A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, Ways and Means, Agriculture, and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The PREPARE Act of 2025 establishes the Commission on the Federal Regulation of Cannabis. This commission is tasked with studying and proposing a pathway to end federal cannabis prohibition. The goal is to develop a federal regulatory framework modeled after the regulations for alcohol. The commission will collect public testimony and expert input to create these recommendations. Final reports and suggestions will be published on the Department of Justice website.
Yes· 3 of 47
- Scored +6
Would business owners be better off under this?
Directly addresses financial access and regulatory certainty for entrepreneurs.
- Scored +6
Would Black Americans be better off under this?
Explicitly addresses racial disparities in cannabis criminalization.
- Scored +6
Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this?
Explicitly addresses racial disparities in cannabis criminalization.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Remedying Criminalization: The commission must propose measures to alleviate the impact of cannabis criminalization, specifically for veterans, low income, and minority communities (Section 4(b)(1)(A)).
-
Expanding Medical Access: The bill seeks to address the lack of medical cannabis access and research within Federal agencies and publicly funded medical training centers (Section 4(b)(1)(D)-(E)).
-
Improving Financial Access: The commission will work to remedy the lack of access to financial services for cannabis entrepreneurs (Section 4(b)(1)(B)).
-
Increasing Safety and Research: The bill aims to fix the lack of consistent product safety, labeling requirements, and research on medical uses and impairment effects (Section 4(b)(1)(C) and (F)).
-
Supporting Marginalized Communities: The commission includes a member from the Small Business Administration specifically focused on creating industry access for historically marginalized communities (Section 4(c)(20)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
No Immediate Law Change: The commission does not have rulemaking authority (Section 4(j)), meaning it can only make recommendations and cannot instantly change current laws or release individuals from prohibition.
-
Lack of Compensation: Members of the commission who are not federal employees are prohibited from receiving any pay, allowances, or benefits for their service (Section 4(k)(2)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Explicitly addresses racial disparities in cannabis criminalization. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Explicitly addresses racial disparities in cannabis criminalization. Would business owners be better off under this? — Directly addresses financial access and regulatory certainty for entrepreneurs. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Explicitly addresses racial disparities in cannabis criminalization. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Specifically targets remedying criminalization and improving treatment for veterans. Would farmers be better off under this? — Provides guidance on cannabis and hemp cultivation and coexistence. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Specifically aims to remedy the impact of criminalization on low-income communities. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Includes Tribal governments in the regulatory framework considerations. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Increases access to and research of medical cannabis for chronic conditions. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Potentially reduces criminal legal risks and increases medical access. Would retired people be better off under this? — Improved medical access for age-related chronic pain. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Agricultural guidance benefits rural farming communities. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Increases access to medical cannabis for pain management. Would students be better off under this? — Medical training centers will increase training on cannabis. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Addressing criminalization often has high impact in urban areas. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Potentially reduces criminal legal risks for young adults. Would children be better off under this? — The bill mandates protections to reduce harm and access for youth. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Potential reduction in criminal records that affect immigration status. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — General reduction in legal risks. Would men be better off under this? — General reduction in legal risks. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — General reduction in legal risks associated with cannabis. Would white Americans be better off under this? — General reduction in legal risks. Would women be better off under this? — General reduction in legal risks. Would billionaires be better off under this? — General reduction in legal risks. Would high-income households be better off under this? — General reduction in legal risks. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — General reduction in legal risks. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — General reduction in legal risks.
- Healthcare
- Does this help veterans get medical care? — Explicitly focuses on remedying criminalization and improving treatment options for veterans. Does this make health care easier to get in general? — Aims to improve medical cannabis access in federal agencies and training centers. Does this put more money into medical research? — The commission is tasked with addressing the lack of access to cannabis-related research. Does this make mental health care easier to get? — The bill seeks to expand research and access to medical cannabis for conditions like PTSD. Does this do more about addiction and overdose deaths? — Expanding medical cannabis research may provide alternatives for pain management.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The bill explicitly addresses the discriminatory impact of cannabis criminalization on minority communities. Does this shorten or soften prison sentences? — The commission must propose measures to remedy the impact of cannabis criminalization. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Focuses on helping low-income communities impacted by criminalization.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The bill explicitly targets improving financial access for cannabis entrepreneurs and marginalized communities. Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The commission is tasked with proposing consistent product safety and labeling requirements. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Establishing a federal regulatory framework for cannabis can unlock new economic activity. Is this likely to create jobs? — Study of a regulatory framework may pave the way for legal industry expansion and job growth.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make it easier to do business across state lines? — Aims to create guidance for interstate trade of cannabis. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Reports and testimony will be published on the DOJ website for public access. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The framework is designed to account for existing state and tribal rights. Does this give the federal government more power? — Establishing a federal regulatory framework increases federal oversight of the industry.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive? — Focuses on alleviating the negative impacts of cannabis criminalization on veterans. Does this make trade with other countries easier? — The commission will provide guidance on international trade of cannabis.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into scientific research? — Directly aims to fix the lack of medical research caused by Schedule 1 classification.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — Guidance on crop production may benefit rural agricultural sectors.
- 4/17/2025
- Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, Ways and Means, Agriculture, and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
5 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Hakeem JeffriesDemocrat · New York
Max MillerRepublican · Ohio