Opponent of 2016 voter law says cannabis is now ‘everywhere’
March 23, 2026…..Lawmakers cast a skeptical eye Monday towards a ballot initiative that would essentially undo 2016’s vote to legalize marijuana, an idea the one supporter who testified framed as a matter of comfort.
Massachusetts voters legalized recreational cannabis through a 2016 ballot measure. A ballot campaign called the Coalition for a Healthy Massachusetts is advancing towards the 2026 ballot a question that would repeal legalization of non-medical marijuana, allow adults 21 or older to possess and gift up to an ounce of marijuana (possession of up to second ounce would carry a civil penalty), make it a civil infraction for people younger than 21 to possess up to two ounces, and allow retail marijuana stores to either apply to become medical dispensaries or sell their inventory to one. The Cannabis Control Commission would remain, but only to regulate the medical sector.
“Massachusetts is just not as comfortable a place to live in anymore. … We walk across the common and smell weed. I drive down [Interstate] 93, the car in front of me is a hotbox. It’s everywhere. It’s pervasive,” Wendy Wakeman, a veteran of Republican Party politics who is working as spokeswoman for the ballot campaign, said at Monday’s hearing. “So, we don’t have a lot of information on the public health effects, on what it does to people who smoke marijuana, in the same way that we have information on people who use alcohol or people who use nicotine. And at the same time, it just makes everyday life a little bit more difficult.”
Wakemen said the question (H 5002) is driven by “parents, teachers, employers, public health professionals, doctors who have seen the effects of legalized marijuana in a way that is not positive” and broadly pointed to a number of complaints: the dearth of scientific studies on the health effects of regular marijuana use, greater potency in marijuana products, concerns about the availability of marijuana and its impact on impaired driving, and more.
Legislators on the Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions seized on her argument that legalization has not shut down the black market for cannabis and her concerns about untested, black market products. Rep. Michael Day pointed out that the ballot question would allow any adult to possess and give to another person up to an ounce of marijuana, regardless of whether they had a medical card to purchase at a dispensary.
“So are we not setting up a black market with this question?” Day asked.
Wakemen conceded that it was “a great question.” Day said he was worried “that you’re either going to have folks coming in with marijuana, or you’re going to have a line outside the medical marijuana dispensary of folks looking for this to be gifted.”
“That’s not how I look at it, but I see your point,” Wakeman responded.
Marijuana industry supporters with the Committee to Protect Cannabis Regulation testified in opposition to the possible ballot question Monday, often framing the choice as one between a regulated market or an illicit one.
“Massachusetts voters chose a regulated system over prohibition. That system protects consumers, creates jobs and holds businesses accountable. Repealing it will not stop cannabis. It will simply push it back into the illicit market where none of those safeguards exist,” Kristin Rogers, co-founder and CEO of cannabis-infused beverage company Levia, said. “The choice before us is not cannabis or no cannabis. The voters have already answered that. The choice is whether it exists in a regulated system that protects people or an unregulated one that does not.”
Sen. Paul Feeney asked Wakeman what was driving the cannabis rollback ballot question and whether she personally believes there is any benefit to cannabis use.
“Yes. I believe that the vast majority of people who use cannabis can do so safely,” she said. “That doesn’t mean that we should ignore the fact that a very large portion of the population is affected in a way that’s so negative that it outweighs the benefit of having it freely accessible.”
Feeney followed up by asking, “So the majority of people can use it safely without issue. But you’re saying the ills of a very small minority of people is what outweighs legal use by adults?”
“So as you reflect it back to me, I’ve become more uncomfortable with that statement,” Wakeman said. “I just don’t think we know. The research on cannabis use is scant. We can all agree on that.”
That was the issue Sen. Cynthia Friedman took with Wakeman’s testimony. The Arlington Democrat wanted to know, if a lack of data and studies is such a problem, “why doesn’t the question then become ‘the state will investigate and do research and, you know, and look into this’ … why isn’t that your ballot question?”
Wakeman responded, “You’re certainly welcome to do that as a state senator. That’d be a great…” before Friedman asked her original question again.
Wakeman was the only person who testified in support of the question at Monday’s hearing. The committee, which has been tasked by the Legislature with producing a report on each potential ballot question ahead of the Legislature’s May 5 deadline for action to prevent a question from going to voters, also heard from cannabis business operators, a person who said he was sickened by using unregulated vape cartridges, and Jessica Troe at the Mass. Budget & Policy Center.
Troe told the panel that state and local revenues from the legal cannabis industry have largely plateaued, but could rise again as on-site consumption facilities open. Since legal sales began, the state and local governments have collected about $1.9 billion in revenue from cannabis, she said.
In 2016, the question to legalize non-medical marijuana passed with about 1.77 million voters or 53.7% in support and about 1.5 million voters or 46.3% opposed. A MassINC poll from April 2024 found that 65% of respondents said legalizing marijuana in 2016 was the “right decision,” while 22% said it was the “wrong decision.”
If the Legislature decides not to take action on the ballot initiative by May 5, petitioners must then collect an additional 12,429 signatures to ensure the questions appear on the ballot.
