Rep. Greg Steube’s recent op-ed “A Conservative Case for Rescheduling Cannabis” in the Washington Examiner presents a superficially plausible argument for moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
However, his case is riddled with omissions, distortions, and flawed logic that ignore the scientific, legal, and public-health realities justifying marijuana’s current classification.
Steube claims that “millions of people rely on medical marijuana prescribed legally under state laws.” This assertion is misleading. Doctors cannot prescribe marijuana—only FDA-approved drugs like Epidiolex qualify for prescriptions. State programs rely on “recommendations” or “certifications,” not prescriptions, because the FDA has never approved smoked or vaped cannabis due to inconsistent dosing, carcinogenic effects, and a lack of rigorous safety studies. Notably, PTSD, central to Steube’s argument, has only “limited evidence,” per the 2021 Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guidelines, which reject cannabis for PTSD due to risks of worsening symptoms and violent behavior. Additionally, Steube ignores that “medical marijuana” is often indistinguishable from recreational products, dispensed by “budtenders” promoting high-THC edibles and concentrates with no medical oversight.
He also argues that rescheduling “would simply clear the way for serious research.” This claim is false. The Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act of 2022 already streamlined cannabis research without rescheduling. The DEA has approved dozens of studies, and the NIH funds research on marijuana’s effects. The Congressional Research Service confirms that rescheduling alone does not automatically facilitate research. Any problems in research aren’t due to weed’s Schedule I status—they stem from the industry’s refusal to submit FDA applications due to profitability concerns. Steube also fails to mention that rescheduling primarily benefits corporations seeking tax breaks under IRS tax code Section 280E, not researchers or patients.
The article asserts that “rescheduling is not legalization,” but this ignores the pharmacological reality of modern marijuana. THC potency has dramatically skyrocketed from less than 4 percent in the 1990s to 15–30% today, with concentrates exceeding 90%. Public health risks are severe: The Lancet Psychiatry in 2019 linked high-THC use to a 300–500% increased schizophrenia risk. Additionally, 30% of daily users develop Cannabis Use Disorder (CUD)/Marijuana Use Disorder (MUD), a rate higher than alcohol. Adolescent use correlates with IQ decline (per JAMA Pediatrics in 2022) and permanent memory impairment. Steube omits these risks, falsely equating today’s engineered THC products with low-potency historical cannabis.
As for his claims that rescheduling will help veterans and small businesses, the reality is starkly different. Rescheduling enables over $2 billion in tax breaks for marijuana companies (via repealing IRS tax code Section 280E), primarily benefiting large corporations like Trulieve and Curaleaf—not small farmers. Furthermore, a considerable number of state-licensed farms have ties to illegal labor and foreign cartels. Rescheduling legitimizes these operations while flooding markets with addictive products. Steube also ignores the fact that VA hospitals cannot prescribe marijuana, and rescheduling won’t change that without FDA approval.
Yes, Steube cites polls showing “overwhelming support for medical cannabis,” but these polls omit critical context. Respondents are rarely informed of marijuana’s risks (e.g., psychosis and addiction). When polls present balanced facts, support drops significantly. Advocacy groups fund misleading surveys to create a false narrative of consensus.
Rescheduling marijuana to Schedule III (where Tylenol with codeine sits) would undermine federal authority. Gonzales v. Raich (2005) affirmed Congress’s power to regulate marijuana under the Commerce Clause; rescheduling would invite interstate trafficking and weaken enforcement. Additionally, and despite Steube’s implication to the contrary, it could indeed pave the way for full legalization, as lobbying efforts would intensify to deschedule entirely, bypassing FDA safeguards.
Rescheduling marijuana is a corporate Trojan horse disguised as reform. The science is clear: smoked or vaped cannabis has no accepted medical use, a high abuse potential, and unprecedented potency. The president (and Congress, if necessary) must reject industry lobbying and uphold Schedule I to protect public health.
Angel Gomez is a researcher specializing in the societal impact of drug policy. He has a background in psychoanalytical anthropology and general sciences.