Top Wisconsin GOP Lawmaker Says State Isn’t Ready To Legalize Medical Marijuana, Criticizing Trump’s Rescheduling Move

Wisconsin medical marijuana legalization is still a mirage shimmering on the horizon—close enough to argue about, far enough to stay thirsty. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos says marijuana is a “dangerous drug,” and he’s not ready to move a medical bill through his chamber. Yet he admits there’s an upside to President Trump’s push to reschedule cannabis: fewer research barriers, more data, maybe a tightly controlled alternative to opioids for people in real pain. In the cheese-curd belt, politics moves like a slow river in January—thick, deliberate, and indifferent to the people casting stones from both banks.

Rescheduling isn’t legalization—and that’s the point

Let’s get the federal contours straight. Cannabis hasn’t formally moved yet, but the White House directive to the attorney general aims to shift it from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act. That would finally let state-licensed cannabis businesses take federal tax deductions blocked by 280E, and it would pry open lab doors long jammed by Schedule I red tape. It would not, however, legalize retail sales, home grows, or possession without FDA approval. Congress has already signaled where the wind is blowing—dropping a bid to stop rescheduling while keeping medical protections intact, the legislative equivalent of a wink and a nod, as charted in Congressional Leaders Drop Attempt To Block Marijuana Rescheduling, While Preserving State Medical Cannabis Protections. And yet the feds remain split-minded: the IRS still treats cannabis like contraband whenever convenient, as the taxman’s posture toward a would-be nonprofit makes plain in IRS Denies Marijuana Tourism Group’s Request For Nonprofit Tax-Exempt Status, Citing Ongoing Federal Prohibition. This is the liminal space—one foot in reform, the other planted in prohibition.

Wisconsin’s slow boil

Back in Madison, Vos told CBS 58 he thinks rescheduling is the wrong move—then conceded it could finally let scientists test what patients have been reporting for years: relief, without the blunt force of narcotics. Meanwhile, the Senate has warmed to a limited medical program. Hearings, testimony, guarded optimism—then a cold splash from the Assembly, where leadership calls the latest bill too broad. Voters, however, have read the room: recent polling shows roughly two-thirds of Wisconsinites support legalizing marijuana, including a solid share in rural counties. Every month of inaction sends more money over the border to Illinois. It’s the kind of fiscal self-own you taste in your morning coffee.

• Public support: around 67 percent statewide, with about 65 percent in rural areas
• Outbound spending: Wisconsin residents bought over $100 million in cannabis next door in a recent year
• Estimated revenue: nearly $170 million annually if lawmakers regulate and tax legal cannabis
• Process reality: rescheduling enables research and 280E relief; it doesn’t create a legal market

What neighboring states already know

Other states aren’t waiting for consensus to descend from the rafters. They’re threading the needle between compassion and control. Virginia has entertained the most intimate of questions: what relief looks like inside a hospital room, where time is precious and comfort is currency, explored in Terminally Ill Patients Could Use Medical Marijuana In Virginia Hospitals Under Newly Filed Bill. Then there’s the money—the lifeblood and the battleground. Look to Michigan, where a new levy set off a courtroom tug-of-war, a cautionary tale about tinkering with cannabis taxation and the fragility of trust between government and an emerging industry, captured in Michigan Judge Allows Lawsuit Challenging New Marijuana Tax To Proceed. Wisconsin can learn from both: build a medical framework that actually delivers patient access, and design taxes that don’t punish the very system you’re trying to legitimize.

The road ahead

So what does “not there” mean in practice? It means a session of quiet negotiations and loud positioning. A medical bill with tight guardrails—limited conditions, regulated dispensaries, pharmacist oversight—could pass if leaders decide the science (enabled by rescheduling) and the economics (kept at home instead of exported to Illinois) matter more than old talking points. It means recognizing that Schedule III won’t greenlight recreational sales, but it will make research easier, patient data stronger, and the business side less punitive. Until then, Wisconsin keeps straddling the line—anxious about what could go wrong, while watching what already has gone right nearly everywhere else. If you’re exploring compliant hemp-derived options while the politics simmer, you can find them here: https://thcaorder.com/shop/.