Hemp and the New Senate Farm Bill

The U.S. Senate’s model of the Farm Invoice lastly landed this week. They’re calling it the Rural Prosperity and Meals Safety Act of 2024 (the “Senate invoice”). The Senate invoice follows on the Home’s proposal, referred to as the Farm, Meals and Nationwide Safety Act of 2024 (the “Home invoice”), supplied in Might. Neither the Senate invoice nor the Home invoice would preempt state or Indian legislation relating to hemp or the regulation of hemp merchandise. This implies states and tribes will retain loads of latitude in regulating hemp and hemp-derived merchandise– which will get folks fired up.

Other than giving states some runway, the Senate invoice and the Home invoice differ in key respects relating to hemp. Subsequently, these august our bodies should confer and reconcile their sundry proposals. That might occur in 2024, however appears extra seemingly in 2025 when the brand new Congress convenes. As of this week, although, we lastly have a framework.

The Senate Invoice re-defines “hemp” and defines “industrial hemp”

Part 10016 of the Senate invoice (“Hemp Manufacturing”) amends the definition of “hemp.” Hemp was outlined within the 2018 Farm Invoice and faraway from the federal Managed Substances Act (CSA), taking us on a very wild journey. See: What Occurred to Hemp? (“What Occurred”). The Senate invoice additionally provides us a definition for “industrial hemp.” Listed below are these definitions, with factors of emphasis in daring:

(1) Hemp. The time period “hemp” means (A) the plant Hashish sativa L. and any a part of that plant, together with the seeds thereof and all derivatives, extracts, cannabinoids, isomers, acids, salts, and salts of isomers, whether or not rising or not, with a delta-9 whole tetrahydrocannabinol focus (together with tetrahydrocannabinolic acid) of no more than 0.3 p.c on a dry weight foundation; and (B) industrial hemp.

(3) Industrial Hemp. The time period “industrial hemp” means the plant Hashish sativa L. if the harvested materials (A) is just (i) the stalks of that plant, fiber produced from these stalks, or every other manufactured product, spinoff, combination, or preparation of these stalks (besides cannabinoid resin extracted from these stalks); (ii) entire grain, oil, cake, nut, hull, or every other compound, manufactured product, spinoff, combination, or preparation of the seeds of that plant (besides cannabinoid resin extracted from the seeds of that plant); or (iii) viable seeds of that plant produced solely for manufacturing or manufacture of any materials described in clause (i) or (ii); and (B) won’t be used within the manufacturing or synthesis of man-made or natural cannabinoid merchandise.

The brand new regime

Once more, the definitional stuff in daring is what I wish to emphasize.

First, the Senate invoice retains the THC threshold at 0.3 p.c, which is an arbitrary quantity we’ve been advocating in opposition to for years. The Senate invoice mirrors the Home invoice on this respect, although, so we’re caught with this– except Ron Paul will get his method. (He seemingly gained’t get his method.)

Second, the Senate invoice retains the 2018 Farm Invoice’s whole THC customary, together with THCA. The Home invoice does this too. This was pretty predictable: in What Occurred, I wrote that we might “count on the whole THC customary to stay, which signifies that precise Delta-9 THC gained’t be the one metric for calculating THC content material.”

We’ve additionally defined on this weblog that the 2018 Farm Invoice and USDA guidelines mandate whole THC testing on pre-harvest hemp batches, however don’t mandate such testing on post-harvest hemp or hemp merchandise. The Senate invoice doesn’t change this paradigm, which suggests the “loophole” for fuel station weed stays open. This proposal is a giant win for opponents of the Home invoice’s “Miller Modification,” which would chop the definition of “hemp” to exclude intoxicating hemp-derived substances.

Third, the Senate invoice introduces a brand new definition and framework for industrial hemp. The Home invoice does this too, albeit barely in a different way. The thought right here is to ask farmers to develop hemp for fiber and grain functions, whereas releasing them from regulatory burdens with the Division of Agriculture and felony publicity with the Division of Justice. Extra particularly, for “industrial hemp” growers, the Senate invoice:

removes background verify necessities;
instates “relaxed regulatory necessities” for sampling and inspection methodologies (which is able to have to be adopted by rule); and
develops a licensed seed program. 

The Senate invoice additionally makes any hemp producer ineligible to develop hemp for 5 years if that producer, “with a culpable psychological state higher than negligence, produces a crop of hemp that’s inconsistent with that license.”(Trace: use the seed program.) The proof customary right here looks as if it may very well be a problem, and even when anybody has been adjudicated as rising marijuana below the guise of hemp, Farm Invoice ineligibility looks as if a far-off concern.

Backside line

The large takeaway for me is that the Senate invoice leaves the door open for intoxicating hemp merchandise, whereas the Miller Modification to the Home invoice doesn’t. One thing’s gotta give. And it must occur quickly, as a result of we’re already lengthy overdue. As I defined in a webinar final week, the Farm Invoice offers with the nation’s whole meals provide, not simply hemp. Subsequently, this isn’t like with the SAFE Banking Act, the place we have now a proposed legislation particular to hashish which will or might not ever go. The Farm Invoice should go, and shortly.

Keep tuned and we’ll maintain you up to date on any main happenings. For extra on this subject, try our huge hemp and CBD archive, or these particular, current posts: