DannyDuberstein said:
If he does disagree with diddle dan, I'm sure Abbott would prefer not to risk pissing off the bible thumpers by dealing with this at all. But this is an opportunity to prove that he's a practical, freedom-embracing, pro-business leader if he vetos and then effectively communicates why he vetoed it. If he ever has any national aspirations, it could actually be an asset for him.
IF Abbott vetoes it then I expect a mandate for a bill establishing stricter regulation of publicly available THC products or a significant expansion and simplification of medically Rx'd THC products next session. Maybe both.
That would allow for him to make an intelligent argument across his voter base for both tighter controls to "protect the children" while at the same time benefiting Texans who use THC products medicinally. This thwarts Dannie, while at the same time addressing his "for the children" rationale and prevents him from circling back to revisit it later thereby closing the door on any NIMBYist wasting further time on the matter in successive legislative sessions.
I think we will probably see some restrictions on existing THC products to battle perceived recreational use but it will be offset by the ability to get it for a much broader range of medical reasons (insomnia, general pain, migraines, etc.).
