COVID-19 has had profound impacts on all sectors of the economy, and cannabis is no exception. In states where cannabis regulatory systems exist, we are seeing for the first time how the cannabis economy responds to economic turmoil and national crisis. There are three trends to watch: Demand, supply, and access.

Demand

Many were surprised to see that COVID-19 has not hampered the demand for cannabis. Though it will take a few months of data to confirm this as a trend, word from the industry is that cannabis sales have remained steady this past month, with many citing a surge in sales as consumers stocked up before sheltering-in-place. California saw a 159% year-over-year increase in sales on the day San Francisco ordered residents to shelter-in-place.

We are also unfortunately going to see how the cannabis economy holds up in a recession. Most of us have speculated that cannabis will behave like alcohol during periods of recession. That is, we expect to see consumers continuing to budget for cannabis purchases, and no significant decline in wholesale activity. That said, alcohol also shows us that a continued recession will likely change the kinds of products that cannabis consumers purchase. They will likely move away from expensive brands in search of bargain deals. Interestingly, this will be the first time during a recession that we will have data on the types, quantity, and concentration of cannabis purchased, thanks in large part to companies like Metrc. Very preliminary data has shown some movement towards edibles – California and Washington State both saw a ~30% increase in edible sales for March compared to the previous months. This data over the next few months will tell us what products (flower, concentrates, edibles, tinctures, etc.) consumers view as providing the greatest value for the dollar.

The continued, or even increased, demand for cannabis during COVID-19 is a bright spot for the industry in what has otherwise been an 18-month period where market growth failed to meet expectations.

Supply

Unfortunately for the industry, they appear less able to capitalize on this demand than other industries would be. These state regulated systems are more fragile to the whims of the economy and workforce than companies that have national distribution. We have already seen store fronts have to close down as they struggle to supply product. Many of the larger growers and manufacturers appear able to adapt their operations, at least in the short term, to meet new sanitizing and social distancing requirements. Smaller operations may struggle to meet challenging new logistics. And since cannabis supply chains must remain intrastate, many states may see supply issues in the coming months. It remains an open question how well the industry as a whole will be able to maintain supply, and at what cost.

Watch the wholesale price of cannabis by state in the next few months. A spike in price may indicate a less mature state cannabis industry, which in turn means future industry growth.

Access

While the industry may struggle with supply chains, their ability to be labeled “essential” for purposes of public access is a clear display of the power industry, consumers, and advocates have gained at the local level. Last decade, state and local officials couldn’t talk about cannabis legalization without making a stoner reference. Now, cities and states across the country have declared cannabis an essential part of their society, giving them the privilege of staying open while the restaurant and hair salon nearby have to shutter. Denver Mayor Michael Hancock told Denver residents they would have to shelter-in-place without access to dispensaries, before quickly backtracking on that decision a few hours later. In states like Massachusetts, where Governor Baker has only allowed medical cannabis licensees to stay open, powerful grassroot organizations have already started to mobilize to get adult-use licensees classified as essential as well.

COVID-19 has even pushed state and local governments to embrace home delivery. Oregon just passed emergency rules allowing for retail stores to engage in delivery services. In San Francisco, delivery giant Eaze suspended operations for one day at the direction of the Department of Public Health, only to have that ban lifted later that same day.

These movements make clear that the right for consumers and patients to access cannabis has reached a societal tipping point, at least in states with legalization. Future regulatory efforts will have to contemplate how to provide continued access to cannabis in all environmental conditions.

Legalization efforts

In states that have not legalized cannabis, the COVID-19 response will stall legalization efforts that appeared on course to pass – states like New York and Connecticut have understandably sidelined legislation while they deal with more immediate concerns.

Post COVID-19, when legalization efforts restart, there will be renewed emphasis on the cannabis industry’s ability to create employment. Cannabis is unique in that, for the foreseeable future, it requires massive amounts of manual labor to bring it to market (growers, taggers, trimmers, transporters, budtenders, and ancillary services like electricians and plumbing). Also, because the cannabis industry has to order many of its inputs within its own state, the cannabis industry has an unusually high state-GDP and state-employment multiplier. A 2016 study of Colorado’s industry by the Marijuana Policy Group estimated this multiplier to be about 2.4, ranking it top amongst non-governmental industries.  Within the year, this economic argument will gain new traction as states like New York, Connecticut, and Florida consider adult-use legalization during economic recovery.

Additionally, if there does end up being a supply challenge, these same advocates are going to be closely monitoring any negative public health effects from illicit market activity, especially as it pertains to cannabis patients. Remember, this is the same illicit market that was largely responsible for the vaping crisis a few months back. Expect to see credible arguments in the future that COVID-19 exposed the need for better state systems and perhaps even federal cannabis policies to ensure a safe, consistent buying experience for consumers and patients in good times as well as times of crisis.

Closing thoughts

The COVID-19 crisis is the first national stress test for legalized cannabis, both as a movement and as an industry. Initial indications on all fronts is that cannabis legalization is remarkably resilient. On the supply side, where it is most weak, it will only grow stronger as the industry matures. This resilience is welcomed news for advocates and the industry, but it should also serve as a wake-up call for public health and government officials. Though the federal government has been slow to act, legal cannabis is now a permanent fixture in much of America and will continue to spread with time. Officials must increasingly recognize that we should be spending our efforts contemplating the best ways to provide legal access to cannabis while maintaining public health and protecting public safety.

We will continue to keep you updated on interesting developments in the cannabis world. There will be a lot to discuss around how COVID-19 will impact cannabis venture funds, the economics of hemp and CBD, as well as the federal future of cannabis.

The column below originally ran in Roll Call which can be viewed here.  

OPINION — Two developments in the last month signal potential new life for a long-popular policy idea: creating a national paid family leave program.

First, two prominent Democrats — Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut — reintroduced the FAMILY Act, which would provide working Americans up to 12 weeks of paid leave for the birth or adoption of a new child; to care for a sick loved one; or to recover if an injury or illness requires an extended absence from work. The bill has wide-ranging support among Democrats, but this is the seventh year in a row it has been introduced without a Republican co-sponsor.

Second, a handful of prominent Republicans — including Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida, Joni Ernst of Iowa, and Mike Lee of Utah, along with presidential senior adviser and paid family leave advocate Ivanka Trump — met to discuss how to move forward on this topic.

It would be easy to look at these developments as another example of the parties retreating to their corners and touting competing solutions, and perhaps in today’s Washington a healthy dose of skepticism is appropriate.

But to do so misses three key insights. First, the sheer fact that a handful of Republicans are meeting to work together on this issue is a milestone.

Second, federal policymakers across the political spectrum support the concept of a national paid family leave program. In fact, in the last Congress, a record 207 members signed on to some form of paid leave legislation, and this Congress is already on track to beat that number.

Third, and most importantly, the policy solutions are starting to sound more and more similar. While not trying to sugarcoat real differences, it’s time to celebrate the attention being given to this critical issue and areas of policy agreement that might pave the way toward bipartisan support for action.

Specifically, here is where we see Republicans and Democrats beginning to agree:

Gender equity

Most caregivers are women, but there is broad agreement that gender equity is key. Both parties now propose maternity and paternity leave, a dramatic shift from conversations that solely focused on moms.

Duration

The current federal policy, the 25-year-old Family and Medical Leave Act, offers 12 weeks of unpaid leave. Many plans are now considering up to 12 weeks of paid leave. Past proposals have been far skimpier.

Focus on working families

Democrats and Republicans alike are proposing policies designed to reach Americans who struggle to make ends meet. There is agreement to prioritize policies that focus benefits that are accessible on low- and middle-income families.

Any national plan is going to have to answer some essential questions: Who will be covered, what will the benefit be, how will the program be structured, and how to pay for it? But on some of these, common ground already exists. It’s time for collaboration and compromise to fill in the gaps.

Why make this push now? The real-world need of America’s workers is beginning to align with political benefit and political will for both parties in a way that makes action possible.

America simply can’t wait any longer. As an Axios report detailed last week, women now outpace men in educational achievement, yet their participation in the workforce is stagnant or even declining. And young people are waiting longer to have children, citing economic insecurity and lack of paid parental leave as key reasons. At a time when only 15 percent of American workers have access to a paid leave benefit, and very few hourly-wage workers receive paid leave, we are beyond asking why.

What’s more, Americans want national paid family leave. A recent poll found 84 percent of voters support a national policy. Instituting paid family leave will support economic growth, foster family formation, and keep America globally competitive. It’s a political winner.

We have momentum toward making a monumental difference for working families through some type of national paid family leave program. The only ingredient missing, and maybe not for long, is bipartisan collaboration.

In addition to her work at FTP, Adrienne Schweer is a fellow at the Bipartisan Policy Center focused on paid family leave. She is also the founder of the nonprofit organization Family Leave Works and a former chief of protocol to the secretary of Defense. 

This week, the U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM) is hosting its 87th Annual Winter Meeting. Mayors from across the political spectrum, representing big cities and small towns alike, will descend upon Washington, D.C. They come here to strengthen federal and municipal relationships, promote policies that help America’s cities and the diverse populations that call them home, and create a forum for local leaders to share ideas, policies, and best practices on how to tackle some of the nation’s most pressing issues.

As political gridlock continues to consume Capitol Hill, mayors from around the country are crafting and implementing innovative solutions that address the challenges faced by their constituents. In particular, mayors are leading the way when it comes economic opportunities, public health, and combating addiction.

Providing Economic Opportunity

Public and private partnerships are a staple of American public policy, helping to provide critical services and economic opportunity. Following the Great Recession of 2008, federal and local lawmakers have looked for innovative ways to spur economic development in some of America’s most distressed rural and urban communities.

As part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, Congress included a bipartisan provision that established a new community development program intended to encourage long-term investment in America’s low-income rural and urban areas: The Opportunity Zone program. The program provides tax incentives for the investment of unrealized capital gains into Opportunity Funds that are dedicated to investing in real estate development and businesses located in designated low-income areas. To encourage long-term support for these communities, investors will realize the tax incentives at five years, with the highest rate of return starting in year ten and beyond.

Today, mayors are leading efforts to transform their communities and provide economic opportunities for everyone. Mayors Greg Fischer of Louisville, Kentucky (D) and David Holt of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma (R) are at the forefront of utilizing Opportunity Zones to improve their cities.

Louisville is one of the most advanced cities in this space and has 19 different areas designated for investment. A couple of the projects currently on track for completion include:

In light of Oklahoma City’s recently released investment prospectus, Mayor Holt and the Alliance for Economic Development of Oklahoma City has eight neighborhoods selected for investment. Specifically, the city is committed to continuing the development of the Central Business District, the Oklahoma City Indian Cultural Center, and furthering its role in the medical innovation space, among other projects.

These projects, under the guidance of Mayor Fischer and Mayor Holt, seek to provide responsible economic development that create a social impact by partnering with local residents who can benefit from the wealth created.

Fighting Childhood Obesity for Healthier Communities

Over the past three decades, childhood obesity rates have tripled, with the greatest impact felt in communities of color: 40 percent of children in African American and Hispanic communities are overweight or obese. As rates continue to climb, mayors are taking action to combat the epidemic.

The current USCM President and Mayor of Columbia, South Carolina, Steve Benjamin (D), is at the forefront of creating healthier communities. Columbia was recently awarded a Childhood Obesity Grant by USCM and the American Beverage Association due to Mayor Benjamin’s leadership through the program “Project GNF (Gardening, Nutrition, and Fitness).”

The initiative seeks to make gardening, nutrition, and fitness fun for families, and offer healthy food alternatives for those who live in food deserts through urban farming and community gardens. The grant provided to the city helped redesign and increase the size of each garden plot, increase the level of youth and community involvement, and partner with a local university to teach young children the science behind growing fruits and vegetables.

Studies have shown that obesity is associated with job absenteeism, costing approximately $4.3 billion annually, nationwide. By prioritizing the health of the children of Columbia, South Carolina through community gardens, Mayor Benjamin is creating a foundation for a stronger future and taking an innovative approach that could be a part of a national strategy. 

Combating the Opioid Epidemic

In 2017, nearly 50,000 Americans died of an opioid overdose, with the number of opioid-related deaths doubling in the last five years alone. Today, you are more likely to die from an opioid overdose than a motor-vehicle accident.

The City of Dayton, Ohio held one of the highest opioid death rates in the country for almost a decade. In 2018, however, the city reversed that trend, lowering opioid overdose deaths by half compared to the previous year. Mayor Nan Whaley (D) has been at the forefront of combating the epidemic and undertook a new strategy to help save lives.

The city implemented a collective impact model that relies on data to help inform public health decisions. Mayor Whaley and community leaders took an all hands on deck approach that brings together law enforcement, public health officials, non-profit, municipal and county leaders, as well as the private sector to help reduce deaths.

In addition, the Mayor and her administration have implemented tactics such as greater access to naloxone and a needle exchange program; compassionate policing focused on prevention and support for addiction, rather than criminalization; increasing access to addiction treatment; and, developing a community of recovery and support.

Mayor Whaley’s holistic approach is helping the residents of Dayton as they grapple with one of the deadliest health epidemics in American history. Her leadership and ground-breaking strategy offers insight into one way a city has successfully saved lives. 

Local leaders have a long history of playing a pivotal role in our nation’s policy. The aforementioned highlights are just a small snippet of the incredible work mayors are focused on around the country. Mayors will continue to lead the policy conversation and address issues not only prevalent in their communities, but also pressing for the entire nation.

While cybersecurity is nothing new, its recent, rapid growth is undeniable. Hackers who were once infantile are now so sophisticated that they can steal personal identify information from millions of people in one hack. Every country, every sector, and every company has now realized the importance of cybersecurity.

This means that America will need to continue to prioritize our cyber marketplace and cultivate the workforce required to successfully support it. Currently, the White House estimates there are more than 300,000 unfilled IT jobs in the US. In the state of Virginia alone, there are over 36,000 unfilled cyber-related jobs.

But, we shouldn’t view this gap in the workforce as a challenge or threat. Rather, this gap is an opportunity to inspire women, and minorities, to help fill these jobs. Today, it is estimated that while women make up almost 40% of workers globally, women represent only 11% of the cyber workforce – an uninspiring number. However, there were 1 million cyber-related openings last year worldwide, openings that could easily have been filled by women.

That’s why I’m attending the annual NATO Cyber Security Symposium (NIAS): To attract women to the field.

This week, I’ll be joining NATO Deputy Secretary General, Rose Gottemoeller, and female cyber experts from the government, private sector, and academia to dispel the myths around cyber and facilitate a discussion on how we can bring more women into the field.

Following Thursday’s discussion, I’ll be sharing strategies and programs that private and public-sector professionals can implement to get more women into the cyber world. For now, let’s debunk some myths that delay women from starting their education and career in cyber:

Myth: You have to join the military to be a cyber warfighter.

Fact: There are a huge number of civilian and private sector jobs that allow you to contribute to the mission.

Myth: You need an engineering degree from an Ivy League school to get a good job in the industry. 

Fact: The cyber field has a very diverse set of jobs – from policy and engineering to project management and sales. Many of the jobs may not even require a college degree. Instead they value a cyber certificate, which can be earned through an 18-month community college program.

Myth: Cybersecurity jobs are round the clock operations, with little to no work-life balance.

Fact: The cyber challenge may exist 24/7, but with the right management and team, you don’t have to work night and day to contribute. Many women are intimidated by the field due to the demanding time restraints, but there are a lot of impressive women who have found balance and you can too.

NIAS is set to provide insight into the changing perceptions of gender in the industry – exciting things to come for women in cyber!

Adrienne Schweer is a senior vice president at Forbes Tate Partners and former Chief of Protocol in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, where she served under Secretaries Chuck Hagel, Ash Carter, and James Mattis.

We have had Governors, business leaders, Members of Congress, Presidential candidates and Administrations from both parties call for paid family leave but it still can not break through in Washington. Just this past month, in true bipartisan fashion, AEI and Brookings released a report on how a national paid family leave policy is needed in the United States. The working group of experts compromised and laid out a potential comprehensive policy that was heralded by a wide array of leaders in Washington.

As the public and politicians continue to weigh in, could a national paid family leave policy be something Americans actually see implemented in the near future? We think so.

When it comes to paid family leave, leaders from both parties – Democrats and Republicans in the Senate and even the President – have signaled they are willing to work across the aisle. With 87% of American women not having a single day of paid maternity leave, it has become a common-sense issue that most Americans support. If Washington works together, this could be a big and lasting win for working parents and American business.

Already, most Americans believe mothers and fathers should receive paid family leave from their employers, with a record 82% of Americans saying they’re on board with giving new mothers maternity leave and another 69% of Americans saying fathers should receive paternity leave.

Employers also support providing paid family leave, with 70% of small businesses saying they’d approve a federal paid family leave law and a number of major corporate employers already offering policies to compensate their new parent employees.

Regardless of toxicity in Washington, any issue that boasts such a strong combination of public support, economic interest, and political momentum can create meaningful policy change.

The number of Americans with access to paid family leave from their employers has only grown ten points in the nearly 25 years since the Family and Medical Leave Act was passed in 1993, which required employers to provide new parents with job-secured but unpaid leave.

Countless studies over the years have shown how paid family leave reduces infant mortality rates, improves women’s ability to stay in the workforce, boosts employers’ business, and helps grow countries’ GDP. Anecdotal stories from across the country point to the personal need for a paid family leave policy that gives American workers financial security and peace of mind.

The American businesses that have already gotten on board with paid family leave have noted how these policies help with recruitment, ensure employee retention, grow market share, and boost a company’s overall brand. But more needs to be done to ensure all workers have access to the benefits of paid family leave.

On the whole, academics and labor experts agree that a paid family leave policy would build a stronger American economy. According to the Georgetown Center on Poverty, parents forgo an estimated $96 billion in wages to care for their young children. That’s why economists have estimated that a national paid family leave policy, with its strong effect on female worker retention, could grow the United States’ GDP by 3.5%.

Right now, there is a prime opportunity to provide real direction for this growing movement for paid family leave. Taking a cue from the AEI and Brookings partnership, Washington could shape a bipartisan plan that would create financial stability for families, providing them the ability to make sound long-term financial decisions and give their children healthy starts to life.

Enacting a lasting paid family leave policy would grow American business, improve political goodwill, and provide financial security for millions of hard-working Americans. It’s time for leaders from both parties to unite and make this happen, and it’s time for Washington to have a win on major national policy.

Adrienne Schweer is a senior vice president at Forbes Tate Partners, founder of Family Leave Works, and a lifelong Republican. Lauren Crawford Shaver is a partner at Forbes Tate Partner and longtime Democratic political operative.

Ready to change Washington?

Join Our Team.

View Career Opportunities