The Senate has approved large-scale spending legislation that includes provisions to allow U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) doctors to recommend medical marijuana to military veterans living in legal states.

The appropriations package that senators passed on Friday was also amended to omit a controversial proposed ban consumable hemp products with any quantifiable amount of THC.

After being cleared by the Senate Appropriations Committee last month, the full chamber advanced the package covering Military Construction, Veterans Affairs (MilConVA) and Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration (AgFDA) in a 87-9 vote.

In committee, members adopted an amendment to the MilConVA measure from Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) that contains the cannabis and veterans language. For AgFDA, the bill initially featured hemp language that stakeholders argued would devastate the industry, but an agreed-upon amendment removed those provisions following tense deliberations.

The Merkley amendment attached to the underlying defense appropriations measure is meant to mirror standalone legislation titled the Veterans Equal Access Act. The text of the proposal adopted by the Senate committee is not identical to what the House passed as part of its own MilConVA appropriations measure in June.

On the House side, Reps. Brian Mast (R-FL) and Dave Joyce (R-OH)—who are both co-chairs of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus—sponsored the adopted companion amendment, which would increase veterans’ access to state medical marijuana programs and eliminate a current VA directive barring the department’s doctors from issuing cannabis recommendations.

Mast in February filed the standalone Veterans Equal Access Act—marking one of the latest attempt to enact the measure that’s enjoyed bipartisan support over recent sessions.

In past years, both the House and Senate have included provisions in their respective MilConVA measures that would permit VA doctors to make the medical cannabis recommendations, but they have never been enacted into law.

Because both chambers again adopted differing language this year, the matter will once more be a topic of conversation in conference committee or informal bicameral negotiations and, as such, could end up being left out of the final package sent to the president this time, as has been the case in the past.

Here’s the text of the House version:

“None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department of Veterans Affairs in this Act may be used to enforce Veterans Health Directive 1315 as it relates to—

(1) the policy stating that ‘VHA providers are prohibited from completing forms or registering Veterans for participation in a State-approved marijuana program’;

(2) the directive for the ‘Deputy Under Secretary for Health for Operations and Management’ to ensure that ‘medical facility Directors are aware that it is VHA policy for providers to assess Veteran use of marijuana but providers are prohibited from recommending, making referrals to or completing paperwork for Veteran participation in State marijuana programs’; and

(3) the directive for the ‘VA Medical Facility Director’ to ensure that ‘VA facility staff are aware of the following’ ‘[t]he prohibition recommending, making referrals to or completing forms and registering Veterans for participation in State-approved marijuana programs’.”

The Senate language reads:

“None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department of Veterans Affairs in this Act may be used in a manner that would—

(1) interfere with the ability of a veteran to participate in a medicinal marijuana program approved by a State;

(2) deny any services from the Department to a veteran who is participating in such a program; or

(3) limit or interfere with the ability of a health care provider of the Department to make appropriate recommendations, fill out forms, or take steps to comply with such a program.”

Also attached to the MilConVA bill that the Senate approved is a report that contains cannabis and psychedelics provisions, including a call to allow VA doctors to recommend medical cannabis if the federal government reschedules it.

If rescheduling does happen, “VA should consider issuing guidance allowing VHA doctors and other personnel to discuss, recommend, and facilitate access to medical marijuana in States with state-legal medical marijuana programs to the extent allowable under Federal law,” the report says.

Another section discusses the potential for cannabis to be used as an alternative treatment option for veterans, urging VA to study “the relationship between treatment programs involving medical marijuana that are approved by States, the access of veterans to such programs, and a reduction in opioid use and abuse among veterans.”

Additionally, a section of the report for MilConVA addresses psychedelics-assisted therapy, noting that members understand “VA and other relevant Federal agencies are undertaking research to evaluate the efficacy of psychedelic-assisted therapies in treating PTSD, major depressive disorder, and other conditions.”

The committee is mandating that VA produce a report to Congress that lays out the status of research into the topic within 180 days of the bill’s enactment, and it’s further directing the agency to “initiate a longitudinal study of veterans participating in such therapies and track outcomes over a period of five years.”

The report further discusses GI Bill benefits as they related to cannabis, noting that “VA policy determinations have restricted the ability of veterans to access their earned benefits, including GI Bill Benefits.”

Under the AgFDA appropriations measure that the Senate also passed as part of a package on Friday, there are no longer provisions hemp industry stakeholders said would effectively eradicate the market by banning consumable hemp products with any “quantifiable” amount of THC.

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who ushered in the federal legalization of hemp under the 2018 Farm Bill, championed the THC criminalization language. But while he got it included in the base bill for Ag/FDA, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) threatened to procedurally hold up the process if it stayed in, forcing McConnell’s hand. Paul’s amendment to strike the language passed as part of an en bloc package on the floor on Friday.

That came after a verbal lashing from McConnell, who took to the floor earlier in the day to criticize those who opposed the ban, including Paul.

“In order to move the package forward, I allowed my language to be stripped from the bill,” McConnell said. “But my effort to root out bad actors, protect our children, support farmers and reaffirm our original legislative intent will continue.”

The hemp language in the Senate spending bill was nearly identical to what the House Appropriations Committee passed in June, with noted cannabis prohibitionist Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD) leading the charge.

Meanwhile, Paul recently filed a standalone bill that would go in the opposite direction of the hemp ban, proposing to triple the concentration of THC that the crop could legally contain, while addressing multiple other concerns the industry has expressed about federal regulations.

The senator introduced the legislation, titled the Hemp Economic Mobilization Plan (HEMP) Act, in June. It mirrors versions he’s sponsored over the last several sessions.

—

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.

—

Meanwhile, a GOP-controlled House committee last month approved an amendment attached to a must-pass defense bill that would require a “progress report” on an ongoing psychedelic therapy pilot program for active duty military service members and veterans.

However, while Congress has been notably amenable to psychedelics research proposals in recent sessions, the House Rules Committee separately blocked a bipartisan amendment to a spending bill led by Rep. Morgan Luttrell (R-TX) that would have given DOD another $10 million to support clinical trials into the therapeutic potential of substances such as ibogaine and psilocybin.

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) took to the Senate floor on Friday to lambast opponents of his proposal to ban hemp THC products, including his home-state GOP colleague who he said “derailed” his attempt to recriminalize most consumable cannabinoids through a key spending bill.

During a floor speech, McConnell acknowledged that he “led the effort” to legalize hemp as part of the 2018 Farm Bill, which spurred “tremendous growth” in the industry, “especially in Kentucky.”

“Hemp is used in food, clothing, paper, plastic and many of our consumer products. Its versatility gave farmers hope for a new and profitable cash crop,” he said. “Unfortunately, some companies looking to make a quick buck have been exploiting a loophole in the 2018 Farm Bill by taking legal amounts of THC from hemp and turning it into intoxicating substances.”

“They take these synthetic chemicals and use them as ingredients in appealing snack- and candy-like products and distribute them in familiar packaging,” the senator said. “Young children are consuming these snacks—thinking they’re candy, not poison. On top of that, these products are easily accessible and be purchased at convenience stores.”

“Some of them are even more intoxicating than actually smoking marijuana. So let me repeat that: Products more potent than marijuana can be brought off the shelf of a gas station,” he said, adding that he’s tried to get the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate such products, but “they’ve not taken the initiative to do so, which has certainly been an ongoing disappointment.”

Short of FDA regulation of the market, McConnell tried to ban hemp with any “quantifiable” amount of THC as part of appropriations legislation covering Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies (Ag/FDA).

But when Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) threatened to procedurally hold up the underlying bill if the hemp language remained, McConnell acquiesced.

“This language would have remained in the appropriations package had one senator not derailed the process,” he said, apparently referring to Paul. “We need the appropriations process to function. Congress needs to do its job and fund the government.”

“So in order to move the package forward, I allowed my language to be stripped from the bill,” he said. “But my effort to root out bad actors, protect our children, support farmers and reaffirm our original legislative intent will continue.”

“For the sake of those misguided by my opponents on this issue, let me clarify a few things. You’ll hear from some that this language would have meant the total destruction of the hemp industry. Well, obviously that’s wrong,” the senator said. “Under my language, industrial hemp and CBD would have remained legal. Period. Some predicted there would be widespread economic downturn for farmers should this language become law. Wrong again.”

Despite having the hemp ban provisions stripped from the spending bill in negotiations, McConnell filed another amendment to the Ag/FDA bill on Wednesday to reinstitute the policy, with substantively identical language except for some technical and structural changes from the original provisions.

Two industry sources told Marijuana Moment on Friday that it’s their understanding that McConnell’s new amendment will not receive a vote. And in his floor speech, the senator seemed to concede that the ban would not be included in the appropriations package that’s before the Senate.

The proposal has been aggressively opposed by the hemp industry, as well as Paul, who put forward his own amendment earlier this week to formally strike the hemp THC prohibition provisions that he says would “destroy” the market.

One source said it’s also their expectation that Paul’s amendment—as well as another that he filed as a compromise, banning synthetic cannabinoid products but maintaining the current 0.3 percent THC limit for naturally derived cannabinoids—will also not receive a vote on the floor.

The key contention with the original bill and McConnell’s amendment is that it would redefine hemp, which was federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill with strong banking from the former majority leader, to recriminalize hemp containing any “quantifiable” amount of THC.

While some have argued that concerns about the impact of that change are overblown and that it isn’t meant to disrupt the non-intoxicating CBD market, for example, industry stakeholders have pointed out that the zero-THC standard is unworkable from a manufacturing perspective because of the nature of the plant.

“We’re hoping to fix it so they don’t kill the hemp industry,” Paul told Ask a Pol on Tuesday, adding that, “We think there are gonna be some changes in the bill.”

Separately, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) filed an amendment to the Ag/FDA spending bill on Wednesday that would appropriate $250,000 for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to expedite fiber research on industrial hemp between the Cereal Disease Laboratory and the Cotton Fiber Bioscience and Utilization Research Unit, including cooperative agreements with qualified nonprofit organizations.

Meanwhile, longtime cannabis reform advocate Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) sided with his colleague, Paul, telling Marijuana Moment on Wednesday that the proposed hemp ban “really destroys the CBD industry, which I’m not okay with.”

“So we’re trying to work out an alternative,” he said, while conceding that he agrees with McConnell that there is an area of federal hemp law that he also wants to see changed.

One of Paul’s two recently filed amendments would exclude from the definition of federally legal industrial hemp any product containing “cannabinoids that are not capable of being naturally produced by a Cannabis sativa L. plant” as well as those that “are capable of being naturally produced by a Cannabis sativa L. plant” but “were synthesized or manufactured outside the plant.”

It would otherwise maintain the legal status of plants with “delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of not more than 0.3 percent in the plant on a dry weight basis” and derivative products unless they have a “delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of more than 0.3 percent, as determined based on the substance, form, manufacture, or article of the product.”

It should be noted that, regardless of what ultimately happens on the Senate side, the broad hemp product ban provisions are still included in the House version of the agriculture appropriations bill, so it’s possible the the language could end up making it into the final version of legislation sent to the president’s desk later this year.

Paul told Marijuana Moment late last month that the proposal—which largely mirrors provisions of a House version of the spending bill, championed by Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD)—would “completely destroy” the industry.

On the House side, while Harris amended report language attached to the chamber’s bill clarifying that it’s not the intent to stop people from accessing “industrial or non-intoxicating hemp-derived cannabinoid products with trace or insignificant amounts of THC,” the bill itself still says that products containing any “quantifiable” amounts of THC couldn’t be marketed.

Meanwhile, Paul recently filed a standalone bill that would go in the opposite direction of the hemp ban, proposing to triple the concentration of THC that the crop could legally contain, while addressing multiple other concerns the industry has expressed about federal regulations.

The senator introduced the legislation, titled the Hemp Economic Mobilization Plan (HEMP) Act, in June. It mirrors versions he’s sponsored over the last several sessions.

Harris, for his part, told Marijuana Moment that he’s not concerned about any potential opposition in the Senate—and he also disputed reports about the scope of what his legislation would do to the industry.

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) released a report in June stating that the legislation would “effectively” prohibit hemp-derived cannabinoid products. Initially it said that such a ban would prevent the sale of CBD as well, but the CRS report was updated to exclude that language for reasons that are unclear.

The hemp language is largely consistent with appropriations and agriculture legislation that was introduced, but not ultimately enacted, under the last Congress.

Hemp industry stakeholders rallied against that proposal, an earlier version of which was also included in the base bill from the subcommittee last year. It’s virtually identical to a provision of the 2024 Farm Bill that was attached by a separate committee last May via an amendment from Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL), which was also not enacted into law.

A leading alcohol industry association, meanwhile, has called on Congress to dial back language in the House spending bill that would ban most consumable hemp products, instead proposing to maintain the legalization of naturally derived cannabinoids from the crop and only prohibit synthetic items.

Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America (WSWA) President and CEO Francis Creighton said in a press release that “proponents and opponents alike have agreed that this language amounts to a ban.”

Separately, key GOP congressional lawmakers—including one member who supports marijuana legalization—don’t seem especially concerned about provisions in the bill despite concern from stakeholders that it would put much of the hemp industry in jeopardy by banning most consumable products derived from the plant.

—

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.

—

Jonathan Miller, general counsel at the U.S. Hemp Roundtable, told congressional lawmakers in April that the market is “begging” for federal regulations around cannabis products.

At the hearing, Rep. James Comer (R-KY) also inquired about FDA inaction around regulations, sarcastically asking if it’d require “a gazillion bureaucrats that work from home” to regulate cannabinoids such as CBD.

A report from Bloomberg Intelligence (BI) last year called cannabis a “significant threat” to the alcohol industry, citing survey data that suggests more people are using cannabis as a substitute for alcoholic beverages such a beer and wine.

Last November, meanwhile, a beer industry trade group put out a statement of guiding principles to address what it called “the proliferation of largely unregulated intoxicating hemp and cannabis products,” warning of risks to consumers and communities resulting from THC consumption.

Bipartisan senators say they’re confident that a final deal on rules for hemp THC products will be reached, despite conflicting opinions about how to navigate the issue among key lawmakers.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has been leading the charge to prevent an outright prohibition of consumable hemp items containing THC—a policy change he and other industry stakeholders say would “destroy” the market that was federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill.

A deal was tentatively reached earlier this week to strip language that Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) supported which would’ve prevented the sale of hemp products containing any “quantifiable” amount of THC. Paul’s amendment to remove those provisions was filed alongside what seems to be a separate compromise option that would ban synthetic cannabinoid products such as delta-8 THC.

“They both want a good market for hemp farmers, because that’s a significant crop in Kentucky, which is why I think we’ll get this,” Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND) told Marijuana Moment on Wednesday, referencing negotiations between Paul and McConnell. “We kept going backwards. I thought we actually had something figured out, but we didn’t.”

“We’ll figure it out. We’ll continue to work on it,” he said.

Paul took a decisive stand to prevent the hemp ban language from going into the Senate’s spending bill covering Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies (Ag/FDA), threatening to procedurally block the underlying measure from advancing as long as the cannabis provisions were kept intact.

That resulted in an initial deal to strip the language, but the next step is to codify the revision with Paul’s amendment to Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins’s (R-ME) substitute language for a House-approved spending bill.

Marijuana Moment reached out to Paul’s office for comment, but a representative did not respond by the time of publication.

Meanwhile, longtime cannabis reform advocate Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) sided with his colleague, Paul, telling Marijuana Moment on Wednesday that the proposed hemp ban “really destroys the CBD industry, which I’m not okay with.”

“So we’re trying to work out an alternative,” he said, while conceding that he agrees with McConnell that there is an area of federal hemp law that he also wants to see changed.

“That is when hemp is used for hallucinogens. That was never the idea” behind legalizing the crop, he said. “Blocking that is absolutely fine.”

“But when it blocks production of CBD? No. I think a lot of people have CBD as an ingredient that they feel contributes towards health, and it’s part of what makes the hemp industry financially feasible here,” he said. “So it’s good for the consumer, good for the economy, good for the [agriculture] farmer. And so I want to see a definition that preserves CBD.”

He added that while the definition of hemp proposed by the committee before the deal with Paul would preserve “industrial” products such as fiber and grain, Canada already supplies the U.S. with such products, so it would not meaningfully contribute to the industry’s domestic economic health.

Approached by Marijuana Moment to weigh in on the hemp debacle on Wednesday, McConnell declined to comment—smirking as he was asked how he expected the pending appropriations legislation to end up handling the hemp issue.

One of Paul’s two newly filed amendments would exclude from the definition of federally legal industrial hemp any product containing “cannabinoids that are not capable of being naturally produced by a Cannabis sativa L. plant” as well as those that “are capable of being naturally produced by a Cannabis sativa L. plant” but “were synthesized or manufactured outside the plant.”

It would otherwise maintain the legal status of plants with “delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of not more than 0.3 percent in the plant on a dry weight basis” and derivative products unless they have a “delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of more than 0.3 percent, as determined based on the substance, form, manufacture, or article of the product.”

It should be noted that, regardless of what ultimately happens on the Senate side, the broad hemp product ban provisions are still included in the House version of the agriculture appropriations bill, so it’s possible the the language could end up making it into the final version of legislation sent to the president’s desk later this year.

Under the legislation that advanced through the Senate Appropriations Committee earlier this month, consumable hemp products with any “quantifiable” amount of THC would be banned.

Paul told Marijuana Moment late last month that the proposal—which largely mirrors provisions of a House version of the spending bill, championed by Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD)—would “completely destroy” the industry.

On the House side, while Harris amended report language attached to the chamber’s bill clarifying that it’s not the intent to stop people from accessing “industrial or non-intoxicating hemp-derived cannabinoid products with trace or insignificant amounts of THC,” the bill itself still says that products containing any “quantifiable” amounts of THC couldn’t be marketed. And it’s rare to find CBD items without any natural traces of THC.

Paul recently filed a bill that would go in the opposite direction of Harris’s ban, proposing to triple the concentration of THC that the crop could legally contain, while addressing multiple other concerns the industry has expressed about federal regulations.

The senator introduced the legislation, titled the Hemp Economic Mobilization Plan (HEMP) Act, in June. It mirrors versions he’s sponsored over the last several sessions.

Harris, for his part, told Marijuana Moment that he’s not concerned about any potential opposition in the Senate—and he also disputed reports about the scope of what his legislation would do to the industry.

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) released a report last month stating that the legislation would “effectively” prohibit hemp-derived cannabinoid products. Initially it said that such a ban would prevent the sale of CBD as well, but the CRS report was updated to exclude that language for reasons that are unclear.

The hemp language is largely consistent with appropriations and agriculture legislation that was introduced, but not ultimately enacted, under the last Congress.

Hemp industry stakeholders rallied against that proposal, an earlier version of which was also included in the base bill from the subcommittee last year. It’s virtually identical to a provision of the 2024 Farm Bill that was attached by a separate committee last May via an amendment from Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL), which was also not enacted into law.

A leading alcohol industry association, meanwhile, has called on Congress to dial back language in the House spending bill that would ban most consumable hemp products, instead proposing to maintain the legalization of naturally derived cannabinoids from the crop and only prohibit synthetic items.

Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America (WSWA) President and CEO Francis Creighton said in a press release that “proponents and opponents alike have agreed that this language amounts to a ban.”

Separately, key GOP congressional lawmakers—including one member who supports marijuana legalization—don’t seem especially concerned about provisions in the bill despite concern from stakeholders that it would put much of the hemp industry in jeopardy by banning most consumable products derived from the plant.

—

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.

—

Jonathan Miller, general counsel at the U.S. Hemp Roundtable, told congressional lawmakers in April that the market is “begging” for federal regulations around cannabis products.

At the hearing, Rep. James Comer (R-KY) also inquired about FDA inaction around regulations, sarcastically asking if it’d require “a gazillion bureaucrats that work from home” to regulate cannabinoids such as CBD.

A report from Bloomberg Intelligence (BI) last year called cannabis a “significant threat” to the alcohol industry, citing survey data that suggests more people are using cannabis as a substitute for alcoholic beverages such a beer and wine.

Last November, meanwhile, a beer industry trade group put out a statement of guiding principles to address what it called “the proliferation of largely unregulated intoxicating hemp and cannabis products,” warning of risks to consumers and communities resulting from THC consumption.

The LCB contributed reporting from Washington, D.C.

Photo courtesy of Brendan Cleak.

Image | adobe.stock/Elroi

Language that would have banned intoxicating hemp products across the nation has been removed from the agricultural funding bill, Politico recently reported (1).

The Fiscal Year 2026 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and Related Agencies Appropriations Act had been approved on July 10, 2025, by the Senate Committee on Appropriations with a vote of 27–0, according to a news release (2). Intending to support farmers, ranchers, food supply security, and nutritional support for families with low incomes, the bill also included language addressing hemp. The news release included highlights of the bill, and the Agricultural Marketing Services (AMS) section notes, “The bill also closes the hemp loophole that has resulted in the proliferation of unregulated intoxicating hemp products being sold across the country.”

In a July 29, 2025, press release (3), the US Hemp Roundtable celebrated the removal of the language, which would have ended 95% of the nation’s hemp industry, it stated. The bill had been authored by Representative Andy Harris and the hemp-related language had been added by Senator Mitch McConnell, it explained. After negotiation efforts from Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, the language was removed.

“We are deeply grateful to Senator Paul for standing up for the hemp industry. We stand with Rand for his leadership on this issue,” the press release stated, also noting appreciation for Senator McConnell for his efforts in the 2018 Farm Bill and his efforts for a compromise with Senator Paul, as well as efforts from Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley on the issue. It also explained that while a long-term agreement had not been reached yet, discussions would continue after the recess in August.

The organization also created a thank-you petition for Senator Paul for his efforts that resulted in “preserving the livelihoods of farmers, entrepreneurs, and consumers across the nation,” (4).

A June 23 press release (5) from the House Appropriations Committee had addressed the hemp-related language in a list of key takeaways of the bill: “Closing the hemp loophole that has resulted in the proliferation of unregulated intoxicating hemp products, including Delta-8 and hemp flower, being sold online and in gas stations across the country.” The Committee had approved the measure with a vote of 35–27.

Additionally, in June 2025, the Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America (WSWA) had announced (6) its support removing the section of the FY2026 Agriculture–FDA appropriations bill that the ability to place a federal ban on naturally-derived cannabinoids.

“WSWA supports the subcommittee’s action to eliminate synthetic, unnatural cannabinoids that are a threat to public health and safety,” Francis Creighton, WSWA President and CEO had stated in the press release. “But prohibition of all cannabinoids is not the answer—it risks sweeping up state regulated and Farm Bill compliant hemp-derived products that have driven a new and dynamic market. Under attempted complete prohibition, bad actors dealing in potentially harmful products will continue to operate and thrive in the shadows, while state regulatory structures that protect public safety will be put in conflict with Federal law.”

References