amount of legal cannabis. can you generalize about what states are doing with the tax revenue? >> absolutely. so you have states like colorado, who spent the first $40 million of its tax revenue towards school construction. in total, it's spending over 60 -- $60 million in education and general. and that's compelling when you think about the number of protests that have been held in

places like west virginia, because there's not enough money to pay teachers and pay them raises. there's a lot of capital invested in health and health-related programs, from drug abuse treatment programs, to general holistic health of our communities. and then a number of states are allocating a lot these revenues towards the general fund. towards the totality of their state budget to fill in some gaps. and the numbers are significant. since 2014, colorado has made nearly $750 million in cannabis taxes. last year, it made a quarter of a billion dollars alone. these are significant numbers for state budgets at a time when states are increasingly squeezed on the revenues. >> when we see these initiatives go forth at the state level, is it sold as a tax benefit policy and liberty issue?

>> that's certainly been one of the important arguments. $40 million cause in colorado is one of the ways to get them to buy into the bill. tax revenues has really been one of the ways in which this has been sold. but we think social justice is another critical part of it. the decriminalization and recognition of the social equity in which cannabis prohibition has been enforced. when you are four times more likely to get arrested for cannabis uses when you are black -- even though cannabis consumption rates are almost identical between blacks and whites. addressing that inequity has been an important aspect of this debate. >> john, let's turn to you. this industry has grown despite significant tax efforts. 280e and whatut

that has done. talk about the federal bank restrictions. 280e and the internal revenue code that in its most basic terms says that if you are engaging in activity that is illegal in the context of drugs, you are not entitled to the type business deduction that you would traditionally be eligible for. there's this irony in american policy that is, no matter what illegal activity you are engaging in, whether you are a cannabis business in colorado, you are the mafia, you are running a child prostitution ring, you are supposed to pay your federal taxes. it may be shocking that most child sex ring leaders do not pay federal taxes, but if they were willing to go to the irs with a bag of cash from a bunch of perverts, they would pay their taxes, but they would not

get the types of deductions of it for instance, if they wanted to build an addition to the house they are running a child sex ring out of. the federal government would say no, you're not entitled to deductions. i hope there is no one in this room who is thinking, those poor pedophiles. that's terrible tax policy. but for legal cannabis business, it's a serious issue, especially at the beginning, the inception of a business when you have joined us capital needs. you also have tremendous tax burdens. the business is usually sinking money into thinking they will have the ability to deduct that come tax time. every other legal business in the united states has access to those benefits. cannabis businesses don't. people out there who are fearful of big marijuana, it is a lot easier for a large marijuana firm to absorb those costs then it is for a mom and pop for them

to absorb those costs. section 280e decreases this dynamic where businesses are getting hurt constantly. patients aren't customers are constantly, why? because when you cannot do that, you are paying the price at the point-of-sale. and so it raises prices across the industry. not because of anything the industry wants to do, but because of what the industry can't do, and that has effects on the ability to displace the black market and has white -- has a wide reaching effects across the industry and country. your question about banking restrictions, this gets tied in. the first panel of the they talk about how difficult it is to pay taxes when you are a cannabis business. state treasurer's do not like you coming in with a big bag of cash or a pallet of cash for some companies in order to pay your taxes.

in part, when a business does not have access to banking because of a treasury and federal reserve, and other regulations, they have to become a cash only business. the irony in all of this, and this is a real killer for me -- is that this all exists because of fears about money laundering. because of anti-money laundering policies in the united states. there is no bigger facilitator of money laundering and tax cheating than the united states government, because of the regulation that comes out of fdic, treasuries, and a variety of places, including the federal reserve. if you are cash only, if you are forced to be cash only, it is much easier for you to skip on taxes, and much easier for you to launder money. while most of the industry is full of good actors who are well intentioned and want to be honest, genuine brokers and business owners, there are bad people in this industry to, and every day cannabis businesses do

not have access to banking is another day those bad players in the industry are going to outwit and outsmart people in this industry and the government, and do a lot of terrible things with the money they can stash. [applause] >> how did this happen? tell us how public policy and marijuana has evolved. >> public policy in marijuana has evolved in dramatic and interesting ways. and as a self plug, if you would like to read about it, you can buy my book, available on amazon. [laughter] but it has been something -- i will not go through the whole arc of history, but you go through this period american history where the british crown required land owners to grow hemp at the time. it was fairly common in the 1800s, and then suddenly, this may come as a shock, the federal government realized they can racialized this policy, first to

disenfranchise and turn white americans against mexican americans coming across the border. boy, how times have changed, huh? [laughter] marijuana, which sounded exotic and dangerous, turned to another community, and in the was the jazz movement. it wasn't by accident that the jazz movement tended to exist in new orleans and chicago and harlem. and so this now became something the government could use to turn white americans against black americans. and then it was beatniks in the 1950's and hippies in the 1960's. and then when richard nixon became president it was the jews were using marijuana. he was on tape saying that. this became a product that was made illegal, first informally, then formally.

not because of harms, not because of science, not because of our understandings of public health, but because of politics and racism and the ability to divide and the ability to get votes. where we are at now is a position where states are saying no to this. legislators at the federal level are saying no to this because they understand the history and they understand the substance, and they are looking at the landscape and saying, alcohol kills more people than cannabis. nicotine kills a hell of a lot more people than cannabis. [applause] we as states, we as individuals can probably make better choices about this drug then a crazy man named harry and slinger did at the bureau of narcotics the 1930's. >> talk more about him and tell us what he did. >> he cut his teeth in the era of prohibition, and he was ap or -- a peer of j edgar hoover.

in fact, he ran the bureau of narcotics are almost the same amount of time as j edgar hoover ran the fbi. and he was a teetotaler. he was in about our mission is to develop cannabis to be the product that he could sell -- you could say, to the american public is something that is a problem. you see him writing in newspapers and academic befores, testifying congress about all the terrible things that cannabis does, and this should seem familiar to any cannabis users because you expressed the same problems. you've committed rapes and murders, you have gone psychotic. for the white women in the audience, you have done the terrible thing of having sex with a man of color, if you used cannabis. these are things this meant literally sent to congress, in newspapers. it's good white america and people about what it meant to -- it scared white america and people about what it meant to the fabric of society.

he was a master manipulator who turned this nation against a drug that had been part of society since before the founding. >> alright, thank you. neil, we haven't had a business view. you are out there in the trenches. how does 280 affect you? >> not to disagree with john, who i respect greatly, but local taxes can be passed on, but 280 cannot. when you pay a rate of 80% or more, mom and pops -- there is no way for them to make anything if they are paying taxes. maybe if you run a smart business and you are able to scale and pull single-digit percentages out of business, but not enough to properly skill and not enough to reinvest into your business. it's an industry killer. it's there on purpose -- the federal government is using it to keep the industry small and poor. going back to the history of how 280e began is actually an

industrious regular in minneapolis who was arrested. he went for some standard is us for his cocaine, and methamphetamine business and he won in tax court. so congress passed 280 e, may not take any standard business the actions. -- business reductions outside of goods sold -- business deductions out of goods sold. they never envisioned an industry like ours existing in the early 1980's when that passed. this law, 280e, has been targeted since california passed proposition 215. this is a bipartisan issue, the clinton administration -- and those originally their policy to use 280 e that the struggle the industry into the grave. they slowed it down, but they haven't strangled us. >> what about regulations around

banking? would you like to do that you can't do? >> we would like to use the bank. [laughter] [applause] can you use local banks, credit unions? >> this patchwork. going back to -- it is patchwork. going back to what you were saying, i have been working send -- closely with senator gardner on working on tax policy and banking. this was historic news that came out last friday. it is huge projects -- progress regardless of how this goes forward. john was correct in saying there is a ton of work to do to get legislation through the senate and the house, and get us into a position where we wait -- we to significant way change federal law.

as an industry -- the new fund is joining forces with the american trade association for cannabis and 10 and will form a new cannabis trade federation and expected resources to lobby the fight and try to pass this legislation and normalize the industry once and for all. [applause] >> tell us about the new fund, what are its goals? >> coming out of the 2016 elections, we formed because we saw a potential opportunity with comprehensive tax reform. we have a very bad tax issue, so we thought as part of that package that it was a coin flip shot, and we took a shot because it was the best shot we ever had to fix this horrible tax problem. we didn't get into copyists of -- into comprehensive tax reform, but we are able to make a tremendous amount of progress on the brinkoised of real federal change. it took a lot of work and a lot of resources and we are ready to , go. >> tell us about the conversations you have on the the sale.

-- on the hill. how do they differ depending on the political leaders that you are talking to and how you frame the issue? >> it is interesting. it is not really a party issue, it is more of an age issue. you would be hard-pressed to find a republican on the hill under the age of 40 who is against us. i think when you take a look at this overall -- this is a bipartisan issue. it is a social justice issue. it is a federalism issue. it is across the board, a massive confiscation of wealth and personal rights. because of the state conflict, because the federal government is executing policies that is not allowed states to be the laboratories of democracy, we have nine states that opted for prohibition entirely, we have 30 states that have marijuana laws on the books. the toothpaste is out of the tube. this is only going one way. the federal government should step back and allow states to be laboratories of democracy.

the sky is not falling. we are generating tons of tax revenue in states that have passed laws. opioid deaths are declining. the experiment is working and it should continue, and the federal government should get out of the way. were announcer: 280-e presented, what with the growth look like? >> it would be monumental. is aasically, 280-e massive confiscation of wealth. >> who are cannabis's best friends on the hill? >> there are a lot of people in the press recently. i don't want to leave anybody out. >> other than people from states reppo legal up -- from states who have legalized it, who are the most productive? >> we have had tons of productive conversations.

but i'm not going to do it. [laughter] >> i am going to ask you the same thing i asked michelle. if the gardener bill or schumer bill came to the floor, can we expect it to pass? >> is this a federal issue or a prohibition issue? >> it is both, and i think it is important that people look at it. there are different people who side. it on your and there are others who have not thought of it as an issue, but it has been approached that way. instead of waiting until you had 218 house members and 60 senators, which is a long wait, and we had not gotten close to majorities in the house that said if there hadn't and successes in the state, there is a fear of the unknown. havehing that helps, i worked on criminal justice reform issues, and the fact that texas did it first, then other states go and nobody lost an

election in texas. then they just did it. georgia and the one place it came up in a primary was one guy who is very conservative who voted for criminal justice reform. he was attacked by someone who was more conservative because he was taking too much credit. not that he was wrong. see that an issue is safe politically, and also safe -- if there were people piling up cars in denver, you would go, whoa, let's see what that is. but that is not happening. easier it becomes much when other states do it, but also for the federal government to say the concerns people have -- we recognize the concerns people have are not what we thought they might be, and your secret friends become not secret friends. i was always on your side on

this issue. >the challenges, and that is where you get to 280-e, that is the law that says if you are selling the want to -- selling marijuana in a state that is legal, the federal law says you cannot take ordinary business deductions. paying your staff, rent, buying marijuana. nothing. the recent tax cut has helped the industry because it used to be a 35% excise tax. not on your profits, but a 35% of every dollar of sales. excise tax. that is pretty rough. then you have to add to that, you have to hire people and pay rent. that is only 21% excise taxes. for pastors, it is 37% down to 20%. it is a little less painful. in the point of fact, if you care about federalism, if you care about the idea we have 50

states and they should compete with each other to provide the best government, the lowest cost and change the governments if they are not doing very well, millions of people move every year and you can see where people move into and out of. federalism allows states to decide what works, what doesn't. but the federal government, through 280-e, interferes with federalism. ok colorado, you've got this, but we have this massive punitive tax, an excise tax rather than a profit tax that makes it difficult. when you talk to an audience about it, who may not have an interest in or not care one way or another or be hostile toward marijuana, how would you feel if school choice, a scholarship or faced faced -- or voucher a 35% excise tax? we don'ters union said

like that and we will have this massive income tax. income, scholarship. you would in fact cripple, damage the ability to have 50 states. you want 50 states to do different things. some work and some don't. nobody's life is a complete failure. some states serve as bad examples. on a given issue, don't do that. over here, this is really working. there are a number of ways to do anything wrong. one of my least favorite is in nevada. marijuana to want be regulated like liquor, wine,'s, spirits. that is the worst way to regulate anything. maximize thew to number of people who extract monopoly from the system. >> i will unpack this for the

audience. >> when we ended last time on states, liquor, wine, can decide how it is produced, marketed, and you are allowed to have three tiers. you have the store, the wholesaler, and these guys all manage liquor sales. this is why you cannot get a beer on sunday afternoon. they have all sort of rules that nobody else would put up with, with any other product. the guys in nevada who run the wholesale distributors said why don't we run marijuana just like we do spirits and run it through us so we get to have a monopoly on the distribution? unfortunately, they put a few thousand bucks into the campaign and were able to write the rules. that past, and it is unfortunate. ohio, there were five guys who said, we will legalize

marijuana, but you have to buy it from our land. that was laughed out of court. you have to watch out for people trying to write special interests into the state constitution as you are writing it. washington state runs it too much like the post office instead of allowing lots of private-sector competitors. but again, you look at that and say, don't do that, and move that way. there are some very -- i would stay away from treating this the way we treat spirits and wine and beer. that is a bad model. slightly better than prohibition, but it is not where you want to get stuck. >> who does it well? been --ado i think has interesting that the guys -- usually the third adapter gets it right. the first two guys, don't do that, now we know we are doing

-- what we are doing. colorado > has the maximum out f competition? >> and they promise there will be one level of tax. and that is a dirty trick because they said they were not going to do that. you always have to keep an eye on the government because they will tax everything. we have a few minutes left, and i would like to open it to questions. yes, ma'am? >> hi. i am wondering what the tax implications are for people who get legal advice or help with marketing? how are those businesses able to navigate the tax? would they be able to put money in banks? >> if you are not trafficking in

cannabis, 280-e does not apply. >> other questions? >> [indiscernible] >> hang on, i think there is a mic coming to you. >> that will work better. thank you. i am a libertarian running for congress and district four in maryland. i am curious about the implications of say we were not able to get schumer's bill through, for example. what are the repercussions -- not the repercussions, able to get but the results of trying to get rid of 280-e by itself if we were not able to do more of what we want to do in other areas? for anybody. >> out of what gardner negotiated with trump, the way they are doing it, you would end up with 280-e side tracked and

the ability to bank restored because you take marijuana off the prohibitive list. so there is a great deal of respect. he put a hold on every single appointment, nomination in the justice department, which got the attention of the number one appointment of modernizing the approach towards marijuana and took him out of the debate and went directly to discuss things with trump. we had an agreement that should move forward. it solves those two problems. legislation goes further and saw some other challenges. >> one of the reasons why addressing this 280-e issue is becoming more urgent is because of the dynamics. if you look at colorado as an

example, and colorado is a well-regulated market, the average also prices by this date legislature from cultivators -- the average price per pound has fallen from $2000 a pound to $1000 a pound in three years. it was one thing when your margins were very high and when market first launched that you could take on, you could there -- you could bear that 80% tax and skim a little off the top and get a little out of the exhaust pipe. once you hit $1000 a pound, a lot of folks were getting squeezed out. it is much less tenable to survive under that environment of $1000 a pound when a lot of companies have said to break even point at $1000 a pound. you add on top of that breaking point and you have this 80% -- 75% federal tax, and if this does not get addressed soon, you will see a lot of small and

medium-sized operators struggle to make it to the next couple of growing cycles. >> can i answer that quickly? i think one of the benefits of chuck schumer's bill, if you are a cannabis advocate is not a chance of passage. it is not going to pass this congress, period. sessions will not let it out of the rules committee were passed it out of thet rules committee, it will not pass congress. here is what it does, it signals to other senate democratic colleagues and other house democratic colleagues, i am the strongest leader in this party right now. you have cover. this is an ok issue for you. in discussing it, what did he say? i looked at the numbers, i looked at the polling. this is a no-brainer. i am paraphrasing. that is essentially what he did. that is a benefit moving forward. chuck schumer's not looking at his bill at this congress but the next congress, where maybe

the house is controlled by democrats. it will be controlled by a different speaker in the next congress, we know that's. -- we know that. perhaps there is a new rules committee chair, etc., etc. that can move the needle a little bit and that is part of the game. in terms of 280-e, in my conversations with legislators and their staff, and brookings does not lobby these, they are just conversations, that is an issue they get. talk to an old white man, look up the medical research, or let me discuss out marijuana -- discuss how marijuana actually works. they do not know anything about this but they know about business and taxes. they understand the interaction of the two. in my conversations, they get this more than other issues in the space. >> i went to bet you want a -- on a dinner we will get it through this congress. [laughter] >> other questions? yes, right there. >> hello. andrew santo.

i was wondering how much support the industry is getting from banks and lenders and regulatory institutions that can not necessarily support it legally yet? how much support are you expecting when federal changes? >> i think you will see a lot with chambers of commerce because they recognize this as what they are, small businesses. either you have lawyers who cannot in certain states work with cannabis businesses because they are professional organizations or engaging in illicit activities. once the federal law goes away, you will start to see in certain areas, especially those professional organizations, a quick turns towards supporting the organization. the rest of the country will come slower. john mentioned as they see that potheads are not cheech and chong, they are nancy down the street or a coworker i work with that shows up with that 9:00 a.m., and they leave at 5:00.

>> we have time for one more. right there. let's get you a microphone. >> how are you? with the states that have already federally or excuse me, recreationally passed cannabis and medically, how do we prevent monopolies from happening across the united states from the states that have already had it happen? >> by not letting the government get in the way of entry. the only monopolies we had in the country are the ones the government created. at&t had to compete with other phone companies until they got a law passed that telephones are a natural monopoly. it is natural they did not have one until they got the law. it is a natural monopoly. post office does fairly well against all competitors on first class mail because there are not any. you go to jail if you try to do that. not so on parcels. just get the government out of

-- the more they allowed limits, like occupational licensing, you do not want the government telling people they cannot go into a business or limiting it or putting in these high barriers, taxes being high barriers to entry. take those taxes down and get the regulatory barrier to entry down. then you just don't end up with that problem because there is so much index that people who come in and start and stop, whenever you try to fix things by having so many roles, the guys who are already in decide to use the rules as a lot to keep others -- as a law to keep others out, and then you end up with monopolies or quasi monopolies. withover really hit on it the alcohol industry. >> do not do that. >> i have been hearing from this for about seven years that business is declining in the large business -- was large beer

business. until the last 10 years or so, you saw huge monopolies and -- in beer. it was mostly by three companies. the reason is because each of the states decided to go with the distributors and said, you produce beer, you sell it at retail, and you cannot talk to each other. you have to go through this third person, this distributor, who gave them a lot of money because they control the entire industry. and it allowed them to make a lot of money and pay politicians and give them donations, and keep the laws the way they are and keep competitors locked into certain areas. that is something we do not want to see that with marijuana happening, so hopefully marijuana will learn a lesson when they see surrounding states doing better and changing their lies. -- and changing their laws. >> i have the evil flashing lights, please join me in thanking this panel. [applause]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] chatting] >> good afternoon. my name is michelle young and i am pleased to be here today on behalf of the minority cannabis business association, the only nationwide trade organization fighting for the economic empowerment of minority owned

businesses in the cannabis industry. the war on drugs is a racist war. it continues to disproportionately impact communities of color, devastating entire generations and families. here, in the district of columbia, prior to legalization, despite equal rights of -- rates rates -- equal marijuana use across all races, african-americans were eight times more likely to be stopped, harassed, and arrested for marijuana possession than their white neighbors. long before the ncba was founded, organizations like the naacp laid the groundwork toward what we are working to today. 10 years ago at the age of 35, our keynote speaker was elected as the youngest ever president and ceo of the naacp. today, he is running for governor of the state of

maryland. a state where despite one of the largest african-american populations in the united states, no entrepreneurs a color -- of color received licenses for medical marijuana cultivation. our speaker once said, we do not owe allegiance to any candidates because they share our party or our color, but because they share our principles and our conscience. i would like to borrow those words and caution us today. we do not owe allegiance to any simply because they share our plant or color, but because they share our principles and our conscience. with that, it is my distinct honor to welcome to the stage civil rights activist, scholar, and 2018 element gubernatorial candidate, mr. benjamin t. jelis. [applause]

>> good afternoon. i think it is afternoon. [laughter] sinceaven't seen the sun i got here early this morning. it is great to begin with you. i am the former national president of the naacp and a candidate for governor of maryland. i want to thank the host this morning, the host of the reception for me, miss linda green, and others. i also want to thank caroline phillips and the national cannabis festival for pulling the event together and having me as keynote speaker. i want to talk today about what we have all lived through and how we get to a better place. the war on drugs has failed us and we can do much better as a country. i remember a day when i was in college, it was my friend's 21st birthday party and around a

-- a round of toasts went up. the first was to our friend for turning 21 and the next, before glass evene the crossed line, it turned into libations of memory for all of our friends who had been shot, killed, sent to prison before we even got to college. and then trying to turn the mood around, someone toasted the fact that one more of us, one more young men of color in america had survived to 21. i could not raise my glass on that last toast. the emotion cut me like a knife, the notion that somebody thought it was an achievement for a member of any group in this, the world's greatest democracy, to merely breathe past their 21st birthday.

it sent me reeling. i did not sleep for days. ultimately, i did what i am so blessed to be able to do. my grandma is a 101-year-old social worker. she is a third-generation member of the naacp. she is the grillo in our family -- she carries 200 years of stores with her, those inherited from her grandparents, born slaves, and all she has witnessed. and i went to my grandma's table and i said grandma, what went , wrong? you told me we were the children of the dream and we would need -- we would be the first generation to be judged purely based on our character, not on our skin color or our gender, or what public housing projects our family comes out of.

like my mom grew up in a housing project the first half of her childhood. and grandma, you know, you said all we had to do was keep our nose clean and walk a straight line, and everything with the -- everything would be ok. you know, grandma, it has worked ok for me, but i don't think it has worked well for most of my generation because we had come of age in time to find ourselves the most incarcerated people on the planet. by that, i mean americans of all colors. 25% of the world's prisoners, 5% of the world's people, we have the most brown and black people incarcerated and the most white white ablearcerated on the planet. let's not pretend this is an issue that does not affect all of us. [applause] and my group in particular, young black men, the most murdered in the country. grandma, what went wrong?

she looked at me and she said, baby, it is sad but it is simple. we got what we fought for but we lost what we had. we got the right to live in any community we could afford to live in. black peopleand walked in by the thousands, acres every month, every week, every decade, from the start of world war ii until the end of the cold war, and has only slow down in recent decades because there isn't much more land left to lose. we got the right to be police officers. my grandfather served as a probation officer in baltimore for three decades. but we lost the right to live in safe communities. we got the right to send our kids to any school in town. we lost the right to assume they

would be loved or welcomed the way my grandmother had been on my mom had been at the public schools and in the public housing sector she grew up in during segregation. you know, i -- my grandmother's comments set me deep inside myself trying to figure out what had went wrong. i realized that for four generations, from my grandmother's parents being born slaves all the way through, we have been members of the naacp, we fought segregation, and we understood it was everyone's obligation to fight for freedom, and we had done better. than he got to my generation and it was optional. go protest if you want, but we have killed all the big dragons. you just need to reap what we have sown. and you don't need to fight anything. while things have stopped getting better and they had gone from worst to worse. i committed that night i would figure out what i would fight for. my grandmother made it clear she did not think my generation knew what it was fighting for or

understood what had been gained for us. i wrote down on a sheet of paper all the things that made me upset about the state of my country, my community, my county, my state, and i ended up be pretty good. i was like, i can only fight for one and a half to be focused on something. i flipped it over. my grandfather always said to not let the perfect get in the way of the good. the all good so i wrote them all down and spend the sheep around and drew a circle. whatever is in the circle, that is what i will fight for. and it said injustice in the justice system, and i had no idea to do that. at least i did not have to worry about all the other thing. when you commit yourself to really winning a battle. when you say this is the one thing i am going to achieve, a

little light goes on inside of you. one day you might be preaching and you say, that sister or brother is on fire but at first, it is like the old negro spiritual this little light of mine. i'm sure which appears have experienced this. your dream this not make sense to anybody else but you can see the next step, so i kept following it. eventually, that might got brighter, it empowered me to play a role in abolishing the death penalty in six states, for juveniles completely. working with the governor of georgia to shrink his prison system, down now more than 25% in the last three years. [applause] and i was preparing to run for governor, it was clear i would rollout a criminal justice

reform strategy. i am the only person in the history of maryland that anybody can find who is run for governor and put out a strategy to shrink our prisons. it was clear with my family rooted where the uprisings occurred in the wake of freddie gray, killing, murder, that would put something out there policing, and it wasn't clear just how far i was going to go, whether or not i would call for the legalization of cannabis. but i believe it is important to listen before you lead. i went out there and i listened. i listened to the handy man who was driving me to the airport, who -- brilliant man, deacon in his church, approaching 60 years old, handyman, and i said, you are so brilliant. and you read your church, why are you working as a handyman? he said, i spent most of my life working in hospitals and when

ever the chains merge, they find when i was 22 years old, a police officer arrested me for having one marijuana seed in my vicinity. he said it was in an ashtray at my friend's house but the officer saw it and thought it must be mine. i cannot get it off of my records and they fire me every time a new company buys the chain i working for. i was tired of the indignity so i work as a handyman. i listened to the police officers across baltimore. one of the researchers on our team is a former lieutenant, 15 years on the force, and to go out and listen to your peers and tell them what is going on with the killings in our city because they were spiraling out of control. he came back and said, there are two things that they could agree on, one, nobody was sure why they were spiraling so high the

last years. the three years are starting to level off, but they were two and it was out of control. but the agreed in the last 10 years, half the killings appear to have been one set of marijuana dealers killing another set of marijuana dealers. he said they all agreed. was it from neighborhoods? he said, no, it was across the state. it made sense. i studied criminology. well, violence and the drug trade is often about territory. and when a drug is easy to source, your territory gets infringement. and so when i rolled out my criminal justice strategy, i called for the full legalization of cannabis in maryland for adult use. [applause]

if we want to stop the bloodshed being deregulated by bullets, we have to regulate it by law. if we want to make sure that men like that church deacon are not relegated to being a handyman, there we have to expunge people's records . once we legalize it, we should not carry on the books that you have been convicted of something that is now legal. we had to learn from d.c. and learn the cultivation for small personal views, some people do not have to buy from corporations and eventually tax the process. we have to learn from colorado that unless you are willing to reform the police and how it is done simultaneously, the

disparities in enforcement will continue. [applause] and we have to have the courage to learn from maryland own experience and say it is time to take the bias out of how these licenses are issued. [applause] and it is time to get serious about making sure that the communities that have been most negatively impacted by the war on drugs are treated fairly. i do not just believe we should have the inclusive in who gets licenses to own, distribute, cultivate. i think we should have what is known as micro zip code targeting as far as work preferences. to say, if you come from neighborhoods at the epicenter of the war on drugs, you qualify to be an employee and we will give you a leg up in the process. because this cannot simply be a case of the rich get richer. [applause]

i am proud to be one of the leading candidates in the race for governor in maryland. if you are in maryland, i hope to earn your vote. we have never seen what it is like to have a civil rights leader become governor in any state. [applause] and i hope to have the opportunity to show you just how transformative that will be. thank you and god bless. [applause]

>> hello. i am an associate at the drug policy alliance is in d.c. i work with advanced drug policies and policies that repair the generational harm that black and brown communities have faced due to the war on drugs. marijuana legalization of and on the federal level is on -- across states the horizons. how do we reconcile the way that they use, possession and sale of this plant? a plant that many of us know personally as a healing agent? how do you reconcile that it has served as a tool of violence against back and brown communities, families and individuals? we only have a second to do so but as i introduce the next panel and moderator, we hope that the lives lost because of

this relentless in force of marijuana prohibition ends. to fail to act is a question the next panel poses. to call for marijuana legalization without a conversation about dismantling the criminal justice system, without a conversation on policing and reparations, is immoral. i am thrilled to hear the group of experts unpack what we need to hear as we embrace this growing industry. with that, it is my pleasure to introduce cj ciaramella -- can cannabis heal our broken criminal justice system? [applause]

>> we have a really great panel. i am c.j. ciaramella, i am a reporter for criminal justice in reason magazine. i will let everyone go down the line to introduce themselves and learn a little about them. >> my name is niambe, the daughter of peter mcintosh, so also the sister of jawara mcintosh. all of us have heard communities that have been affected this war on drugs. when i think of my brother's story, it is important to know what that looks like and what it felt like for my family. when my brother was arrested in new jersey, in 2013 on father's day weekend, we got a call and

he was arrested. i thought this would pass. it was not until six months later when he had his first hearing in court, so he sat in jail with other inmates and had to stay there for six months before we knew what he was charged for. during that time, we showed up with my family, my mom, and saw him shackled into a room and correctional officers, very rude to families and to the inmates. that is when we heard the prosecution say that, would you accept a 20 year plea? it was mind blowing to think, wow, that is when it was real.

that is when it's real that this is what is happening in communities. three months later he finally was able to make bail. it was not until, even at that point -- he went back-and-forth to new jersey for three years, pretrial, going back and forth when we lived in boston. finally accepted a plea, wanting to get this behind him. he accepted it in december of 2016. in january of 2017 he turned himself in and went back to jail. he was expected to only serve six months. a month and a half in he was brutally attacked by another inmate in jail and suffered a severe brain injury.

to this day he is still in the hospital. unable to communicate for himself, unable to do anything for himself. he was an advocate for cannabis. he was heavily spiritual, and musician as well. he was a father of four children. when you look at how families and what that means when you hear that phrase that is being thrown out throughout this panel, i want you to understand when you hear about that incarcerated population, it is more than we can imagine. it is worse than what we think. understanding how to change policy to affect these families in a positive manner and bring these families out of this devastation. we have to think a lot more critically about how to support

other people in this situation. [applause] >> i am clark neilly, the head of the criminal justice department at the cato institute. before that i was with the libertarian public interest law firm called the institute for litigated cases for almost 20 years. it is important to understand what we have done to the constitution and to the institution of our criminal justice system by enforcing marijuana laws. when you authorize the government to do violence to people, when you authorize the government to put people in cages for no good reason, and i think an increasing number of people are realizing that is the case with marijuana prohibition. there is no good reason for criminalizing that activity.

there is no good reason for doing violence to people who do not obey that law and there is no good reason for incarcerating or killing people who have violated those laws. we are realizing that, a lot of us have known that all along. mainstream politicians are beginning to acknowledge it and that leaves us with a number of difficult questions. we will talk about some of those. some of them are, how do we go forward, what do we do about the past, how can we begin to repair our justice system and repair the relationship between law-enforcement and communities that law enforcement was meant to serve when they have devoted so much of their attention to supporting an unjust and immoral law. we can't give up a we have to -- but we have to recognize the difficulty of the path ahead. >> my name is kayvan khalabari,

i am a 2019 candidate for mayor of denver. a business owner across the spectrum of businesses. i have 13 that cover the space of cannabis in five states, comedy production, arts magazines, other things. i started as a cannabis policy reform volunteer about 15 years ago. that's how i got involved in the industry in denver. that was my entry point into more than the consumption side of things. as my businesses grew i always had them act as advocates for drug policy reform and the decriminalization of other public health concerns like homelessness and sex work and things of that nature. as i have gotten further into the cannabis space and worked with larger companies and more folks with means, which we will talk about later. the path of the cannabis industry is an unfortunate one when it comes to the regulated

side of things and the lack of participation we have from people who have been disenfranchised by the war on drugs. i'm starting to divest some of my interest in the business side and focus more on my advocacy. part of that is being the chairman of the board of the northern cannabis business association which created state model legislation last year and is working on municipal ordinances that help our lawmakers understand that just because we have legalized does not mean we have fixed things and that there is a lot we need to undo to garner participation from people of color, especially in ownership and in support roles. also that our tax money will be -- that are collected are being wasted and spent inappropriately. that those monies go to help positively impact the folks who have been thrown under the bus

by the war on drugs and that is part of this mayoral campaign is getting beyond -- a lot of what we are seeing in denver which is a microcosm of the country, which is this corporate liberal mentality of money first and special interests first and people last. i'm hoping to inject some life into a different conversation there. [applause] >> my name is shaleen title and i'm the commissioner for the massachusetts cannabis control commission which is the state regulating agency that is implementing the legal marijuana program there. the somewhat unusual path i took to get to that point was as an activist over the past 15 years. i started out as a college student in the movement with students for sensible drug policy, as many speakers and audience members here are also a part of. i stayed with students for sensible drug policy through my masters degree and my law degree. when i graduated i joined the movement full-time. i was lucky enough to work on the colorado campaign to

legalize marijuana for the first time. i briefly practiced marijuana business law. i really wanted to find a new way to help get the marijuana industry more diverse, to get more women and people of color matched up with opportunities, so i cofounded a diversity and inclusion focused recruiting firm. as part of the minority cannabis business association i worked on a model bill to help provide a process of reinvestment and reconciliation in state policy. part of that was used as an inspiration in the massachusetts ballot question in 2016, provided that the regulated agency would find a way to promote and include communities that had been disproportionately harmed by the war on drugs into the industry. it did not specify how.

i helped to write that language and the joke was on me because i am now part of that regulating agency that has to figure out how to do that. my current position is broadly working on how to safely and responsibly regulate the marijuana industry, but specifically to turn these concepts that i think most people agree on in terms of criminal justice reform and giving communities a fair shot into practical policy that can be enforced in a way that is logical and transparent. >> very good. [applause] >> good afternoon. i have eric sterling the executive director of the criminal justice policy foundation. i was reflecting, i am 68 years old, 50 years ago i first started smoking marijuana. as a college freshman.

[applause] i first testified for marijuana decriminalization in 1976 when i was a law student in pennsylvania. for 42 years of my career as a lawyer i have been an advocate for reform in one form or another. i had the amazing opportunity to get hired by the house judicial committee, crime committee in 79 to write federal law and became a colonel in the war on drugs as a house democrat during the reagan years. my boss supported medical cannabis that became one of my responsibilities to learn about

medical cannabis and become an advocate for that. i helped bob randall, the first legal federal patient, start the alliance for cannabis therapeutics. in his apartment on eight street. i left -- i have to give the cato institute credit. they ran seminars during the 80's in their office across from the library of congress and i would go over during lunchtime to get indoctrinated. in 1989 when i started the criminal justice policy foundation it was clear that we needed many different aspects of reform. i helped create the families against mandatory minimums to fight mandatory minimums. i helped start the marijuana policy project. other groups i have been involved in sspd. in 2013, governor o'malley named me as maryland medical state

cannabis commissioner. i was a medical cannabis bureaucrat for four years. i will simply say that i am concerned, i have learned over these years that the heart of the criminal justice system is about the dehumanization of offenders. i hope we will be talking about what the reform of that might mean. i am so proud to be with these distinguished panelists at the first national cannabis policy summit here at the museum on 4/20. [applause] >> awesome. we heard a little bit from niambe about what the drug war looks like on a personal and family level. a lot of people seem to think that marijuana is becoming normalized and is not a big deal and that people are going to -- aren't going to jail for this. it is still a driver of a massive amount of interactions with the criminal justice system. before we get into the ways to

fix that and restore communities, i want to ask clark and eric about the bigger picture of what the drug war looks like now and how marijuana is still driving a lot of these interactions with criminal justice. >> that's an extraordinarily important issue to focus on. as some of you may know, there are more marijuana related arrests in 2017 than for all violent crimes combined. you have law-enforcement enforcement dedicating its resources and its attention to a total nonissue well the national while the national clearance rate for all violent crimes is less than 50%. the national clearance rate for homicides 50 years ago was 90%, now it is down to 61% and in like baltimore it is far below that. the existence of marijuana laws on the books has an effect of

incentivizing law enforcement to engage in pointless activity. it increases the contact between law-enforcement and citizens in dangerous and broad circumstances. for those who remember for philando castille. the officer that shot him testified he became afraid because he smelled marijuana in the car. he said that someone who smoked marijuana in front of his girlfriend and child must be a deadly dangerous criminal. it would be impossible to list the ways in which the existence of marijuana laws fundamentally pathologizes the criminal justice system. >> i think you laid it out very clearly. enormously wasted resources and

the enormous cost to civilians. the enormous cost to civilians. it is part of a dehumanization, it is part of the legislators misunderstanding -- the moral authority of our government to take our liberty away is only when the conduct is wrongful, that it hurts other people. you are abusing their rights. everyone in our audience understands that to use cannabis is not wrongful. the legislature will authorize the police to take our liberty away and that the police will so readily do this. the prosecution will do this in the name of the law.

reflect on our whole understanding of what the power of the law is has become distorted in society. our work in reforming cannabis laws shines a light on, what is the authority of lawmakers. what is the legitimacy? it is highly destructive. we have delegitimized all of law enforcement by its enthusiasm to embrace this wrong law. >> you are from massachusetts. there was a discussion when they were talking about legalization about what should be done to restore, how much of this money should go back into the communities that have been affected by the drug war. as a marijuana bureaucrat now and an activist i would like to hear your perspective on that debate and what solutions have

been proposed and what is being done. >> sure. let me say first that i think a really interesting side conversation that has been touched upon is, when we have these brand-new agencies starting from scratch thinking about policies it gets you thinking about how we can be more modern in the way we enact policy and in terms of civic engagement. when our agency gets feedback from people we try to be as modern as possible. i am an appointed government official but i am still an activist and i am still in millennial and i get a lot of information from places like twitter, i know a lot about marijuana and i don't know much about anything else because i've been focused on marijuana for so long. i absolutely don't know everything. when we are looking at a policy we will get as much feedback as possible. we certainly want feedback from

people in the underground market. we don't want to talk about those communities like they are not there. i will often get tweets from people who say they are in the underground market and what something looks like and make a decision based on that. in massachusetts we have, i would say there are three main ways we have chosen to address this. the first way is trying to weave into every decision that we make the fact that we want to encourage small businesses and people who might be in the underground market. when i was a practicing marijuana business lawyer, back when the medical program in massachusetts had just passed, people would come into my office and say i want to be enough for -- an entrepreneur, can you give me a consultation? i would say there is a $30,000 application fee that is nonrefundable. when you are charging these huge

application fees, you are charging for packing software, there is no way to find funding in the program still meet number two, the econ empowerment priority in massachusetts is a way to ensure that the industry gets started off on the right foot. in most states, existing medical dispensaries enter the industry because they're already started and know how to plant. we also want to make sure that people that have a market advantage are people who have demonstrated that work with these communities and they have good business practices. that is something the institute in massachusetts -- the headline was sunday -- deadline was sunday and we are going to these

applications and looking for businesses that can demonstrate that they have this past experience to go first. third, we have an equity program that is not about going first. it is an ongoing program. the idea is, if you are from a community that has been disproportionately harmed by prohibition and these communities who are designated through a study, we commissioned looking at arrest data throughout massachusetts before and after decriminalization, if you are from one of those communities or if you have a drug conviction, or if a parent or spouse had a drug conviction, we want to give you some extra help. you would have help finding funding, technical assistance on filling out applications, and ongoing business health. those are the three programs. i think this is very much a groundbreaking area of policy

that is going on around the country. i am open to having a dialogue with other activists and agencies who are looking into this. if you want to see what massachusetts did, we have put forward a lot of guidance and summaries. if you go to masscannabiscontrol.com and click on guidance you can see these programs. >> shaleen has done great work. [applause] one of the things we have done is highlighted the gap between that population that is devastated and make sure they have access. it is hard for them to be a business owner and have the support if there is no -- to parents in the household. when you are trying to run a business these are the gaps that exist. we want to figure out how we

fill those gaps. people are starting from below ground zero. i definitely want to make sure that we are intentional about not only as we start to create legislation around getting people into the business, we should also look at how we support these communities. what programs do we put in place to help the youth that are affected by these communities. because they don't have a father in the home or because their parent is dealing with some other aspect, that they can grow up and be emotionally supported. i have four nieces and nephews that now have to visit their father in the hospital. what does support look like echo -- like? with a think about simple things that are privileged. when you can go to summer camp and afford to go to summer camp. when you can do simple things like go to school and have a space for you could do homework, because maybe your family can't

afford to have a house that is big enough for you to have a quiet space to have the simple luxuries that we overlook. someone joked and said, we cannot use any of these tax revenues to build a playground. i said, why not? those are things that we take for granted when you have this kind of privilege of having simple normality in your life. there are a lot of us that when you are living in these particular communities, they don't exist. we have to have a lens on supporting the nonprofits that are providing these programs to the communities. supporting the nonprofits that also, programs for enrichment in

school. look at how we can support public school. i just read the headlines in the summer and it was like, 50% budget cuts. all of the programs, music programs, all things that are outlets for students that are affected by it this being cut and now it is back to basics. you have kids that don't want to come to school. they had a reason to come to school and now they don't want to because these programs are being cut. i know the business side is very important but there is going to be a cap if we don't uplift -- gap if we don't uplift those communities. [applause] >> you were speaking forcefully about this earlier. when i look at the radical bills in the senate and the stocks in

the index and is -- the stuff cynthia nixon is proposing. is expungement of enough and what other things -- is expungement enough and what are other things we need to think about with legalization and how we use those funds and how that affects these communities that have been ravaged by the drug war. >> they have done expungement clinics up and down the west coast where we pay for the legal fees associated with getting your record expunged. in a state like colorado you can't get your record expunged and less you incurred them as a minor. otherwise you can do record ceiling. if ucla record -- if you seal a record, if it is cannabis you are better off keeping that up your record. i have been disappointed in colorado and denver and how we spent our tax money. firstly get swindled into voting for legalization based on the first $40 million going to

school construction. on the surface it sounds great, but where we need money in schools is in teacher salaries and school supplies. [applause] which is not happening. that money is not going there. it is going to contractors that are being overpaid to do capital projects for schools that don't need them. i think we have lost sight of all of the things that are still broken after legalization. as somebody that has been involved for 13 years and then entered into the entrepreneurial space, i've seen sony people that were on the same path as me totally forget about their roots in advocacy. to know that in colorado still we have a racial disparity when it comes to arrests and citations associated with public consumption. why are people being arrested and cited for public consumption, because it'll have places to consume -- we don't have places to consume cannabis. why are they people of color?

because that is where cops patrol. we had the distance requirements on 1000 feet from the perimeter of the schools, we thought that was reasonable. when the city went to rulemaking added parks and rec centers, treatment centers, playgrounds, pools, until the only places where we could open these establishments were in the same poor neighborhood still the people of color that the city had just said were too concentrated with cannabis businesses. on the public consumption peace, hoa and landlords, we have no home ownership and -- in denver because the cost has increased. people are renting and they are getting kicked out for using a legal substance. there are people who live in

subsidized housing who can't consume cannabis. we have terrorists that visit to -- tourists use cannabis who can't use it legally. all of your people fighting to use full strength out the hall in our parts. we have a mayor who has never set foot in a regulated cannabis business. there are all these things that are so broken that we are focusing on. a lot of that goes back into the schools. our public school system in denver is 80% of people of color, our charter school are a lot more white. the schools have become ground zero for crackdowns on cannabis possession. we have drug dogs go into public school. kids are getting expelled and suspended. we know that is not a way for

children to get an education. these of got up since legalization and nobody seems to be talking about that. >> we did an investigation into drug-free school zones in tennessee. 38% of arrests are in 1000 foot drug-free zones. those carry enhanced sentences which can make you go to jail for longer. these are part of these overlapping problems. >> i want to pick up on the expungement please. expungement is good but it does not get to the heart of the matter. what we need is what i call clean slate laws. which is that, after five years, by law, you have no record. we say that it goes away. what we have is a situation -- with modern data you never lose your sentence. we must have a process that says, there is a period at the end of the sentence. as a matter of law, you are free of any consequence of having once had a conviction. you get to say it and we treated

that way. [applause] >> have any jurisdictions tried that? >> no. we have not gotten that far. this is not been sufficiently articulated. it still reflects this fear in society around who are the offenders. the offenders are all of us. there is nothing in particular about the background of this former offender as opposed to someone who is not yet an offender that means we should stigmatize them and set them up for a special concern. in maryland, our state cannabis law says that if you have a drug conviction you cannot work in the industry. if you have it county drug conviction. -- a felony drug conviction. these kinds of laws reflect the

legislature's suspicion of patients. they were suspicious of patients and their doctors and they were deeply suspicious of people going into the industry. in maryland we are way over regulated. we having incredibly complicated rules in guarding security -- regarding security because there is some fear of dishonesty that is greater than any other industry. >> in colorado we have created 30,000 regulated market jobs, we also probably took away 20,000 from folks who are relying on distribute and cannabis on a

small level to make ends meet because they have issues binding traditional jobs because of the criminal records. as someone that has been on the ground floor of 14 different jurisdictions that have executed these legalization laws, people are not talking about equity, they are not talking about reinvesting in these communities, because everybody is reinventing the wheel talking about, what about the kids, what about driving, what about packaging. all the things these jurisdictions have already figured out. if they take their lessons, tildes eagle to shut up, and evolve the conversation -- tell those people to shut up and evolve the conversation. we are not getting traction because those few loud people are getting all the attention. >> i want to go back to one question then we will go to a qa day. -- q and a. in new york city, 86% of marijuana arrests were minorities. which is a pretty stunning number. there were about 16,000 of them. would you mind talking about policing?

i wanted on what the bias. there is bias in policing and the industry itself would licenses and things like that. i wondered if you would talk about that. >> there is no question that marijuana laws -- the police suspected that a particular person is a bad person and they engage in a lot of criminal activity but they can't prove it. the marijuana prohibition becomes low hanging fruit. we can get the person for what they claim they did that we can bust them for marijuana. you mentioned the drug-free schools on situation in tennessee.

reason reported that in some settings, law enforcement when they are setting someone up to a confidential informant to do a drug by, the confidential informant will propose moving the transaction into a school zone in order to enhance the penalty which starts to look a lot like entrapment and probably is a form of entrapment. having a marijuana law on the books to facilitate this kind of blatantly immoral policing by proxy where you are saying, i think you are a bad person but i can't get you for the thing i think you did, so i'm going to jam you up on a marijuana charge. there is a great deal at stake for the defendant. the cops get paid overtime. in montgomery county, maryland the cops get an automatic three hours of overtime pay because they are excused by the prosecutor. every time their cases call their getting overtime pay. they call for backup, they all get subpoenaed, they all show up for the court date. it is called callers for dollars. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

marijuana prohibition is like a swiss army knife for law enforcement. if i am a cop and i have a suspicion that these people are dirty and i get them out of the car and searched the trunk and i find contraband, i find weapons, i find burglary tools. how do i justify that? while i smelled marijuana, i was looking for marijuana. when marijuana is legalized, this allows the fourth amendment -- this loophole that allows the fourth amendment to be violated will be removed. [applause] >> let me add one thing, we must not talk about collars for dollars without talking about policing for profit which refers to civil forfeiture. a process by which people can -- police can take your property by merely alleging it was involved in criminal activity but never

actually proving it. civil forfeiture is one of the most corrupt and corrupting policies in america today. there is no question that marijuana prohibition is a gateway crime for substantial amounts of civil forfeiture. [applause] >> do not take large amounts of money through the airport. [laughter] they will take it from you. we have about 10 minutes left. i'm sure you guys have great questions for our panelists. we have microphones out here. you right there. do we have microphones coming around? they are coming. >> how are you guys doing? so, 13 to 15 years ago for shaleen and eric, before i was born. 13 and 15 years, now those millennials are now 27 to 30 years old.

what blueprint has been left, what foundation has been left for anyone to see what you have done with your grassroots in order to go back and door to door to inform people of what is going on. i ask because d.c. in the past 31 days we have had for expungement events. i live in one of the last wards standing due to denture vacation. no one was informed. -- gentrification. no one was informed. the council is having an expungement clinic right now and mayor bowser did not inform anyone. where is the disconnect, how can we stop it from happening, who is speaking on behalf of of the minorities and the people in these communities? if we don't have social media i wouldn't be here.

we don't know. [applause] >> the short answer is that the government does a crappy job of publicizing its own events. i see it all the time in my county. official events are not well publicized. you have to be following things very closely already to know there is going to be a hearing, meeting, forum. >> they do a terrible job communicating with the public in general, let alone events. as somebody that is in the industry and has been in the industry for a long time i was very disappointed in most of the cannabis industry that is regulated. those people have that opportunity to make money, to be in this for profit legally because of what folks have done the last few decades trying to turn this around, to fight for

legalization. it is incumbent on them to understand that they only have this opportunity because of those people and they should be educating, going to the city and state and pushing this out to your people -- their people. as somebody that has worked in so many of these mayor-based application processes, people promise a lot of stuff when they apply for these licenses and don't do that stop on the backend. if they did this would be a far different place and people would be far more educated. there are other great organizations like sfsp that is doing a great job with building awareness on college campuses that have been disconnected for the past couple of years, they may have been too young to care about it. those are some of the brightest, hardest working mines that we have and they are growing larger every day in their influence. [applause] >> that is such a great

question. that is something i feel passionate about. i think there is an attitude inside the government often that you pass something like a loan expungement and you have an expungement clinic and everybody should just feel happy and show up. of course they don't show up. that leads to a snowballing that does not help anything. in massachusetts we have spent that we as a movement have spent years cultivating relationships with community organizations and establishing authenticity and credibility such that when people do show up they get to see their results. we had a workshop for -- or empowerment program last week in roxbury, massachusetts. there were three times as many people as good fit in the room that showed up. people with criminal backgrounds, people in the underground market. the people we were trying to serve.

that could never be done the month beforehand. you have to put years into it. the last thing i will say about that is, it really struck me earlier when eric said, this is all on a foundation of dehumanizing people who use or sell drugs or have drug offenses. when you have these events, and i have seen this firsthand and you are a policy maker, and nobody in your world intersects with this world, you are imagining something scary. if you can do a good job at getting people to show up and have that one-on-one interaction, so you are thinking about should we exclude someone with convictions, you're not thinking about someone scary, you think about the person you met. it makes such a big difference for decision-making. it could not be any more important to have these events correctly and set up a form of authenticity that is ongoing. [applause]

>> in the question here in the center. >> my question goes out to all of you regarding your background issues. i am a felon and it was because of cannabis. i did four years. i am in the middle of an application for massachusetts. how do i get over this road bump, please. i want to be legit. i want to be straightforward. i work for a group in new york city that helps new york city people who have records, expungement doesn't work and sealing them cannot figure it out. $10,000 and it won't guarantee anything. any insight? >> it just happened. we need people to show up at items like this has asked these questions. what robot are you trying to get pass -- road bump are you trying

to get past? >> a felony conviction for marijuana. >> in massachusetts there is no road bump. you specifically cannot be excluded from the industry for that. you can apply for priority because you have a drug conviction. you can apply for the equity program and get extra technical assistance. [applause] >> all right all right. we have time for one or two more questions. one question. >> i have a question -- i have a question about the new up and coming entrepreneurs like myself. what can i do, starting today,

to help the community and not just start today, but implement that into my business of it can last longer and it can always apply? >> one thing i would recommend is getting involved in the minority cannabis business association. i have noticed, in a place like denver that is incredibly white, that people of color do not feel comfortable in the cannabis industry. when you go to cannabis events they don't show up. mcba held an event and 250 people of color showed up. i didn't even know there were that many people of color in denver. [laughter] i think they are striving for a network. we held an event at the university of denver that was there for just this issue, to help you much for newer's and advocates -- young entrepreneurs and advocates find their network. we are trying to find the same value in this industry.

it may not just be having a license. there are so many ancillary opportunities. not just packaging and point-of-sale systems, but it events, culture, fashion, music. it is endless. i think helping people find out there are other opportunities that are being pursued that are lower capital but still have a huge upside and are more culturally appropriate to the folks that want to get in, i think that is a wonderful place to start. also to be working with folks that understand that this is much bigger than business. that there is a social .obligation to the businesses that we run and that is the kind of community we are try to create. >> could i take just a few

seconds to address that question of can cannabis heal the criminal justice system? >> you have 15 seconds. >> i think that the drugs that are going to heal the system are heroin and opioids. that epidemic is leading to understanding the humanity of people who are suffering. we are in a cultural moment where the drug problem is being reconfigured around the country because of the extent of this kind of tragedy. once we understand -- want we accept the humanity of people using drugs various the purpose of drug loss should be to minimize suffering instead of -- >> people only care because it started affecting rich white communities. [applause] heroin has been hurting people for a long time. they did not start caring until it started affecting suburban white communities. [applause] any final words? >> i think we all understand there are powers and numbers. people asking how they can get into an industry, this is a time

where you have to unite. you have to look for different networks to be a part of to make change. this is the most important time were joining different organizations, sfsp, all the organizations that are out here and doing the work. >> why don't you guys give our panelists a big hand. [applause] >> they come a lot of coverage on book tv of the l.a. times p.m. "tarting at 1:00

eastern with the bookstranger: the challenge of a latino book -- a latino in the trump era." and the author of dispatches from the forgotten merrick -- america. our coverage begins at 1:00 p.m. eastern with david corn's book "russian roulette: putin's war on america and the election of donald trump." black lives matter co-founder patrice come dollars with her book "a black lives matter a more." political commentator roger simon with his book"i know best: account royal narcissism is restraint our republic."we long coverage of the 22nd annual festival of books live on c-span twos book tv. on newsmakers is weakened,

james lankford of oklahoma. as a member of the senate intelligence committee, he talks about the russia investigation and the committee's work on election committee. he also talked about speeding up nominations.or watch the interview 10:00 a.m. , here on c-span. >> connect with c-span to personalize the information you get from us. hero c-span.org/connect & for the equal -- email. the program diet has the most updated prime time schedule. word for word gives you the most interesting daily video highlights in your own words with no commentary. the book tv newsletter is an inside look on upcoming authors. the american history tv newsletter gives you the programming on our nation's past. visit c-span.org/connect and

sign up. >> c-span recently sat down with the white house principles depth r secretaryaj as part of ours hah interview series. talked about his life in connecticut, interest in politics, and what it is like working for the president. the principal deputy white house press secretary. we are seeing you behind the podium on occasion. for that? prepare mr. shah: we have a preparation process i used to oversee the previous role for that? mr. shah: here. -- oversee in a previous role here. our staff have to produce our answers, and we will have a briefing prep session with the person that