A new federal bill would, for the first time, require the government to consider the costs of prohibiting a drug—not just the risks the drug itself poses—before adding it to the controlled substances list. Rep. Steve Cohen's Public Health and Research Reforms in Controlled Substances Act of 2026 shifts primary scheduling power from the Department of Justice to the Department of Health and Human Services, removes marijuana from federal control, and fundamentally changes how officials decide which substances land users in prison.
Under current law, the Drug Enforcement Administration applies an eight-factor test that focuses almost entirely on a substance's potential to harm people and society, with the attorney general holding final authority through the DEA. The agency has historically treated FDA approval as the bar for "accepted medical use," creating what the report calls "something of a catch-22" since substances already scheduled face stigma and research restrictions that make gathering evidence for approval exceptionally difficult. The existing framework sorts drugs into five schedules based on perceived danger, with Schedule I substances like marijuana, heroin, LSD, psilocybin, and MDMA banned outright as having high abuse potential and no accepted medical uses. Federal law currently doesn't ask officials to balance a drug's potential harm against the damage prohibition itself might cause, such as eliminating beneficial therapies or pushing users toward more dangerous alternatives.
Cohen's bill makes that comparison mandatory. Officials must weigh "what threat to public health, if any, from scheduling the drug or other substance, including replacement by alternative drugs or substances," according to the legislation. The bill also requires consideration of whether a drug is currently helping people reduce dependence on other harmful substances they might return to if their preferred option becomes restricted. The measure replaces the current five schedules with a dual system: drugs receive a Roman numeral (I through IV) reflecting misuse risk, dependence potential, and public health threat, plus a letter (A through E) showing therapeutic value—allowing a substance to be classified as high-risk while still recognized as medically beneficial.
The shift matters because current scheduling decisions have ignored evidence for decades. Marijuana has occupied Schedule I alongside heroin for more than 50 years despite thousands of years of medicinal use, scientific proof of effectiveness for chronic pain and chemotherapy-induced nausea, and state-authorized medical programs since 1996. Under Cohen's framework, that evidence would have to be weighed alongside the harms users face from prohibition. A new expert committee of 15 to 25 members appointed by HHS would conduct transparent analysis, scoring substances against 15 factors with published methodology available to the public. The bill also ends quantity-based mandatory minimum sentences for trafficking while preserving maximum penalties up to life in prison where death or serious injury occurs, and creates a resentencing pathway requiring the Bureau of Prisons to identify eligible prisoners and file motions on their behalf.
Cohen is retiring this year and the bill likely won't pass in the lame-duck session, so the report frames it as a benchmark for future reform efforts. At minimum, those efforts should adopt the provision requiring government to weigh prohibition's costs, including damage done to people and communities when legal supply channels close. That requirement would push federal drug policy away from its current default of control first, evidence later, and toward an approach rooted in science and public health.