If a conservative state like South Dakota can do it, then the U.S. Senate darn well should be able to do it too.

That was the posture of Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., while he and Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. and Cory Booker, D-N.J., introduced a draft of the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act (CAOA) during a press conference July 14. The legislation aims to end the prohibition of cannabis at the federal level.

“Even South Dakota, one of the most conservative states in America, a majority voted to legalize adult, recreational use of marijuana,” Schumer said. “If South Dakota can do it, the Senate should be able to do it, and we’re going to fight to make sure it happens.”

Although South Dakota’s voter-approved cannabis measure, Amendment A, was ruled unconstitutional on a ballot technicality by a circuit court judge—and is still being considered by the state’s Supreme Court—state lawmakers there have vowed to honor the will of the people by crafting adult-use legislation ahead of next year’s legislative session.

Despite Schumer’s wishes, the federal government is not South Dakota. In Washington, D.C., politics tend to trump policy far more often than at the state level.

When it comes to cannabis policy, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, told Cleveland.com in early February that he’d only be willing to consider the SAFE Banking Act, which cruised to passage in the House, if it’s complemented by sentencing reform in the Senate Judiciary Committee. As the newly seated chair of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, Brown holds those keys.

While pairing multiple policies under one bill can get the job done, it’s a political game that often results in the demise of a beneficial measure that otherwise would have passed if it stood alone. For example, Texas state lawmakers passed House Bill 3948 earlier this year, which aimed to create a licensing process for farmers to use hemp feed—an alternative food source for hungry animals as well as a market opportunity for rural communities.

However, the Texas Senate added language to the bill in an effort to attach limits for delta-8 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) products—a separate market segment. Without agreement between the two chambers, the bill is now dead.

On Capitol Hill, Senate majority leaders can block legislation from even being discussed on the floor of the upper chamber, much like Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., did last Congress through his inaction of calendaring the SAFE Banking Act for debate. And even if legislation reaches the floor, non-reconciliation measures—that aren’t attached to spending, revenue or federal debt limit packages—require a 60-vote supermajority to invoke cloture if a piece of legislation is partisan and draws a filibuster from opponents.

When it comes to SAFE Banking, CAOA sponsor Booker said during Wednesday’s press conference that he’d fight to keep it from advancing through the Senate if it’s not part of a larger reform effort.

If somebody tries to push through just the banking bill, Booker said, “I don’t know about other members of the Senate, but I will lay myself down to do everything I can to stop an easy banking bill that’s going to allow all these corporations to make a lot more money off of this, as opposed to focusing on the restorative justice aspect.”

Many of the larger cannabis businesses already have access to banks, while smaller operations are often unable to find depository institutions willing to take them on, leaving them to deal primarily in cash—making them susceptible targets of crime, robbery and assault.

That said, if CAOA can’t garner enough support as standalone legislation, it shouldn’t get in the way of advancing incremental actions, such as SAFE Banking, which many in the industry support.

Nonetheless, CAOA should garner supermajority support among U.S. senators, who represent constituents of a supermajority who believe cannabis prohibition should end. But the American people can only expect their elected representatives in the Capitol to honor their wishes when it is convenient for them. Ending cannabis prohibition has yet to be convenient.

-Tony Lange, Associate Editor