The cannabis industry is very good at talking to itself.
We gather at conferences, post on LinkedIn, trade articles, and complain to one another about taxes, regulations, illicit operators, and the latest political setback. We know the legal market is imperfect. We also know returning to prohibition would make nearly every one of those problems worse.
But outside our own circles, a very different story is gaining ground.
RELATED: The prescription trap: Who wins when Washington reschedules cannabis?
Over the past year, some of the country’s most influential opinion pages have devoted serious attention to the harms associated with cannabis. Some of the concerns are legitimate. Potency, youth access, impaired driving, and irresponsible marketing deserve real answers.
What concerns me is the leap from “legal cannabis has problems” to “maybe legalization itself was a mistake.”
And now this scenario is playing out in one of America’s most liberal states. Massachusetts voters will decide this November whether to eliminate the regulated adult-use market they approved a decade ago. If Question 8 passes, licensed adult-use stores and commercial cultivation would disappear.
Massachusetts may be where this fight is happening today, but nobody in a legal state should dismiss it as somebody else’s problem. If prohibitionists can unwind an established market there, they will try the same playbook elsewhere.
For too long, many of us have assumed legalization was a one-way street. Voters approved it. Businesses opened. Tax revenue started flowing. The argument was over.
It wasn’t.
RELATED: When cannabis companies fight, patients pay the price
I work in communications and serve on the board of the National Cannabis Industry Association, so I spend a lot of time thinking about who is shaping this conversation. Right now, cannabis opponents are showing up. They are writing opinion pieces, talking to reporters, organizing politically, and using every industry failure as evidence that the entire legal market should be dismantled.
Meanwhile, too many people who know better are sitting on the sidelines. That includes business owners, employees, patients, consumers, lawyers, accountants, researchers, and the many ancillary professionals whose work gives them a clear view of what regulation makes possible. We cannot leave the defense of legalization to a few trade associations, advocacy organizations, or companies with communications teams.
This does not mean pretending the industry has gotten everything right. It plainly hasn’t.
In some states, taxes are too high. Licensing systems have been slow, expensive, and inconsistent. Equity programs have fallen short of what was promised. Some companies have marketed products irresponsibly. The illicit market remains strong in places where legal operators are expected to compete with both hands tied behind their backs.
We should say that. In fact, admitting what is broken makes the case for legalization more credible.
What can you do to protect your industry?
Start locally. You do not need a national platform or a fancy title. Write a letter to the editor. Submit an opinion piece to your hometown newspaper. Contact the reporter covering cannabis or small business in your state. Explain what the legal market looks like from where you sit and what would actually happen if it disappeared.
Use real examples. If you own a business, talk about the people you employ and the rules you follow. If you are a patient, explain what regulated access means to you.
If you are a consumer, talk about why you would rather buy a tested product from a licensed store than take your chances with an unknown seller.
And please, speak like a person. The public does not need another collection of industry talking points. People respond to honest experiences, including experiences that are complicated.
Push back when sweeping claims go unchallenged. That does not mean attacking every journalist or researcher who raises a concern. Share good information. Correct bad information. Ask whether a problem is an argument for stronger regulation or whether prohibition would actually solve it.
Most of the time, it wouldn’t.
RELATED: DEA opens cannabis registration, but key questions remain
Support the people doing the work in Massachusetts. Follow the campaign. Share accurate information about what Question 8 would do. Make sure colleagues, customers, and friends in the state understand that this is not a routine policy adjustment. It is an attempt to eliminate a regulated marketplace while leaving demand intact.
Most importantly, stop assuming someone else will handle this.
People who oppose legalization understand that public opinion is shaped through repetition. If the public hears over and over that legalization failed, and hears little from the people who have spent years building and improving legal markets, that framing will take hold.
The answer is not to claim cannabis is harmless or that every state got legalization right on the first try. The answer is to explain why regulation remains better than the system it replaced—and then do the work of making regulation better.
Prohibitionists are making their case. It is time for the rest of us to make ours.
*This article was submitted by an unpaid guest contributor. The opinions or statements within do not necessarily reflect those of GreenState or HNP. The author is solely responsible for the content.