CONNECTICUT LAWMAKERS PASS BILL SCHEDULING KRATOM AS PART OF CANNABIS REFORMS

As the science around kratom continues to differentiate natural kratom products from ‘enhanced’ products masquerading as natural, lawmakers have taken notice. 

In Connecticut, those concerns turned to an attempt to schedule all forms of kratom, with advocates now pushing back in hopes of keeping natural kratom leaf legal for consumers in the state. 

A bill to update cannabis and other substance-related laws included a clause that schedules the different components of the kratom plant. That bill has now passed both chambers of the Connecticut legislature. With the bill now a signature away from becoming law, advocates are pushing for a veto of that added clause as the governor considers the final slate of bills from the last week of the legislative session. 

With just one paragraph of the 34-page bill targeting kratom, Connecticut consumers are stuck waiting with bated breath to find out what this bill could do to limit legal access to kratom in the state. 

The bill is House Bill 6855, and was introduced as a measure to make tweaks to “drug control and cannabis, hemp and infused beverage regulation.” The majority of the bill focused on tweaks to the regulated cannabis and hemp markets in Connecticut: Details of inspections, regulatory frameworks and definitions around Connecticut’s legal cannabis market. Those measures specifically centered around hemp products and beverages that were being sold at establishments not regulated under the adult-use cannabis law in Connecticut. 

Initially, the bill was sent to the Joint Committee on General Law, which meant it was included in a Feb. 14 public hearing. Although the original version of the bill was mostly focused on cannabis and hemp products, it became clear that the forces behind the bill had bigger plans for the small portion that related to kratom and other products. 

The first person to testify on the bill was Bryan Cafferelli, the commissioner of the Department of Consumer Protection. When it came time to discuss the measure, Cafferelli spoke in general terms about “illegal products” and had a back-and-forth with Rep. Roland Lemar. 

“What tools can I give you to go after new things that might emerge in the market?” Lemar said. 

Without mentioning the clause that would schedule new substances under Connecticut law, Cafferelli’s comments clarified which section of the bill he was referring to. 

“It’s hard to keep up with all the new drugs and designer names that we’re finding in bodegas, gas stations, other stores, that are very harmful,” Cafferelli said. “I believe in this bill, there are substances that are identified.” 

Cafferelli never mentioned kratom products specifically, but the target of those remarks was soon clarified when another state representative testified on the bill. Rep. Tracy Marra was the next voice to speak in support of HB6855 and directly targeted kratom and the dangers presented by an unregulated market for the plant. 

“The growing concern is the widespread adulteration of kratom that we have now. Companies have been able to synthetically alter products with significantly heightened opioid effects,” Marra said. 

Marra never specifically mentioned banning all kratom products, but instead alluded to how the federal government had “failed to act” and told the committee that this bill was necessary to protect children and fend off bad actors in the kratom industry. 

“Adulterated kratom is increasingly being marketed to kratom in children in candy-like products with dangerously high opioid effects,” Marra said. 

That vague approach was also represented in the text of the bill. Rather than specifically mention a plan to schedule the substances included in the bill, the proposed law would “designate the following substances…as controlled substances and classify each such substance in the appropriate schedule.” Notably, 7-hydroxymitragynine was included as a separate substance from “Mitragyna speciosa (kratom), including its leaves, stem and any extracts.” It is unclear what that would mean for raw leaf kratom products if the bill were to become law, but the gathered lawmakers make it clear that they were aiming to pass on that regulatory control to Cafferelli’s team.  

“I think this is a responsible way for us to look at this, giving DCP the power to crack down on folks, and it’s usually the businesses that are illegally selling these products,” Lemar said.  

Speaking in opposition of the bill was Michael White, the chair of the Kratom Consumer Advisory Council, who specifically spoke to removing Mitragyna speciosa from the proposed substances to be scheduled. White also said the wording on 7-hydroxymitragynine should reflect the amount of the alkaloid that occurs in naturally occurring kratom products. 

White explained that such a tweak would bring the state in line with others who had regulated kratom, and offered to work with the committee should it wish to pursue those changes. 

“If whole leaf kratom and mitragynine were removed from (the bill), I would happily work with legislators to craft a Kratom Consumer Protection Act (KCPA) that would balance access with safety for the people in Connecticut,” White said. 

That recommendation appeared to fall on deaf ears, though, as the bill kept the clause targeting kratom despite changes at each step of the legislative process. A bill in the Connecticut legislature to add an age limit to kratom products also fizzled out. 

It took two months for the bill to make it onto the calendar for the House of Representatives in April, but it sat dormant for another two months before it was taken up during the final week of the legislative session. On June 2, the bill was amended again on the House floor and passed by a vote of 146-0. 

The bill was transmitted to the Senate the next day, and after the legislative rules were suspended, it was put to a floor vote that saw it clear the Senate by a vote of 36-0. 

Although it is still unclear what effect this bill would have on natural kratom products in the state, advocates are urging Connecticut residents to contact Gov. Ned Lamont in favor of a line-item veto to keep the bill focused on cannabis and hemp products and remove the language targeting kratom.