Judiciary Leverett Subcommittee Meeting

Any other questions?

I don't see any questions, sir. Thank you so much for your testimony. Appreciate it.

Hitter, is it Goffner?

Just have a seat, tell us your name, and give us your testimony.

Hey. Oh, uh-oh.

Hey. I'm Peter Goughner. How are you doing today? Thank you so much for being here today on this cold day, and, I appreciate you hearing,

my testimony.

I'm gonna be brief.

Again, you've heard from so many people that talk about kratom. I don't wanna piggyback off of anyone and waste your time.

I wanted to share about my

former husband that passed away from kratom on October

22,

2020.

And they talked about seizure seizure, stroke,

and, cardiac arrest. That seems to be the pattern that goes on with the kratom,

when you're

when they're

it's obviously having the act the

reaction to the kratom.

So if you hear them talk about seizure stroke, that's basically what happened to my husband,

at the time. So, anyway, today, I'm I'm here speaking on behalf of the families,

that have lost loved ones, and I'm so sorry,

for that.

Five years ago,

I knew when I was called.

And, again, I'll be playing probably the video,

someday that I was called on FaceTime when the paramedics were working on him. And I was actually begging for his life, and I didn't know at the time that he had taken kratom. I knew he was taking a natural

substance natural product that was sold to him under the false pretense of natural.

So,

and that's when I start hearing all these testimonies of natural

this that, you know, it's it's just sold under a a false pretense of being natural, and that's not accurate.

Kratom,

took his life

very quickly.

My daughter,

who is now 22, she testified last year.

It's very hard for her to testify and relive every moment of that time. So it's very,

hard. And so I'm here to testify on behalf of my family, and, Dana Pope could actually not be here today,

and,

her apologies.

But,

Kratom is known for the gas station heroin.

I've been I usually try to stop in every gas station,

along the way from Georgia to Saint Simons to wherever I'm traveling doing photography.

And when I walk in there,

there is,

kratom,

and it's right next to the monster drink.

My late husband passed away from mixing a monster drink and kratom.

And so he had no clue

to the people, the folks who sold that to him. And,

when there was a deposition,

they were asked, how did you hear about kratom? How did you know to sell kratom? How did you get that into your store?

And his answer was,

oh, I saw a sign at a at a stoplight that says sell Kratom, make money. I said, wow. That's interesting.

That's all you know. That's all you know. You don't have a degree or anything like that. So the people that are selling this product have no idea really what they're selling at all. And so I'm asking everyone to if you have ChatGPT, if you have Google, please Google it. If you haven't if you haven't

even done the research on it, and I'm not saying you have or haven't, but if you haven't, please do the research on what is happening with kratom. How and I don't know if you heard, but in Florida, 92,000

pounds

pounds

of kratom were confiscated down in Florida to make the seven o h product

that is now being

distributed. But, again, he was not able to do that because it was confiscated by law enforcement.

And these are things that are that are moving into Georgia, that are moving into I mean, it's gonna surpass fentanyl. It's right at it. And so if we think fentanyl is bad, this is gonna just only get worse. And so on behalf of my late husband and his mom that passed away last week, she said, put Peter, please try to just fight for this. And please ask that they please consider passing this passing this law because it's killing people.

I mean, and it's almost like a stoplight. People keep going through the stoplight. They keep getting killed. How many more people have to get killed

in order for we us to stop what's going on and do some more research on what's going on and just ban this bill? I mean, ban this ban this kratom and pass this bill.

So thank you for your time. Thank you so much. And, again, we offer condolences on your loss, and thank you for your testimony. Thank you, sir. Is there any, questions for miss Goff?

I don't see that you have any questions. Thank you so much. Thank you for your time. Ryan, is it Scaife? Scaife. Yes, sir. Scaife. Okay.

Good afternoon.

My name is Ryan Scaife. I come to you as a Georgian,

member of the faith community,

and a a member of the recovery community. I live in Walker County, Georgia,

with my wife and our five children.

I work as director of community relations at Renew Ministries in Chattanooga, Tennessee. We are a twelve month faith faith based residential discipleship and recovery ministry.

I went through this ministry six and a half years ago after struggling with opioid addiction for ten years that included pharmaceuticals,

heroin, fentanyl.

And by the grace of God, I stand here today before you,

free of that addiction.

At Renew thank you. At Renew, we work with over a 100 men a year,

many men who come to us from North Georgia,

and I'm here to just simply share what I'm seeing.

Kratom use is rampant. Kratom addiction is skyrocketing.

I see opioid addicts who are trading that addiction for a kratom addiction. I see alcoholics

who are using kratom,

you know, to try as to therapeutically who become kratom addicts, and I see just regular stressed and depressed people who become kratomatics.

Kratom dependency and withdrawals

is,

becoming equal to that of heroin and fentanyl because of the ever evolving kratom industry and the growing potency and availability of the product.

I spoke with a gentleman two days ago when I got invited to come here, who I know has struggled with kratom addiction, and I asked Mark. I said, Mark, when were you hooked on kratom?

He said, about two weeks in, I couldn't get through the day without using it. And four to five weeks in, I couldn't get out of the bed without using it.

Those were the same symptoms I had when I used heroin and fentanyl.

Another individual,

told me a story when he came in to renew about his local gas station who was behaving more like a drug dealer. In addition to the testimonies that you've heard from several here today,

gas station owners,

I'm not gonna stereotype which ones, but you can probably guess, are finding product to users. So they have regular customers who come in.

They know they have to have this product. They know they're addicted. They know they're gonna come back. They take their IDs as collateral. They put it behind the register, and they keep a registry of who owes them money, and they lock that in a safe. How do I know that? I I had to go to one of these gas stations to retrieve,

an ID for a gentleman who came into our ministry,

had to pay off his tab. And when the guy pulled out the list of people that he had licenses and and and, you know, an IOU for, it looked like my notebook here.

I believe that stats on kratom use are unreliable and underestimated.

I work with countless other recovery organizations and ministries in North Georgia and the Chattanooga area, and most of them are unable to test for kratom

because they don't have the funding to afford the drug test, the 18 panel test that come with us. We do test for kratom at my ministry, and I'm seeing, you know, twenty to thirty percent of people who come in with an addiction problem are testing positive for kratom as well when they come in.

Our neighbors in Tennessee are working on a bill to ban kratom,

and I urge you in Georgia to do the same. They're you're gonna hear opponents of the kratom ban bill, who disagree with this, but I believe the widespread effects of kratom are dark and evil. The widespread availability, the lack of regulation, and the lack of medical studies and professional medical oversight and care is leading to devastating and unexpected

impacts on individuals, their families, and the addiction and recovery community.

And in regards to there being more evils out there and allowing people to use this as therapy, I'll just share with you what's on my heart. Romans twelve seventeen. Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. So I encourage you to consider this bill.

Thank you for your testimony. Any questions for,

reverend Scaife?

I don't think you have any questions. Thank you so much for your testimony.

Thank you guys for the opportunity.

And I'm impressed that you have found the time to come down here with five children and a ministry. That's you got a lot going on.

Thank you for your for what you do. Sydney Easam.

Good afternoon.

Alright.

Alright. Can you hear me alright?

I'm really just gonna tell you a story about the addiction of kratom and what it does. So my name is Sydney.

I'm a wife and a mother.

My 11 old is right there in the corner of sleep. So,

I'm here to tell you about my experience with kratom and what it's done to my family.

We were in the halls all the whole time before this. So,

when I was seven months pregnant

with our child, my husband, Landon,

came to me sobbing, saying he is

addicted to an opioid called kratom

and that he feels like he might die from it.

I can tell you it is only by the grace of God that he's still alive today.

I have watched him go from

a driven, ambitious,

thoughtful, and hardworking person to someone whose primary concern

is staying high on kratom no matter the cost.

I'll tell you, it's a soul crushing pain to watch your spouse slowly being taken away from you and morph into a person that you don't recognize.

He became very angry on kratom, had psychotic episodes,

suicidal episodes,

accrued significant debt while on kratom.

And during the last year, he attended an outpatient rehab,

an inpatient rehab,

a residential reintegrative program

and a detox facility

in efforts to overcome his kratom addiction.

Sorry.

He currently in a long term residential facility where he will be gone for a minimum of one year.

He's missed our son's first Christmas,

first steps. He'll miss his first birthday soon, and he's missed so many of the wonderful moments that come with having your first child.

I've learned how to be a mother of my own as I watch my husband struggle

with an addiction to a substance that should have never been readily accessible at a gas station for him.

I'm now raising our son and managing our house by myself

while trying to pick up the pieces of the destruction that kratom has caused in our life.

Kratom also caused my husband

I'm trying hard not to cry. Sorry.

Kratom also caused my husband to become severely physically ill

resulting in countless doctors visits, ER visit.

The damage that this drug has done to my family is far too extensive to be captured in just a few minutes.

It's robbed me of some of the most precious moments of my married life,

moments I'll never get back.

And at times,

I don't know if I'll ever truly even get my husband back to the person I married.

But still, I'm proud of him for getting the treatment he needs and continuing to fight every day to remove kratom from his life.

But, you know, if you are here today and you believe that kratom

is harmless or that it doesn't require regulation,

I ask you to consider whether you would feel the same if your family was wrecked because of something you can pick up at a gas station

everywhere you go.

But

that's all.

Thank you so much for your testimony. I know that was a challenging,

testimony to give. Do we have any questions,

for miss Eason?

I don't see any questions. Thank you so much for,

talking to us today.

Jonathan McMillan.

Good afternoon. How you doing?

Thank you for having me today. I'm here,

to speak to you about

the,

the effects that Kratom

had on my son, 29 year old, healthy,

load working out.

Mary got three beautiful children,

and,

me and his mom drove all the way from South Georgia up here to

share a story with you. So,

and,

so that happened about three years ago. Again, he had hurt his back at work,

and a guy had,

he says, here. Take this. This will help you. I don't know what it is. My son has struggled with alcohol.

So mixing that with the kratom, what I've

learned

is even worse than it being by itself. So,

you know, us living four hours away from him, he lives in Gay, Georgia. You know?

The first call we get is he's having a seizure.

So

his mom and I, we,

you know, we don't know what's going on, and the doctors can't they don't know. So

as time progressed,

I'd say within three years, he's had over 20 seizures.

That's just the ones we know about.

And one day, I encounter or I've encountered him two times having one. One day, we was having a family outing,

and his twin sisters come to me and said, daddy, Hunter's not breathing.

So I go over there,

try to help him.

I've I've been in law enforcement for

fourteen years and, you know, I've seen a few things and learned a few things about reenter an aid. So you know? And but when it's your own child, it's, it's a lot different.

You know? Not saying that you wouldn't do it for somebody else's, but

it it hits home.

And,

I'm thankful that,

representative Townes has

contact we've

stayed in contact about this because, it's new to me. I I didn't really know nothing about Kratom.

And what I found about it is nothing good.

I've tried to look and say, what is, what is good about kratom? You know? What can it be good for? Or, you know, nothing good.

And, I'm just here today to just,

I'm not sure to coat nothing, but

and my heart goes out to these ones that's lost loved ones. I still have our son,

and if and I'm fighting for him and the other ones

that don't think that they have a problem.

So

I appreciate y'all's time today,

and,

I urge you to, pass this bill.

Thank you so much for your testimony. Any questions for mister McMillan?

Yep. You don't have any questions. Thank you so much for making the trip. Where'd you come from? Where'd you come from today, mister McMillan? Brant McKillan. Brant McKillan? Yes, sir. Well, thank you for making the trip. Appreciate that.

Matt Wetherington.

Hello, everyone. My name is Matt Weathering.

I'm attorney at the Weatherington law firm. I'm also involved in wrongful death litigation involving kratom. I have five very quick points, and I'm gonna jump around so I don't waste your time. So number one is that Georgia has put the cart before the horse. So in the general process is that a drug manufacturer has to prove that a drug is safe and,

can be used by people before you're allowed to sell it.

Georgia

did the opposite. We

legalized kratom and then said, okay. Now prove it's not safe. That's the wrong way to think about things. That's not how you normally do it. So that's part of the reason why we don't have 50 different states doing ban bills for kratom because not every state in the country explicitly passed legislation

making kratom legal. It's just not legal to be sold there. It's operating illegal gray zone and is sold in those states sometimes, but they're subject to action in those states. So you we are now seeing many of those states who passed explicit authorizations for kratom like Georgia did. Now reversing those bills. So that's number one, carp for the horse. Number two is that we've already had a study committee. We did one in 2018 with Vernon Jones who then subsequently became a paid lobbyist for the kratom manufacturers

and advocated for the passage of legalizing kratom in Georgia. This is part of how we got here.

Number three is think about the greater harm. Now what's worse here? Having another group, another room filled with parents of addicted or lost children

or someone not getting their preferred drug for a moment in time until the drug manufacturers can prove that it's safe and provide guidelines for how to use it. Like, that's what we're really talking about here when we're talking about this ban. We're saying, wait a minute. I've got constituents that want to be able to use these products, or I got all these people saying, hey, I think we can use this to help people get off of other drugs. You get all these potentially good use cases.

Think about then the other side. Someone dies.

Someone has a lot loses their child, their their spouse.

That's the greater harm here. And there's no one saying you can't come back to this committee and say, guess what? We got the science now. We've gone through the FDA testing. We've done the things we're supposed to do. Now it's safe. Let's go ahead and unban it. There's nothing wrong with doing it that way. That's the normal process when we talk about doing good, answering your call of service. That's how you do it.

Lastly, there's been some legal questions. I'm happy to answer answer questions about this specifically

as to whether we can Georgia can put things on its scheduled list.

So answer to that is unequivocally yes. You're not required to, you know, have a federal schedule before Georgia does it. Georgia explicitly authorizes and maintains its own schedule list. You may hear some explicitly

authorizes

and maintains its own schedule list. You may hear some commentary or questions about can you enforce it or can we prosecute it? My answer to that is it doesn't really matter. And the reason why is because once you put something on Georgia's schedule list, a whole bunch of other good things happen.

It authorizes the board of pharmacy to enact handling requirements. It puts in place reporting requirements and reporting tools. It makes money available for treatment,

for our rehab centers. It does all kinds of good things

aside from necessarily the prosecution aspect. And I acknowledge that's an open question.

I couldn't find any law one way or the other as to whether you can prosecute something that doesn't appear on both lists. But we do have very capable qualified

judicial

advisers here at the capital who can give us some additional language if that became a priority, which I proposed to you it is not. The most important thing here is reducing harm and putting this on the schedule list lets all the people and all the resources that Georgia has to help people come into play. So pass this bill, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Sherry. I think you have a question, representative Kendrick. Yes.

Thank you for that. Thank you, mister chairman. Thank you for answering the with the the answer to your first question because that's what I was asking about the process.

And I'm still trying to get clarity

about

if the general consensus

from everybody that we heard, and maybe there's a mix of it, is it your stance that kratom,

the pure product itself is harmful

or that is too

assessable and people are abusing it? Because I think those are two different questions, and I'm trying to get what

everybody is is trying to say. Let me start by restating your question back to you because I feel like you've asked it a couple of times and haven't gotten a good answer. So I wanna make sure that I'm answering what you want. So it sounds like you're asking about the distinction between is kratom, like, a leaf of kratom put out here. Is that leaf of kratom dangerous, or are we only talking about what people do with that leaf of kratom? Is that the question? Not only would they do with it, but are they

using it in in a piece of way? Because if I went out and, you know,

took title now that's over the counter, if I've used that, then, obviously, I'm still gonna have bad effects, but the product itself is safe. So I'm trying to get an understanding of, are we saying that the pure leaf itself is unsafe or that it is too accessible and therefore people are abusing the

the use of a purely

a safe product in its pure form?

So the answer you're gonna get back, and I think this is something that everyone can agree with on both sides, is that the poison is in the dose is the argument that you'll hear and determine, like, at what point does that leaf become dangerous? Is it one leaf? Is it two leaves? Is it one glass of water or 500 glasses of water that will kill you? Because you'll hear people say that even water can be poisonous. Mhmm. So the short answer to your question, and I hate to defer it this way, is that everyone says everything. Everyone's got an opinion and a take and a take on kratom right now that goes both ways. Some people will say that just the kratom leaf itself is dangerous. Other people will say, no. It's the way that the kratom leaf is being used. Other people will say, no. It's the processing of the leaf to turn it into an extract that's dangerous. Other people say, no. It's the pulling out of certain,

you know, particles of the kratom leaf that make it dangerous. Everyone says all kinds of things. And my answer to you at the end of the day is those other things may not really matter

because we still haven't answered the threshold question of, can the drug manufacturers, the kratom manufacturers, can they prove that the products that they're putting in the market are safe?

And the answer to that question is no. They have not met that burden yet. Therefore, until they can, the smart answer when you've got all of this evidence around you that says that

it it either it is dangerous or it probably is dangerous. And and I'll defer. The science is kinda I'll I'll agree. The science is kind of

developing.

But when you've got all this smoke around you, I mean, you don't have to jump jump into a volcano to know that it's hot. We've got a whole lot of heat here. We got parents just saying, my kid died from kratom. I my child is addicted to kratom. You got you got poison control saying, like, we're seeing a lot of kratom problems. We don't have to wait

until we've conclusively and definitively proved, oh, yeah. This is something that's killing a bunch of people. We've got enough evidence here to say, let's wait and see. Let's not let kratom just run wild in Georgia until we've got certainty.

Let's be proactive. Let's do the right thing. Let's save lives

and then wait until the science develops and let them come back and and tell you otherwise.

Does that help? Yes. So so the book ended, you're

you're saying that regardless of if it's the the leaf or if people are abusing it, the burden is on the kratom industry

to prove that it should not be on a schedule one drug. And and until they do, it should be on a schedule one drug. Perfectly stated. Okay.

Any other questions to this witness?

Excellent. See a question. Thank you very much.

Drew Ashby.

Don.

Don's

oh, sorry.

I guess he's not here. Oh, he's not here? Yeah. Okay.

Is it, district attorney Smith? You still here?

Morning, ladies and gents.

I'm Jason Smith, the DA out in the Tallapoosa Circuit.

I have Harrelson and Polk County, so I'm right on the the Alabama line.

First, I wanna thank,

my guys from from our drug task force for coming out.

I'll I'll go ahead and tell you the

these guys

and our GBI task force out there

are,

probably doing more to fight

gas station poison than than any other law enforcement group,

in the state.

So all my z z top guys there,

they're out there. I mean, they they are hitting it, and they've been hitting it hard for years.

Yeah.

They they got a cool car they ride around into.

But

I I've I was over here today for other reasons, and I I just kinda came in

to to kind of

back up what they're what they testified to.

But I I've been surprised over the past,

two or three weeks,

to determine to see how many people under

the Gold Dome

have no idea what what Kratom is. Never heard of Kratom.

And it's something we've been battling out on I 20,

for better part of a decade.

I have the first two exits once you come into to Georgia from Alabama.

And when you get off Exit 5, which is the first exit,

you're not greeted by

signs

or, you know, welcome to hear that. You're you're greeted by about twenty

twenty foot flags that say, kratom.

And they're at gas stations, and they just line each side.

And

gas stations, they have a gas pump. They're not selling any gas. They're simply selling kratom to folks from Alabama because they beat us to the you know, banning it.

And

I'd I'd like to sit here and and tell you about all the crime that comes from those gas stations and everything else, those gas station sales, and what the sidewalks look like on those gas stations at, you know, 10:11 o'clock at night.

But I know my my time is short. And just by complete happenstance,

today

was recovery day at the Capitol. I didn't

realize that was today.

And, as I was about to go into a meeting about an hour and a half ago, I ran into

20

of,

my local

drug court and mental health court graduates that were here coming through.

Also, I I will toot my own horn a little bit in that

you will not find a bigger advocate and a bigger elected DA advocate

for accountability

courts than myself.

I'm a huge advocate for our mental health courts across the state and our drug courts.

I I've been our mental health court prosecutor for about six years. When I was elected DA last year or a year before last, I made a promise that I was going to stay in that court. So

twice a month, I am with our mental health court,

staffing those meetings.

I ran into them. They had no idea this bill was

even up.

I made and and they simply said, what's it about? I said, they're looking to ban Kratom.

All of them in almost unison,

they had to go catch a bus

to go go back to Cedartown, Georgia.

But they said,

tell

the what they they they called you congressman.

They said, tell those congressmen Tell everybody know.

Tell those congressmen

this will be absolutely

massive

in Georgia's recovery

effort.

That just happened

a 100 yards from where we're sitting with 20

recovering

opioid addicts.

So like I say, that that was pure

God intervention as I was walking into a room, and they just happened to see them walking by. And they started yelling, there's there's mister Smith.

So with with that said,

I I would sit here and and and love to go into the the crime

that we're seeing that derives from all this, the overdoses

we are seeing day in and day out from all of this.

But

as someone who represents

a a circuit right on the Alabama line, I mean, it it it doesn't take a rocket scientist to, you know when you drive on I 20 or I 85 into Alabama,

you start seeing firework city, big firework, you know, stands.

When you cross into Georgia,

you're seeing the kratom stand, you're seeing the kratom convenience stores.

Do the math.

But with that said, I I I held up on my end of the promise to tell my drug court and mental health court graduates,

to let you guys know that this would be absolutely massive in the opioid opioid,

recovery,

of the state.

Well, thank you for your, testimony. Do we have any questions of this witness?

I don't see any questions. Thank you so much. Appreciate what you do.

The chairman always comments how y'all are out there on the front line between us and Alabama, so we appreciate you acting as that buffer for it.

Okay.

Alright. Let's

see.

I think that's all before. Alright. And that that that, I think, concludes the testimony of those in favor of.

We've got a few to testify against. So, mister Highsmith.

Thank you, mister chairman. Robert Highsmith. Hello, madam chairman. Robert Highsmith,

with the law firm of Holland and Knight.

And we we are against the

version of house bill nine sixty eight as drafted,

which is why we checked that box on your form, mister chairman. But, I wanna

just

we represent a company, called, Botanicals for Better Health and Wellness, and they make a a, some some products, including the beverage products

that are made from the natural leaf of Kratom.

And I wanna say that our company agrees

wholeheartedly

and supports about 99 and a half percent of what you just heard. So even though we are against the bill as drafted, and I'll tell you why,

everything they're describing is happening, everything they're everything they're describing is bad, and everybody that is manufacturing products that is causing it, needs to suffer very serious consequences.

The the issue and representative Townsend and I, we've spent a great deal of time talking about all of this, and he understands exactly where I'm coming from. The issue is,

you know, we would support scheduling these synthetic

products like,

seven hydroxymitragynine,

that that

that mimic

extremely

high doses

of some of the natural components of creme, and I'll explain what I mean by that.

We would support scheduling,

seven o h with appropriate language. We can talk about exactly how to do it.

But

but miss, representative Townsend's bill just paint just paints

slightly too broad of a brush because it actually covers just the plant. And although the witness before that said, you know, well, what does just the leaf what does just the leaf do? Well, I tell you.

To to get the amount of seven o h, which is the abbreviation and much easier to say than seven hydroxymitragynine,

to get that amount of that metabolite into your body, you'd have to eat a 100 pounds of this stuff. A 100 pounds. Yeah. You eat a 100 pounds of just about anything, representative, as you alluded earlier. You know you you know, a number of bad things can happen. And more importantly, it's it would be impossible to do.

When when a human being ingests the kratom leaf,

which has lots of benefits that we can talk about in in in future proceedings, mister chairman. I don't wanna

I know the hour's long.

The the body,

creates a metabolite.

As it metabolizes,

it, that creates a tiny, tiny amount,

tiny amount

of of seven

hydroxymitrogyny.

What these bad actors are doing and what I suspect now look, every bad experience that you heard about, mister chairman, is terrible, and I don't know the specifics of those ex and so I don't wanna presume anything.

But, mister chairman,

I'm I suspect strongly that

nearly all, if not all, of the awful, awful things that you heard about that are absolutely happening and need to stop

came from

synthesized

highly, highly concentrated,

chemical products,

highly concentrated chemical products like seven o h, that are in these tablet forms that are that that represented Townsend's bill from a couple years ago already banned. Now do we lack enforcement?

Do we lack resources

Absolutely. And we've worked with representative Townsend and the state law department,

and the FDA for that matter to put out a consumer,

bulletin that says, stay away from seven o h. We we assisted. Our company assisted in preparing that because they're absolutely right. That stuff is bad news. And the mister Scafe who said, look. The way they're describing what this chemical does to people is how I felt when I was addicted to fentanyl. He's right. It it does hit the same receptors

in those quantities and in those concentrations.

So I I'm not gonna belabor the point we're gonna continue to talk about this bill, mister chairman.

We would support

the appropriate scheduling of seven zero h and other synthetic,

manufactured manufactured

substances, what we would ask is let's not schedule a leaf, a natural product that might be made into a tea or or or a beverage

that there's no way with that again, without something silly like ingesting a 100 pounds of it, there's no way you can get to the levels that are creating these, these bad outcomes. And so we look forward to continuing to work with representative towns and continuing to work with this subcommittee and full committee,

to, potentially amend the bill to absolutely cover what's happening to these folks that have testified,

but not ban a product that many people and you'll hear more about this, mister chairman, as we continue the process,

but not ban a natural product that many people are benefiting from and that isn't causing all these awful,

outcomes.

Is there a specific

amendment you're requesting to the bill? We we would again, we wanna be careful about the language because as as you note, mister chairman, we're talking about the schedule that includes LSD, heroin,

more you know, schedule ones that that's the serious stuff that that other than research, nobody ought to have anything to do with as madam as madam chairman well knows.

So we wanna be careful about the language, but we would generally support

scheduling of

seven o h and other synthetic

manufactured

compounds

that are creating all these, harms, because and and our interested, mister chairman, if I may, you know, everybody came up here and said,

That's very frustrating to a manufacturer of a of a of a product that only uses a natural leaf and doesn't do any of these bad things. Seven o h is not kratom.

Kratom is a natural leaf product that many people, have used to their benefit. Seven o h is a metabolite of that that the body produces in tiny, tiny amounts.

And and, and next time, mister chairman, we're gonna bring a medical doctor who works for our company to to give some nobody wants to hear a lawyer try to play doctor.

But we'll we'll give you we'll give some more detail on that, but would would we would we support scheduling the the synthesis and the high concentration

a 100 or more times

of of substance unnatural substances like seven hydroxymitragynine

that that do target the same receptors that morphine and other opiates, target. It absolutely,

need to. And that representative Townsend's bill, the Crime Control Protection Act from a couple of years ago already bans

the problem that you we have an enforcement problem. We have a compliance problem,

and and it hurts our market for our natural product

for somebody to say, oh, crap. I'm crap. I'm crap. I'm crap. I'm crap. Well, hold on a second. We're like, wait. We have a product that's helping people that's a good product,

an unnatural

chemical that is banned and against which there needs to be more enforcement. You're calling that kratom. That hurts our market, and that's why we're here, mister chairman.

Any questions?

Madam Chairley? Thank you.

Robert,

is this the only product that your comp that company makes?

They have the other products, but the the the but I'd I would wanna get you a list. I wouldn't wanna try to do that from memory. But Okay. So that's not the main one that they're pushing? No. No. Well, the the product that we're concerned about with this bill is a

is a is primarily beverage based products

that are made from the kratom leaf without synthesis, without concentration,

without,

the the type of adulteration

that that is leading to these outcomes that you heard about.

Then explain to me because I haven't heard the previous,

testimony.

What does that drink do?

Why do people buy it?

Oh, there and we'll have doctor we'll have, our our medical director come and and testify as to the specific, you know, it has calming effects. It has it has,

it has,

you know, lots of of natural benefits, like lots of, you know, natural products and teas and and various things do. And it has a, but it it does not have,

importantly, this the addictive pro properties that this that the synthesized products do that are that that that are banned and need to stay banned. But it okay. May I have another question, mister chairman? Yes, ma'am. I'm sorry.

But does it affect and

and they have they're they can get a high from it?

No. No. No, ma'am. I would not describe it as a high by any by any means. But because because, again,

the high that people that mister Scaife accurately described what happens when you take,

concentrated

synthesized seven o h. It targets the same,

receptors that morphine targets. And in and and by some measures, more effectively.

And the and but the natural kratom leaf does not do that unless you eat a 100 pounds of it, which

is is only a theoretical,

problem. Up

one of the things they've already said. So often,

you really don't know

which combination if they're taking other things.

But it seems to me if they're selling it in these kind of stops,

which are pretty skate skanky, many of them. Just have to be truthful.

You know, most people are looking for something, and it wouldn't be popular if they were not getting some

effect

to it, whether it be by itself or combined with something else.

I'm sorry. You we have a long time friendship, and I don't mean to put you on the spot, but

I just have to believe it's causing some kind of

that kind of a high or

they feel loose and easy or something.

Well I you have you're gonna you're gonna have to show me. The doctor's gonna have to show me that it doesn't do that. Sure. Sure. Rep madam chairman. And and and you're right about that. But, again,

a and, and,

so many of these products that are being marketed as kratom are not the natural leaf, but rather these synthetic synthesized metabolites. And you're absolutely

right that a lot of what is currently available,

in gas stations,

and and in other other retailers

is not our company's product that doesn't do that, but rather these synthesized,

metabolites

like seven o h, that that's the big one,

that that absolutely had these negative effects. And you're absolutely right, madam chairman. That's why people are buying it. That's why representative Townsend Townsend's bill already rendered it illegal, and that's why we would support,

an appropriate,

change in language to schedule it

while not,

while not, you know, putting on schedule one a a natural, a natural leaf product that, you know, for decades has has been in use around the world without you know, it was only when people started to be able to figure out how to synthesize

these metabolites that you started to see these these horrible outcomes that we we're every bit as opposed to as anybody else that testified. Thank you.

Thank you, madam chairman. So I I gather,

miss Donna Smith, what

the the point, I guess, you're you're making is that some of these products labeled as kratom are actually highly concentrated

metabolites

of kratom,

extremely concentrated metabolites of kratom and should not be marketed by that name.

And you feel that the law currently, which was passed by representative Townsend a few years

ago, would would prohibit their sale as kratom, but it's just not

being enforced?

Everything 100%,

mister chairman. That's you you got that could could not say it better. I I the only thing I would say is that it's not that it's necessarily not being enforced. It's just a matter of resources like anything else. Right? I mean, you know, but but seven o h is representative Townsend's bill from earlier already made it illegal. If representative Townsend says, look, that's not enough. We need to schedule this stuff, put it in the same legal category as heroin and morphine LSD.

Again,

language

we we we wanna say the language, of course, but but we we would we would absolutely support that because we agree with representative towns and that those products

should not be marketed at all, and we especially don't wanna market it in a way that that that confuses them with our product, which is legal and safe. But but do I gather you're saying that striking the word, and I hope I'm pronouncing this correctly, metrogenine

from his proposed bill would not necessarily

address your concerns, or that's something you just need to study. Oh, we seven hydroxy

mitrogenine

is the is the substance that absolutely needs to be scheduled. It's the it's the it's the kratom leaf itself that we'd wanna be that we'd wanna be careful about. And we'll we'll work with representative Townes and, and the committee to to propose So it's not just hypoxymotag

Correct.

Metrogene itself, you think, should be scheduled. Well,

I would I again, I wanna be careful about how we would and and we didn't come here with a a proposed substitute to to offer, although we will, mister chairman, when when the chair tells us it's the appropriate time.

But we we want to we wanna make sure that we get we just wanna make sure we get the chemistry right and not ban the natural leaf product, which, contains,

tiny, tiny amounts of these things. But the real problem now this is what I just cannot emphasize enough. The real problem is

the the body metabolizes this product and creates a tiny amount of, for example,

seven o h. Yeah. What the bad actors are doing is putting in a tablet form

100

times or more

the amount of seven o h that the body could ever create, and that's that's where we agree with representative Townsend's got a gun. Now and and, again, the language and the chemistry of that, I I wouldn't wanna give you a hip shot on that, mister chairman. I'd I'd wanna be thoughtful about that and give you the exact language. Charlie Cooper.

Well, I guess

so you're

so you're saying the leaf does have enough in it.

That it would be very hard for us. First, I thought you were suggesting that we might be able

to say that if it's made strictly from the leaf,

it could go and the other

could be put on a schedule one. But the fact that the leaf does have some in it would, I think, prohibit us from doing that. No, ma'am. The the we're we're not we're not worried about the amount of seven zero eight in the leaf. That that's, you know, that that chemistry is already addressed in in

in existing statute. But but the again, as I said at the very beginning, the way nine sixty eight was introduced,

it would ban the leaf itself, and that's what we wanna get it. That that's all we wanna get right now. Are you saying that and I'm sorry. I'm just are you saying then we could someway write the law where we would specifically

not ban the leaf, anything made from the leaf, but we could put as a schedule one

the other product? Absolutely.

Okay.

That that's it. Alright. Thank you, Charlie Cooper. Alright. Any other questions?

Alright. Thank you, mister Thank you, mister chairman. Your testimony.

Jerry Keane.

Thank you, mister chairman.

Can I give this to the committee? I know Sure. Members have left.

Yeah. What what's left of us? You're welcome to have.

Thank you, chairman Levitt. Chairman the chairwoman proud. Yeah.

So, it's good to see my old friend,

chairman chairwoman Cooper. I won't tell him how long we've known each other, but a long, long time. I'm here very controversial bill we worked on? Yeah. I can remember that

one too. I represent the American Freedom Association. I am pinch hitting because our representative due to the snow and storms in DC

schedule change couldn't get here, but would like to come if if the chair schedules another hearing on this. What I passed out to you was what, mister Highsmith alluded to came from a general Carr, attorney general Carr's office, where we work with him along with mister Highsmith and many others

to go after the problem that we're all addressing.

We sent in secret buyers all over the state.

And not only did we buy them, we've provided the receipts

to the attorney general's office and the location where they're being sold.

They are processing all that now. The general did put out a press release and a consumer alert notice

on synthetics. I wanna draw your attention later,

when you're reading this as I'm sure you all will,

that he does address the synthetics as opposed to the natural leaf product.

Two years ago, if you remember, I know chairman Levitt, this

this committee spent hours and hours and hours on the subject and drafted a bill. We went to the senate and worked again and again again for hours and hours and came up with a bill that went into effect basically a year ago. Yeah. I think representative Townsend still has PTSD. Yeah. He and I I still have a little bit of a tick. So,

anyway

cease up a little bit when you started talking about your little hair. So,

so we too wanna work with him in this committee

to address the problem.

Number one, it's the synthetics.

These products have kratom on it it that have no kratom in it. They were synthetically

manufactured

in a lab without using kratom or the leaf.

There there are opioids.

They're horrible. They need to go. That's why we went to the AG's office with the products, and this is what we've gotta do. The missing piece we've talked around so far today is enforcement.

Representative Trey Kelly introduced at the end of last year, house bill seven fifty seven, which is now pending

in agriculture and consumer affairs in the house.

And we spent pretty much the entire summer and fall working with the Department of Agriculture

to get them to be the enforcement mechanism

over these products

just like they do with our hemp CBD and the other products.

A lot of these products are sold in the same place, and they're in their monitoring.

One of the things and they're working on substitute language now to do that, and, hopefully, we're gonna get that out real quick. One of the things to do there,

mister chairman, is

not only labeling, but put a QR code.

We wanna require any manufacturer that sells product in Georgia to register that product with the Department of Agriculture

with a lab analysis

and a QR code on every product that'll have a current lab analysis

on file as a consumer with my phone that I could pull it up. And so we're working on that language now.

There's a lot more. I'll I'll let that bill have its own hearing and take its but we we we feel good that we're moving in the right direction there to attack the enforcement, Megan Nelson with representative Kelly.

I really wanna turn my time over to the next speaker, or he's far more qualified. I think once you hear his credentials, you will listen up. But, appreciate the committee's consideration.

And, again, we wanna work with you, representative Townsend, to address the real problem.

Thank you so much. Any questions of this witness? Do we have anybody left to ask questions? Okay.

Thank you very much.

Mister Durkin. Bob Durkin.

Good afternoon. Afternoon. Thank you for your time. I appreciate being here. My name is Bob Durkin.

My background, I'm a pharmacist with the master's in molecular biology. I was a captain in the army for six years.

Residency trained at Walter Reed in clinical nuclear pharmacy.

I'm an attorney. I practice in the food and drug space. I'm on-site counsel to the AKA,

various dietary supplement manufacturers and distributors,

including those that that manufacture and distribute kratom products.

I was also for twelve years lucky enough to work at the Food and Drug Administration.

I started off in the center for drugs where I learned how to regulate unapproved new drugs, compounded drugs,

made my way over to the food program where I spent six years as the deputy director for the office of dietary supplement programs.

So I was the number two person in charge of dietary supplement regulation for six years at the federal level.

I'm here today to offer my my advice, my opinions,

answer questions relative as a form of regulator who understands how food is regulated in The United States.

I think a lot of this is confusion about what kratom is and kratom isn't. And we've heard some things here today, and I I'm benefiting from going last. It also it's horrible to go last because you hear some really sad stories. And as a dad, you don't know how to handle that. So I think it's real important to to see what kratom is and what kratom isn't.

If kratom is marketed as a drug, it's illegal.

Bust it, get it off the streets.

If Kratom's market is a dietary supplement or food, there is a pathway for it to legally be on the market in The United States. It doesn't require clinical control, double blind studies, placebo controlled studies.

Food goes to market unapproved in The United States. Drugs require approval.

Food can go to market with animal studies, history of use,

clinical studies if they exist, but they're certainly not required because you're not selling a drug. You're selling a food.

Kratom is a botanical out of Southeast Asia. It's been used for hundreds of years as a natural wellness of pick me up.

Legend has it, it was brought back by our Vietnam vets in the sixties and seventies, became popular in The United States in the early two thousands.

One of the ways it became popular in The United States was there was an incident in Sweden in 2010

where kratom leaf killed 10 people, nine people.

The other pharmacist in the room mentioned tramadol.

An investigation in that by the Swedes discovered that that kratom was contaminated with methotramadol,

the active metabolite of the drug tramadol, and and that's what ate their livers and killed them. It wasn't the kratom leaf. But that's where the dye was cast for the FDA and its position on kratom and how they were gonna approach it. From there, you had import alerts. Myself, when I was in charge in 2015, authorized the seizure of kratom

based on the information I have.

In hindsight now, that probably wasn't the best decision because there is a good body of science out there about the safety of kratom.

Companies have satisfied the pre market responsibilities of the Food and Drug Administration by filing at least seven new dietary ingredient notifications to the Food and Drug Administration.

This This is where a manufacturer

distributor puts together information about their manufacturing to show that they can make it the right way. They put together information about the safety of the product to show that it's reasonably reasonably expected to be safe the way they manufacture it and sell it. Kratom is a botanical.

The word kratom has come to include so many things. The leaf, the ground leaf, an extract taken from that leaf.

Unfortunately, now it's also come to include things like seven hydroxymitragynine,

pseudoendoxal,

and other metabolites.

You know, we talked a lot about habit and addiction,

and I'm I'm that's that is a very complicated science. There are other experts that can counsel on that,

but

I'm pretty sure I have a habit for coffee or addicted to coffee. Today, when I went to your commissary and there was no coffee at noon, I I I I panicked a little.

And I'm not making light of anything, but it's a it's a very complicated

spectrum

of of of science.

You know, to to draw the analogy of what's happened to kratom,

you could take a coffee bean, you could grind it up. That's a gruff that's a crushed coffee bean. You can make an extract of it. We call that a pot of coffee.

That pot of coffee contains caffeine.

If somebody were to pull that caffeine out of the pot of coffee and chemically alter it, usually with pool chemicals, shock pool chemicals, and turn it into something different, that's what seven hydroxymitragynine

is. Folks are then taking that seven hydroxymitragynine

and selling it, sometimes calling it seven hydroxy, sometimes calling it something else, sometimes calling it kratom.

Seven hydroxymitragynine

is not found naturally in the leaf. It only develops in the leaf after the leaf is plucked from the tree and mitragynine

oxidizes in the seven hydroxy.

A very very small amount of seven hydroxy is in the leaf because of that oxidation process.

When you eat kratom, when you eat a kratom leaf or when you ingest metragynine, the primary alkaloid from kratom, your liver metabolizes

it into a lot of things. One of which is seven hydroxymitragynine.

That's the way your body works. You ingest things that metabolizes them and the things that knows how to excrete or get out.

Seven hydroxymitragynine

is 15 times more potent than opium. 15 times more potent than morphine.

It attaches to the mu opioid receptor and does not let go like other other drugs do. In addition to that, the the ER surgeon,

he might be gone. Now, mention how complicated the pharmacology is. He was talking about seven hydroxymitragynate.

It attaches to so many different receptors in the brain. It's it's you can't even keep track of it. So I think right now what you have is a problem where

you're regulating and you have a choice to ban.

My experience is that when you ban something, you drive it into the shadows. You drive it to the lowest common denominator.

It's not gonna go away. It's gonna be in your it's gonna be in in your in your cities, in your state. It's gonna come in from out of state. People are gonna find a way to sell it because they make money on it. What's gonna happen is quality is gonna drop. It's not gonna be made the right way. It's not gonna be labeled the right way. You're gonna go back to the days when kratom was sold in baggies

with Sharpie marker on it about what it was. People are gonna get sick. People are gonna die. There are no conditions for use. You're better off regulating it and controlling it. I don't think you have a regulation problem. I think you have an enforcement problem. You've already made it illegal to sell seven hydroxymitragidine.

You've already made it illegal to sell kratom that has more than a hundred and fifty milligrams of mitragidine in a serving. It seems like you just need to enforce it. As far as the proposed ban or or scheduling,

DEA looked at scheduling kratom, not actually kratom, metragidine and seven hydroxymitragidine

twice. It failed twice.

Right now on July 29, the Food and Drug Administration secretary Kennedy and commissioner McKay stood on a podium with the DEA administrator and announced they were going to schedule seven hydroxy.

It was profound. Nothing like has ever happened in American health history. It it's remarkable.

They pointed to a chart with waves of the heroin epidemic and how it's transitioned from different drugs. And they pointed to a cross line on this on the chart where we we were coming down from fentanyl and we're going up for seven hydroxy.

And they said, this is where we're at in time and we're gonna stop it. Right now, you have a seven hydroxy problem. You have a pseudo and docile problem. You have the next it problem.

If you're gonna ban something, you could probably do what's called an eight factor or seven factor analysis. You found it in your your code of regulations there, and it looks at different factors.

And those factors are what decides when something gets put into a schedule. They're very complicated factors. If you want a seven factor, eight factor analysis, seven hydroxy, I'll get it to you. If you want a seven factor, eight factor,

analysis on metrogynine,

I'll get it to you. If you want one on kratom leaf, I'll get it to you. I strongly encourage you to schedule seven hydroxyl and the other metabolites,

but I strongly encourage you to regulate Kratom and enforce against the bad players while giving consumers an opportunity to choose and buy good products.

So when you say

regular kratom, are you talking about metrogena or is that another,

what's the word? It's an alkaloid. It's a it's an alkaloid.

So the other pharmacist mentioned that there's 42 alkaloids. Might even be more than that now. Which means what?

An alkaloid is a is a molecule with a nitrogenous base and then a structure from there, and they're all kind of similar. Something your body creates as a result of something else? No. It's something well, yes. But it's also something that your body pulls out a kratom. There are about 42 of them in the kratom leaf. Sort of like caffeine is not the only thing in coffee, but it's it's what we all want. The alkaloids are the things in in kratom that give the effect that you were asking about. The general wellness, the anti anxiety, the pick me up. A lot of people use kratom to replace coffee. A lot of people use kratom for mild pain. A lot of peep some people reportedly use kratom as managed withdrawal from drugs.

I don't understand that. That science is beyond me. Addiction science is very, very complicated.

So to answer your question, metragynine is the primary alkaloid in kratom. Makes up about sixty five percent of the alkaloid profile.

What folks have learned to do over time is to take the kratom leaf and do an extraction of the kratom leaf to isolate those alkaloids because that's what gives you the the the sensations, the benefits that you asked about. And they sell those as a kratom extract.

Both of those qualify as dietary ingredients under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, section two zero one f f one.

A botanical other herb or a constituent metabolite of a botanical other herb. So kratom is a dietary ingredient, and an extract of kratom is a dietary ingredient that

that based on other parts of the regulation can legally be sold

without FDA approval. Okay. Alright. Thank you. Any questions? I I went really quick there. I'm sorry. I'm nervous, and I wasn't sure my No. We we appreciate quick.

Representative Neal.

Thank you, sir. The chair. And so, yeah, just to make some general comments. Like, I

know we've debated it this ad nauseam

prior to today.

He's smiling over there.

And literally almost rewrote this bill,

in the prior version that has already passed. And I thought, to your point, we'd already addressed

a lot of the issues, and we just need to

enforce those issues because we wanna be careful, especially in this committee and a few others where

we,

you know, because we had a lot of testimony of how this helps so many people. Yeah. But then on one side, those that abuse

it, I was trying to schedule a certain way

for people that, you know, have some type of addiction

and ignore the people that, have demonstrated how this has helped them in a way when they are responsible

with using it.

So I just wanted to make that statement, but thank you for coming today. No, ma'am. It's it's a it's a good point. And your bill right now,

it's pretty good. I mean, you limit the amount of mitragidine.

You're you're not allowed to have seven zero eight or metabolites.

If you wanted to schedule or ban seven hydroxy, I would suggest you do it on a parts per million basis.

It was one of the things that was being wrestled with here with the the one of the other witness is how how would you schedule it? The state of Florida schedule it based on parts per million. They said 400 parts per million on dry weight. Anything that has over that is considered seven hydroxy and is scheduled.

That's based in pretty good science. 400 might be a little bit too low of a number. The dry weight basis is a good idea,

but you can certainly schedule seven hydroxyl in an effective way. Florida's done it.

Charlie Cooper. Okay.

I'm not a lawyer, but I do wanna say, isn't it true?

I get to play a lawyer.

In the true that when you say, oh, well, this can be just a food substance. Mhmm. Okay. And the FDA doesn't regulate it. We have had trouble over the last thirty, forty years

with

concerns about vitamins and all sorts of things that are labeled at foods

for whatever reason, but that do have harmful side effects. Yes, ma'am. Okay. So just saying that just because this one can be,

you know, labeled the food, it doesn't have harmful effects. It's getting into a real iffy It is. I can give you a good example.

If I sell an orange and I sell you that orange for its vitamin c content, buy Bob's orange, it's high in vitamin c. Now that I've sold that vitamin c like that, vitamin c is a food.

If I sell you a product and I say this has five hundred milligrams of vitamin c, it's gonna support your immune system, I just sold a dietary supplement.

If I sell you vitamin c to prevent or cure scurvy, I just sold you a drug.

So a lot of, like semantics. A lot of what the it is and a lot about how the it is regulated is based on the objective intent Semantics. Annex. Of the party putting in commerce. Yes, ma'am. Well, it's kind of I would say it's it's it's based

less on

intent

as on an objective

representation

about what it will do. Right.

I think you're right, and it's it's the objective representation of that intent on the label and labeling. What do they say about the product? You know, what what what's the deal being made?

Yeah. What my my representation

about it

determines how it's classified, and then it determines a regulatory structure, at least at the federal level. I'm assuming it's what you're talking about primarily. You know, I'm not a I'd have to look at Georgia, but Georgia is probably pretty close. A lot of states,

have incorporated the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act in part or in full. So it's likely Georgia does it pretty similar. Okay.

Any other questions to this witness?

Alright. Thank you so much for your testimony. Appreciate it. Alright. Jennifer Martin.

Are you trying to tell me something?

Okay.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Fellow Georgians.

Hope everyone is well.

I I wrote everything down. I hope that's okay. I'm,

nervous Nancy right now. So,

but good afternoon, and thank you for allowing me to speak. My name is Jen. I'm a mother, a person in long term recovery,

and someone whose life was saved by natural kratom leaf.

In 2006,

I was prescribed opiate pain medication by my doctor, was started as the legitimate treatment,

slowly turned into addiction, and eventually escalated into illegal

opioids including fentanyl.

I lost everything and most painfully, I lost my husband to fentanyl.

After his death, I entered recovery treatment

and that's when I found natural kratom leaf.

I have been clean for almost four years. I have my kids back. I've held the same job for four years, which that was impossible for me to do before.

And I'm in school working towards my master's in psychology to become a substance abuse counselor.

This comes from the natural kratom plant, not the extracts,

not the concentrates,

not the synthetic or high potency products like seven o h that we've heard so many, horror stories,

today,

about.

Plain kratom leaf does not intoxicate me or impair me.

It helped me stay in recovery and rebuild my

life. People deserve the right to access a natural plant based alternative that helps them stay alive and in recovery,

especially when the alternative is returning to the illicit drug market, which is very dangerous right now.

It's critical to understand that natural kratom leaf is not the same as high potency,

chemically altered, or synthetic kratom products.

Treating the same is a big mistake,

and many people in recovery, including myself, actively avoid those products because of their risk.

Kratom

Consumer Protection Act in place, which includes age limits, product testing, and labeling requirements. Those protections are working, and they should remain in place. Those protections are working, and they should remain in place.

What I do not support is

criminalizing

a natural plant that helps people like me survive while dangerous high potency products

are either lumped together or allowed to drive policy.

If there is to be a ban, it should be narrowly focused on high potency synthetic or isolated products,

not on the natural kratom leaf that has already been responsibly regulated and helped so many people like me stay alive and in recovery.

Yep. And I was gonna say, so Florida,

banned seven zero eight and they have left, you know, the natural plant alone.

Seven zero eight has ruined everything. All the all the sad stories that we heard in this room today is because of seven zero eight.

But, you know,

it's just I'm asking that you guys just leave the raw powder alone. You know?

But thank you so much for letting me talk.

Thank you. Do you have any questions

That was for miss, I'm sorry. This is Martin.

I don't think you have any questions. Okay. Thank you so much for your testimony.

Alright. Miss Gertin?

Thank

you,

sir.

I'm Maisie Lynn. Gertin, executive director at the Georgia Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

Not my favorite position to be in, because I have not had a chance to talk to representative Townsend simply because

my comments have kind of bubbled up today listening to the testimony and,

also

recognizing that this is a committee that understands the difference between an and and an or.

So I apologize that I haven't because I I would have if I'd realized, but I would love to have some more conversation. But and to not belabor any of the points that have been made.

It seems to me that you would be shifting if if we were to pass this as is.

There's a criminalization

aspect to it. Right? And that's where the and and or comes in.

My colleagues across the aisle, PAC,

at this time, don't believe that we can prosecute they can prosecute

a controlled substance that's not on both Georgia's list and the feds list. And that's the way that they practice.

And it's because there's an and in the sentence in sixteen thirteen twenty one

where controlled substance is defined.

It's defined as

the l the items that are on the federal list

and the items that are on

our list.

Yes.

Well,

say that again.

Exactly.

And so,

just like happened in this room not long ago, we modified how sex offender registry is handled by changing literally

an or to an and,

and it make it much more difficult for people who have rehabilitated their lives to move on with their lives. Lives. And that's exactly what will happen here if we come back if this passes,

we put all of these things on schedule. Whatever gets put on schedule one, even if it's not prosecuted

July 2, because we have not changed that

and to an or, it could happen next year or the year after or after that. And so

given that there's an enforcement problem now with the law that you're dealing with, the idea it's a little bit of magical thinking to think that we would then have adequate enforcement for

a schedule another drug on the schedule one,

crime rubric.

But more than that, you would now be criminalizing the very people that we're concerned about saving.

And that's what we see in our jails. It's what we see in our mental health centers. It's what we see in our rehab centers. We would be just simply expanding that cohort of people rather than

dealing with what we could deal with right now with what we have in the books. You know, and and earlier this during some of the testimony today, I I thought if you walked in the room right now and you heard this person talking about

physical dependence,

heart palpitations,

seizures,

bright packaging that,

you know, draws adolescent attention.

I remember, you know, the camel, Joe Camel. Right? We've had this conversation in nicotine. We've had it in alcohol. We have it now ongoing in cannabis and hemp

and in vapes.

And all of those things we regulate.

We

don't stick them on the controlled substance list as a schedule one drug and cause all of these collateral consequences and, PS, tax revenue

also gets generated

by the things that we choose to regulate rather than criminalize.

So I I just

come to say there are some collateral consequences that I think are well worth considering. It sounds like some of the surgical

moves that could be made with respect to really focusing in on the most problematic type

of cretin

synthetic

might be part of a really thoughtful solution that would

potentially

mitigate some of my concern. But it's not gonna mitigate

the

all of the extent to which we would be potentially burdening

possessors and users with criminalization.

What they really need is addiction

help.

And I will say too, this body also, you all have looked at

in the process of looking at vapes,

some of the research that happened behind the scenes was that when New York and California,

banned vapes,

a black market develops, and that's what will happen here. And so some of the adulteration that we now, at least the gentleman who came in earlier and could say, this is adulterated. This is adulterated. You know, these are things that shouldn't be on the shelf that are.

You can see them. They're on the shelves. And so the other gentleman can go in and buy them and take them to the attorney general and say, let's do something about this. But if we

if we ban or regulate so extensively

these

materials,

it's gonna be much harder to do all of that because it's going to be a black market. It's going to be we're gonna be back in here having the conversation we had about fentanyl and felony murder. And it's just this is where we're headed if we do this this way. So I hope that, as the conversations go forward, kind of this

big picture can be kept in mind, and I

my request would be that you all never change that

and to an or

in the future in sixteen thirteen twenty one.

Do you have any questions for me? So just you so

to to clarify the committee, in sixteen thirteen twenty one, I'm It's the definition. Mhmm. There's a definition of controlled substance. It means a drug substance or immediate precursor in schedules one through five of code section sixteen thirteen twenty five through sixteen thirteen twenty nine and schedules one through five of 21 CFR part 13 o n eight, which is a federal reg, I believe. Right.

So it's saying it's a controlled substance if it's on both the federal and the state schedule. Otherwise, it's not a controlled substance. That's my understanding of the black letter, and that's also my understanding of how the prosecuting attorney's counsel interprets that in their decision making process. And then sixteen thirteen twenty five is the actual statute on schedule one substances.

Yes. That's being modified. Proposed to modify that. Exactly. But I think

the prosecutor's concern, they would have a they might not be able to make they might get dismissed,

because a court would find well, even if it's on the list in sixteen thirteen twenty five, it's not a controlled substance by definition unless it's on both the federal and the state schedule here. Right. I mean, that would certainly be our best defense to do it. Yeah.

But also,

we're

then we're in a criminal posture with a person who likely has some kind of, from what we've heard today, addiction concern

or mental health concern or medical concern that they are trying to self medicate, and we're in the wrong forum for actually helping that person.

Well, I I would push back on that a little bit because I think sometimes the criminal form is the only way we can get someone's attention, and there are alternative,

processes or venues for lack of a better word within that context

where we try to treat and and

through use of,

criminal, like, sanction,

sort of compel better behavior and compel treatment. Fair.

So And accountability courts have been very successful. The drug courts, I mean, I I don't wanna diminish that work

also. Right. You're right. We could be doing it in a in a much less, adversarial space with a lot without having to have carceral measures as the punitive,

stick, if you will.

Points we'll talk about.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions of this witness?

Alright. Robert, did you

I'd like to use phone voice for the

You don't need to talk to Paul.

We know who you are, but just tell us who you are

for the viewing audience at home. I'm Robert Smith. I'm the general counsel of the prosecuting attorney's counsel,

and

that's the problem.

You know, miss Gerten

attempted to explain

what my position is after asking me about it and what my concern is. I don't

you regulate kratom, don't regulate what that's a policy decision that this body is

tasked to do.

What my role has been what my role has been for ten years is to explain to you guys the consequences of a choice.

So if you

pass this bill as it's currently drafted,

when we go to allege in our indictments or accusations, we have to allege kratom,

comma, a a controlled substance.

Miss Gertin and her,

colleagues are gonna turn around and say, no. No. No. No. No. It's not a controlled substance because it has to be both scheduled by Georgia and scheduled by the Feds.

And a judge who is tasked to bound strictly construe all criminal statutes against the state

and in favor of liberty

is gonna look at us and go, you're right. Dismissed.

So pass this, but understand that then we're gonna have to tell

legislator or law enforcement partners,

you can make all the arrests you want, but we can't prosecute this.

It also then puts us in contradiction

with fifteen eighteen thirty two. That's the PAQC

statute that says that you a prosecutor

can be removed from office

if they have a policy

where they don't enforce a certain law.

So you're truly putting us in the horns of a dilemma.

Do we or advise law enforcement to arrest somebody on the law that we can't prosecute?

Or do we put ourselves in a position of possibly losing our positions as solicitors and DAs because

telling law enforcement not to enforce the law. Now something was said about Alabama and how they're doing it, and our neighbors to the West

do it a little bit differently. And if you wanna do some homework, y'all are always giving me homework. I'll give it to you.

Alabama statute 13 a dash 12 dash two one two is the beginning of their drug codes.

One of their references is to schedule is how they schedule drugs.

That's Alabama statute 20 dash two dash 23 schedule one.

There's no reference whatsoever. I'm sorry, Brock. I'll get it to you. There's no reference whatsoever

to

the federal statutes.

So as Jerwoman Cooper asked a few minutes ago, could we get rid of this? Could we make that and and or?

You can. That's a policy decision.

But as I explained to the author of the bill earlier,

you're then gonna have a problem with marijuana,

and you're gonna have both problems with other drugs. I mean, once again, remember, my obligation here is to tell you guys straight. I'm not gonna give

you one way or the other. I'm gonna tell you what the the pluses and minuses are.

Because of the way Georgia treats marijuana, which is different than the federal government,

then suddenly you put us in a position where we might have a problem with our marijuana codes.

So

that's but that's, you know, the that's the education. I'm a policy educator, and that's the education I've got for you. And I'll stand for any questions.

Any questions for this witness?

Can you go first from now on?

Alright. You have no questions other than I think we have a comment, but no question, but well taken. Thank you all so much. Thank you.

Rick, would you like to come

in and respond? Yeah. I probably need some little bit, additional information.

Couple of things.

Not quite sure about the last comment. I've heard some some

people online

signing some statutes and things like that that we need to check out to make sure. Because we wanna do everything on the up and up. So we wanna make sure if that's,

good guidance or misguided guidance. No disrespect by any means,

you know, on anyone at all.

Couple of comments. I know the case in Rick Matthews' death was from a crate and leaf itself.

And, unfortunately,

too, we talk about the pharmacist, and I I respect his, background. It's amazing background.

He made some good comments.

One of the things I was a little concerned about how it's viewed at, it can't be marketed as a drug because they're allowed to by FDA or they would. But everybody who professes to have it, take it is because of it's a drug.

It affects them medically,

and that's why it's marketed. I mean, that's why that's why people take it, and that's why manufacturers sell it. And when they tell you in the hallways or anywhere else, it's about it is that.

And so I think it's a little misguided if we say it's just it's just an herbal supplement or whatever else. They're not taking it for that.

And so,

you know, I I understand there'll be another hearing or whatever else. I think black market exists already, but

I think we can say more Georges about going this direction.

I think we just need to kinda get a legal opinion too about what the comment was just made about, whether we can or not in that direction.

So that's kinda on the short end. On the next hearing,

anyway, I I still want to commit

to consider the ban. Let's find out legally if we can or not. If we can't, that's fine. Plan b then, because we've gotta do something. If it's not a ban, we have to do something to make it,

minimally, of course, seven o h, but even even more than that to restrict

it to make sure it's safe in those dosages and everything else for Georgians. And that's what we have to do. You heard the I mean, I can bring in more I mean, Georgia poison control guide. You want his written testimony? You couldn't get more powerful than that. I mean, that's from a guy who operates out of Grady. He works at Grady. He sees a lot of different people. And George, the poison control,

that's pretty strong testimony.

So and the ones who weren't here for that, if you we need to clip it for you so you can watch it. And others who testified as well, the Davenports, the Esomes, and everything that's happened.

And our, guy from Brantley County, local judge,

affects all of us.

Alright. Thank you, sir.

Thank you. Thank you, committee.

Alright.

I think given some of the issues we mentioned at the end, I think we're gonna let this be a hearing.

The chairman can bring it up if he desires to in committee, but I think for now on the subcommittee, we'll treat this just as a hearing only.

I think we need some more discussion about the the impact of of this

and, try to work that out and see if we can get the bill moving. Yep. Understand.

Alright.

Anybody else

wish to bring anything for the committee? I think so. Mister chairman?

Just a point of personal privilege, mister chairman, if I may, we have a brand spanking new member

of the judiciary

non civil committee.

And so I I I wanna

I wanna recognize him just to introduce himself and, you know, no more than five minutes.

Represent.

Bill. I am Bill Fincher. I've been here, two weeks.

So I am the newest

person.

But, this is exciting testimony, and it's something that we've got to find a way to control

and protect people from the harmful effects. And I'm

law of this committee for the listening that you're doing,

the study you're doing, and I think we need

this is this is

it's life.

It's life threatening every day. Every day, it's out there in the forms that you can buy it in at the jokes at the

gas station. So we I'm I'm excited just to be a part of this committee.

I bring with me, a number of years of experience.

I was in

a prosecutor

for over thirty

three years,

in Atlanta here and also up in the Appalachian Circuit,

Blue Ridge, LAJ,

and Jasper.

I'm this is just

an opportunity for me, and I hope it's an opportunity for you to have my my turn on things because

prior to that, I was in the FBI. And so I I see it from a number of different angles.

But, my father's a pharmacist,

And I I grew up in a drugstore.

So I know there's there are some things, leaves and things that are

beneficial.

And, you know, there there's there may be a a benefit

if it's properly handled. So

my mind's wide open except that

I I I stand for those folks that who's lost loved ones. And and even if they didn't die, they've lost them,

to what they were to begin with in their lives. So

this is an honor for me to be here. I hope I can bring something to the table that will be valuable, and,

thank you for letting me speak about it.

Well, we appreciate your, your comment and your your your look forward to your breadth of experience and expertise.

I'm wondering why you weren't asking more questions today.

I'm I'm on a learning curve.

I understand. I was Glad to have you with us, and, mister chairman, thank you for mentioning that. I was remiss in not, pointing that out. I don't believe we have any further business before the committee today. We'll stand adjourned. Thank you, everybody.