COMPREHENSIVE KRATOM REGULATIONS HELD UP BY CALIFORNIA COMMITTEE

Policy discussions surrounding kratom have become more complex as the situation and science surrounding the plant play out across the country. 

Unfortunately for the people of California, the debate over details led to a stalemate in the state’s latest attempt to establish a regulated market for kratom. 

A bill introduced in the California State Assembly made its way through a floor vote thanks to twists, amendments and turns before the attempt to create a regulated kratom industry died in the Senate. Yet despite the failure to find the finish line, advocates for kratom believe California is on the right path to creating regulations that work for all parties involved in the process. 

The bill in question was Assembly Bill 2365 which was introduced in February of this year. It took a month for the bill to be heard in committee, starting with the Health Committee, and it was amended twice in the Assembly before making it back to the floor. A vote of 73-0 got the bill off the Assembly floor and into the Senate three months after it was introduced. 

Stalled in the Senate

Upon arrival in the Senate, the bill was again diverted to the Health Committee and was unanimously amended for the final time in June. Per California law, AB2365 hit a snag when it arrived in the Senate Appropriations Committee. If a bill hits a threshold for financial burden it can be moved to the ‘suspense file’ to “consider the fiscal impacts to the state of legislation as a whole.” 

When the bill was considered in August, the committee decided to hold the bill in the suspense file, effectively killing the bill. 

Unlike other attempts to regulate kratom, AB2365 was unique in the sense that it failed to pass partly due to supply-side costs and burdens. Assemblymember Matthew Haney was the bill’s sponsor, and he worked with the Global Kratom Coalition (GKC) on this bill to put one of the most comprehensive Kratom Consumer Protection Acts (KCPA) on the books in California. 

In June, Haney told a local CBS affiliate that he was just trying to address a legal gray area that affected millions of consumers in his state. 

"There are no requirements for labeling, no requirements for specificity on doses, no age limits. And, even though California has the highest levels of kratom use, we are also the state that lacks any regulations," Haney said.

Opponents of the bill used that against Haney and cited the complexity of the bill as a reason to steer the measure toward the suspense file. 

According to Matthew Lowe, executive director of the GKC, this bill was a “significant step toward establishing consistent standards for kratom products in the U.S.” but fell short due to the bureaucratic burden perceived by the California Senate. 

"Ultimately, the merits of a consumer protection bill should be assessed based on how the provisions in the bill inform and protect consumers, rather than the cost to the industry," Lowe told the Los Angeles Times. "We will continue to fight for regulation that works."

Protecting California Consumers

What was different about this bill was how the law sought to establish “tiers of registration” that would create a “fee schedule” based on units sold and total annual sales. In addition to the unique methods of creating a registration system, the proposed law was amended to include language steering kratom away from minors, language around “interagency agreements” surrounding kratom and set potency limits for the alkaloids in products available for sale. Many of these elements have been included in legislation in the 13 states that have passed versions of a KCPA. California’s attempt was special because it included ALL of those provisions in one bill. 

Now they’ll have to wait at least another year before kratom protections can be codified into state law. 

“We are confident that as more Californians understand the issues and weigh in, their stories and quantifiable facts will win the day,” Lowe said. “We will have kratom regulations in California that truly address the need for safe, accessible and regulated kratom products."

Kratom in California has been a touchy subject since the plant started to become more popular in the last 15 years. San Diego was the first municipality to make a decision, banning sales of the supplement within its borders in 2016. Earlier this year, Newport Beach defaulted to local law enforcement in enacting a similar ban. The only issue is that both of those major municipalities share borders with cities that DO NOT ban kratom. 

When it comes to the patchwork of laws facing kratom consumers, Haney said it’s time to address the issue with legislation that works for all Californians.  

"The state should be ensuring that these products are safe and not hurting people, and right now, the state isn't involved at all," Haney said. 

"At the same time, many people use it in its purest form for things that should continue to be allowed,” he continued. “So we're trying to strike a middle ground here that protects Californians but that doesn't prohibit something that many Californians are using in that actually can be safe and beneficial."