Politics
Congressional Democratic Lawmakers Weigh Plans To Save Hemp Industry From Looming Federal Ban
Minnesota congressional Democrats are committing to preventing the collapse of the hemp industry after lawmakers passed a now-signed spending bill banning the sale of most consumable THC products, stressing the need to “fix it” before recriminalization takes effect next year and laying out opportunities to achieve that.
And according to one lawmaker, it’s not just Democrats who understand the urgency to prevent the outright ban. A key GOP leader in the House is also “amenable” to advancing an alternative policy solution, she said.
At a press conference on Monday, Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Tina Smith (D-MN), along with Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), addressed the pending hemp prohibition, which they said should be corrected by replacing that policy with a regulatory framework similar to what Minnesota has implemented at the state level to prevent youth access and ensure product safety for adults.
Klobuchar, the ranking member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, called this a “pivotal moment for many farmers, workers and small business owners who have built our state’s successful hemp industry.”
The senator touted the fact that she helped secure language in appropriations legislation that provides grant funding for the University of Minnesota to explore novel ways to utilize hemp for industrial purposes such as construction materials and pet bedding. At the same time, however, she said consumables like cannabinoid-infused beverages represent a “critical” component of the state’s economy that’s “creating jobs” and should be protected from federal interference.
“We are in a good position to try to do something to fix this,” she said. “That’s not easy to say in Washington right now, but we may have a Farm Bill that’s going to be coming through at some point. We’ll have other vehicles where we can do something to fix this.”
Hemp was federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill that President Donald Trump signed during his first term, with then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) leading the push to end criminalization of the crop at the time. But the senator has insisted that the policy change wasn’t intended to allow consumable products with THC, so he’s been determined to close what he describes as a “loophole” in the law.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) attempted to remove the hemp ban language from the spending bill Trump signed earlier this month, but a majority of members voted to table his amendment. Klobuchar and Smith were among those who voted against the motion to table.
“This is about jobs. It’s about our small businesses. It’s about our breweries and our farmers. Hemp is actually an old crop with a strong history in our state,” Klobuchar said at Monday’s event. “A one-size-fits-all measure in Congress is the last thing we need right now.”
“Yes, we must protect kids. That has been what a lot of my work as county attorney and since been about—protecting kids. And Minnesota has a regime that does it, including actually outlawing labeling that would be at all appealing to kids, including requiring labeling, including a 21-year [age] limit—and we can protect kids and we can support our small businesses at the same time. That’s what our state rules do. The hemp provisions in this government funding bill simply don’t strike the right balance.”
“Every day we fail to address this is another day of uncertainty in a very uncertain time in our economy,” Klobuchar said. “I want our state small businesses and farmers to know that we have their back, and we will do everything we can in our power, in a very difficult Congress, to change this.”
The members of the Minnesota congressional delegation who spoke at the press conference each emphasized the last-minute legislative tactics used to advance the hemp ban, with senators handed a massive spending package that included the cannabis provisions just one day before they were expected to decide on the legislation.
‘There was no hearing. There was no planning. People hadn’t heard from their constituents on this because of the way Sen. McConnell did it,” she said. “I don’t think anyone’s surprised that he would do something in this fashion, but that’s what caused, I believe, a lack of information about what this meant and what this did.”
Industry stakeholders, advocates and lawmakers are stressing the urgency of the situation. While the hemp ban won’t take effect until one year after enactment, that still leaves little time in the congressional calendar to reverse course or create an alternative regulatory framework for products set to be banned.
“Knowing that we have a short period of time, our job is to work with Sen. Paul and others—including some Republicans that may have voted one way, but are now hearing from their constituents, particularly in Midwest states—and see if we can come up with something that would either allow for state frameworks,” Klobuchar said.
The senator also floated the idea of having the federal government adopt Minnesota’s regulations for hemp, or at the very least extending the timeline before implementation of the national ban to give stakeholders the opportunity to put forward legislative options for lawmakers to consider.
“There are other Republicans that want to work with us on this, so that’s what’s in front of us,” the senator said, adding that she’s looking ahead toward the possibility of amending the enacted law through a “skinny” Farm Bill or other vehicles that touch on agriculture issues.
“Right now, the key is to get people educated about how bad this is, and that’s where I’m not as worried about what our language is as I am about getting that kind of political support to get it done,” she said.
Smith echoed many of her colleague’s points, pointing out that Minnesota was the first state to specifically legalize hemp-derived THC products and “did it in the right way, with clear guardrails and bipartisan support and a regulatory framework that is grounded in public health and consumer safety and in supporting small businesses.”
“It’s working working here in Minnesota for farmers and producers and retailers and distributors, and is working for consumers who want safe, legal and clearly labeled and record well regulated products,” she said.
To that point, even the national retailer Target recently started selling cannabis drinks at select locations in Minnesota as a pilot program.
“This is what a responsible, growing Minnesota-made market looks like, but in a last-minute move, Republicans added a provision to the budget bills that pulled the rug out from underneath this growing market,” Smith said. The ban is “going to [create] a much, much more chaotic regulatory environment. It’s going to be impossible to develop national markets for Minnesota-made products, and it’s going to make banking for these businesses incredibly complicated and hard to organize.”
“We need to fix this. This is something that we need to fix,” she said. “It is impossible to have this federal law in place barring Minnesota businesses for doing what they know how to do best.”
There are issues with federal hemp law as it stands, the senator acknowledged, and for many who think about the consumable cannabinoid market, they associate it with potent intoxicating products being sold at gas stations without age-gating requirements or other regulations to ensure public safety.
“It’s not uncommon in a new and growing industry that you’ve got a couple of bad actors that kind of screw things up for everyone,” the senator said. “And I think that some of the folks who voted [to table] the Paul amendment, who voted for this ban, were really thinking reasonably about those bad actors and what we need to do to dial that back and to protect kids.”
“But so now we have a really important education job to help folks understand that you can have a safe and secure and responsible market that is good for businesses [and] good for consumers. That’s the job that we had ahead of us. And I’m very open-minded about what the solutions are, but I do think we need to bring some urgency to this because farmers right now are trying to figure out what they’re going to put in the ground come the spring.”
Omar, co-chair of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus in the House, said at the press conference that she was “grateful” that lawmakers were coming together to “raise the alarm and stand with the hemp small business industry in Minnesota.”
“At a last minute, without a single public hearing—without talking to people who are affected— small group of Washington insiders slipped a provision that would have catastrophic consequences for hemp small businesses in Minnesota and across this country,” she said.
“This is unacceptable. Minnesota did everything right. Our state created one of the strongest, most responsible regulatory framework in the entire country. We implemented age limits to keep products out of kids hands, strict rules for retailers, high-quality testing, clean labeling and real accountability,” the congresswoman said. “Because of that hard work, Minnesota now has a vibrant and safe economy.”
“A one-size-fits-all federal ban punishes our state for doing it the right way, while doing nothing to stop and regulate it or bad actors elsewhere,” Omar, who has been rallying lawmakers to get behind the push for a hemp ban correction, continued. “That is just unsensible policy, and it encapsulates everything wrong with the current GOP-controlled Congress.”
“We can and we should regulate these products, but banning entirely everything nationwide is unacceptable… All this will do is kill good jobs, reduce consumer safety and choice and push people back into the unregulated—and sometimes dangerous—black markets. So here is what we must do: Congress needs to fix this, and it needs to fix it quickly. This should not be a zero sum game. We need a sensible federal framework—one that sets strong safety standards, protects kids and ensures product quality without dismantling a thriving industry that states like Minnesota worked so hard to build. We must get this way to protect small businesses, workers and consumers. I will be fighting alongside everyone here today and won’t give up until we roll back this harmful provision, because now is not the time for us to stop fighting and to give up.”
Notably, while the group of congressional lawmakers at the press conference were all Democrats, Omar said her office has also reached out to Republican offices within the Minnesota delegation and she conveyed that House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-MN) “understands just how much the industry is vital to the economy of Minnesota, so he’s much more amenable than the others.”
“We continue to work with them, trying to make the impression that this is, as you’ve heard from the industry leaders, an economic issue for Minnesota,” she said. “This is about job creation. Is about a tax base. And it certainly has been something that—we don’t like to brag as Minnesotans, but it’s something that we certainly brag about getting it right. It is unfair for us to be punished for doing the right thing instead of being looked at as a model across the country.”
Paul, meanwhile, said last week that he’ll soon file a bill to protect the hemp industry from the impending hemp ban. And he also called out alcohol and marijuana interests for allegedly “join[ing] forces” to lobby in favor of the prohibitionist policy change, which will restrict access to a plant and its derivatives that are often used therapeutically.
The senator said the forthcoming legislation would make it so state policy regulating hemp cannabinoid products—with basic safeguards in place to prevent youth access, for example—”supersedes the federal law.”
Meanwhile, Minnesota’s Democratic top prosecutor, Keith Ellison, was one of 39 state and territory counterparts who sent a letter to congressional leaders earlier this month that voiced support for the hemp provisions of the spending bill Trump signed. Ellison later defended his decision, in part by arguing that states with regulations in place for cannabinoid products like Minnesota should not have to worry about hemp entering their market from unregulated, out-of-state operators.
On the other end of the debate, Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD), who helped secure the hemp re-criminalization language, said last week that he’s not concerned about attempts to undercut the enacted law, brushing off arguments about the possible consequences of the policy change as “desperate mistruths from an industry that stands to lose billions of dollars by selling intoxicants to children.”
Overall, there’s been widespread outcry over the pending hemp re-criminalization law, drawing criticism from parents of cannabis patients, veterinarians and influencers like Joe Rogan, for example.
In response to the hemp ban, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) filed bill that would strike the contested provisions of the appropriations legislation. But some stakeholders worry that approach could backfire, and they’re hoping to see bipartisan bills introduced in he near future that would provide a robust regulatory model for intoxicating hemp products as a viable alternative to blanket prohibition.
Meanwhile, GOP political operative Roger Stone said this week that President Donald Trump was effectively “forced” by Republican lawmakers to sign the spending bill with the hemp THC ban language.
However, a White House spokesperson said prior to the bill signing that Trump specifically supported the prohibition language.
The Democratic governor of Kentucky said earlier this month that the hemp industry is an “important” part of the economy that deserves to be regulated at the state level—rather than federally prohibited, as Congress has moved to do.
Also, a leading veterans organization is warning congressional leaders that the newly approved blanket ban on consumable hemp products could inadvertently “slam the door shut” on critical research.
While many hemp stakeholders say the ban would effectively eradicate the industry–even applying to nonintoxicating CBD products that people use for medical reasons—there’s latent hope that they can strike a compromise deal with lawmakers before the prohibition is implemented this time next year.
Lawmakers such as Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) also say that window could provide an opportunity to advance legislation to create an alternative regulatory model for consumable hemp products.
—
Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments.
Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access.
—
Since 2018, cannabis products have been considered legal hemp if they contain less than 0.3 percent delta-9 THC on a dry weight basis.
The new legislation specifies that, within one year of enactment, the weight will apply to total THC—including delta-8 and other isomers. It will also include “any other cannabinoids that have similar effects (or are marketed to have similar effects) on humans or animals as a tetrahydrocannabinol (as determined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services).”
The new definition of legal hemp will additionally ban “any intermediate hemp-derived cannabinoid products which are marketed or sold as a final product or directly to an end consumer for personal or household use” as well as products containing cannabinoids that are synthesized or manufactured outside of the cannabis plant or not capable of being naturally produced by it.
Legal hemp products will be limited to a total of 0.4 milligrams per container of total THC or any other cannabinoids with similar effects.
Within 90 days of the bill’s enactment, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other agencies will need to publish list of “all cannabinoids known to FDA to be capable of being naturally produced by a Cannabis sativa L. plant, as reflected in peer reviewed literature,” “all tetrahydrocannabinol class cannabinoids known to the agency to be naturally occurring in the plant” and “all other known cannabinoids with similar effects to, or marketed to have similar effects to, tetrahyrocannabinol class cannabinoids.”
The language slightly differs from provisions included in legislation that had previously advanced out of the House and Senate Appropriations panels, which would have banned products containing any “quantifiable” amount of THC, to be determined by the HHS secretary and secretary of agriculture.
