On November 18, U.S. Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) introduced the Rural Prosperity and Food Security Act of 2024, aka the Senate version of the 2024 Farm Bill.
In a statement that day, Chairwoman Stabenow said, “The foundation of every successful Farm Bill is built on holding together the broad, bipartisan Farm Bill coalition. This is a strong bill that invests in all of agriculture, helps families put food on the table, supports rural prosperity, and holds that coalition together.”
The Senate bill comes roughly six months after Chairwoman Stabenow shared a detailed overview of the intended bill. That was followed on May 17 by the U.S. House introducing its Farm Bill draft, the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2024 and the subsequent proposal of the “Mary Miller Amendment.”
As reported by Cannabis Business Times, the amendment proposed by Rep. Mary Miller (R-Ill.), in summary, moved to change the definition of hemp to exclude anything other than “naturally occurring, naturally derived, and non-intoxicating cannabinoids.”
Then on June 10, the House Appropriations Committee released the Fiscal Year 2025 bill for the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee, which included amended language from the draft 2024 Farm Bill amendment offered by Miller.
While both the Senate and House versions of the Farm Bill hold what may be many beneficial provisions for farmers in general, the language surrounding industrial hemp is concerning at best.
But just how concerned should the industry be at this point? CBT checked in with National Hemp Association (NHA) Chair Geoff Whaling and U.S. Hemp Roundtable General Counsel Jonathan Miller for their perspectives on where the bills stand and what to expect.
Short-Term ConcernsWith the end of 2024 just weeks away—and a new administration around the corner—the likelihood of either bill moving forward this year appears slim.
“In terms of the short term, we don’t have any concern,” Miller told Cannabis Business Times, noting Chairwoman Stabenow’s upcoming retirement at the end of this year. “It’s clear that there’s going to be no action on this bill, not just on the hemp portions, but on any part of the Senate Farm Bill. We’re also quite confident that there will be no action on the Mary Miller Amendment, whether it’s as part of a Farm Bill or as part of an appropriation spending bill.”
Whaling agreed that significant action on the Farm Bill is unlikely with the changing administration and Senate control shifting to the Republicans.
“Remember, it was supposed to be the 2023 Farm Bill. We’re a long way away from that,” Whaling told Cannabis Business Times. “The election has provided the GOP with the ability to just wait it out … which would give both the House and the Senate the chance to get together again and redo the Farm Bill the way that the GOP wants.” While there may be significant Democratic pushback, he said, “They’re no longer in the driver’s seat.
Concerning LanguageAlthough movement on either Farm Bill version may not happen this year, the language in both bills remains concerning.
“Now we have two different bills, or two different sets of language, that could impose significant harm on the hemp industry and hemp farmers,” Miller said. “The Mary Miller language is worse. The Mary Miller language would put 90 to 95 percent of hemp businesses out of business, because it bans all products with any level of THC in them, which would also cripple hemp farming in the country. It could also impact industrial farming by the redefinition of THC [content in hemp].”
While Miller considers the language in the Stabenow bill to be better, he noted it remains quite problematic: “It would basically prohibit all Delta-8 THC products, and all THCA products, smokeable products. It would not harm CBD products or Delta-9 beverages, for example. But still, it would certainly wreak havoc on the industry.”
The Stabenow bill redefines hemp to include total THC, including THCA, and to exclude anything used for cannabinoid resin extraction and the manufacturing or synthesis of natural or synthetic cannabinoid products from the definition of industrial hemp.
One positive note, Whaling noted, is that both House and Senate Farm Bill versions contain language from the NHA-authored Industrial Hemp Act of 2023, which separates fiber and grain (“industrial hemp”) from cannabinoid hemp (“hemp for any purpose”) and proposes separate permitting systems, allowing farmers to grow fiber and grain just as easily as they grow wheat, corn or soybeans.
Legislative MisunderstandingAs covered in a recent NHA blog post, Whaling stressed that the Farm Bill is not the right vehicle for legislators to try and remedy perceived problems with intoxicating cannabinoids.
“I think that there is just a misunderstanding amongst legislators of the repercussions of them introducing language that is all encompassing to the hemp industry,” Whaling said. “I understand the intent and what people are trying to do to bifurcate fiber and grain from cannabinoids and to halt or prohibit intoxicating cannabinoids, but I don’t think they understand that the language that has been introduced by the Miller Amendment and the Senate version is not really the right way to fix this.”
Instead of looking at the farmers to solve the issue, Whaling suggested legislators should be looking at end products—where they can truly have an impact.
“By putting the burden in part on the farmers, they’re going to be sending a message to American farmers who are just looking at growing this as any other commodity, as was declared in the 2018 Farm Bill, as being too much of a risk,” Whaling added.
Vigilance in 2025While immediate concerns about the Stabenow bill and the Mary Miller amendment may be abated, the U.S. Hemp Roundtable’s Miller emphasizes it’s time for action and vigilance.
“We will be next year fighting to make sure that neither of these see the light of day,” Miller said, noting that the Hemp Roundtable is focused on securing passage of the Cannabinoid Safety and Regulation Act (CSRA), recently introduced by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). As reported by Cannabis Business Times, the CSRA focuses on regulation of hemp products rather than prohibition, with the emphasis on keeping them out of minors’ hands.
“The Mary Miller amendment was quite frightening for the industry, and it was disappointing to see what happened, but it’s dead for now, and so we don’t need to be as anxious or worried,” Miller said.
“But you still need to be vigilant, because there will be efforts to come after hemp in the new year, whether it’s through something like Mary Miller or through something like the Stabenow language. And we need to be prepared to both fight that, but also to proactively promote regulation.”
Jolene Hansen is an award-winning freelance writer and editor specializing in the commercial horticulture, cannabis and CEA industries. Reach her at [email protected].
With U.S. House and Senate 2024 Farm Bill versions now on the table, it is time to stay vigilant. Read More
