The misunderstanding of what hemp is and what it can be used for is perhaps the biggest hurdle in the issue of getting the public behind the push to legalize industrial hemp farming.
If people understood the potential of hemp in what it can do for the economy and environment they would very likely support changing the laws banning its cultivation.
Legalization of hemp farming in the U.S. would improve the situation for family farmers, likely result in more family farms independent of corporate infusion, make the country more independent, and keep money in the U.S. that is currently going to hemp industries in other countries. It would also help the environment, protect forests and wildlife, result in a reduction in the use of farming chemicals, build healthier soil, and protect streams, rivers, lakes, aquifers, and oceans.
There are over 30 industrialized countries that allow farmers to grow hemp. Even though Canada had as much as 50,000 acres of industrial hemp growing during 2006, the U.S. continues to outlaw the growing of hemp within its borders, even though the U.S. is the world’s number one importer of hemp products to the tune of over $300,000,000 in 2006.
“Industrial hemp is being grown in Canada, just a few miles from the United States border. Raw hemp is being imported into the U.S. for the manufacture of products. A growing market exists for Omega-3 rich hemp seed and oil products including snack foods, body care, and supplements. Several thousand businesses, including Fortune 1000 firms, are participating in this market. With raw materials for these products being imported, U.S. farmers are deprived of the economic benefits stemming from these new markets.”
– North American Industrial Hemp Council, NAIHC.org
In February of 2006, North Dakota Agricultural Commissioner Roger Johnson and three agricultural commissioners from three other states flew to Washington, D.C. to meet with Drug Enforcement Administration officials to explore rules for allowing farmers to grow industrial hemp.
On March 9, 2006, North Dakota Governor John Hoeven signed House Bill 1492, directing North Dakota State University to begin collecting and storing hemp seed for the day when hemp farming will be legal in that state.
As of summer 2006, seven states had passed pro-hemp farming laws, including Hawaii, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Montana, North Dakota, and West Virginia. Other states that were working to pass bills permitting hemp farming included California, New Hampshire, and Oregon.
On September 30, 2006, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill to legalize hemp farming in that state. While some loathed Schwarzenegger’s decision, others agreed with it because of the genetic engineering issues. Hemp bills should specify that the crop should be protected from genetic engineering, and that genetically engineered hemp should not be permitted. (See Appendix 3 to read a letter from Jack Herer to Schwarzenegger, and the press release from Vote Hemp.)
“Over-regulation of industrial hemp cultivation—for example, laws requiring that hemp seed be purchased from a certified monopoly, that legal hemp varieties contain ‘terminator genes,’ or that buyers must be identified before farm licenses are issued—should be avoided. The potential for illicit marijuana cultivation is not considered a significant obstacle to industrial hemp farming in any other developed democracy in the world.”
– March 2008 Reason Foundation Study on Hemp, Illegally Green: Environmental Costs of Hemp Prohibition. Policy Study 367, by Skaidra Smith-Heisters
I am against the genetic engineering of plants. I would be in favor of a bill that clearly states that genetically engineered hemp could never be planted. For more on genetic engineering, see the book The Food Revolution by John Robbins (FoodRevolution.com), see the documentary The Future of Food (TheFutureOfFood.com), and contact the Organic Consumers Association (OrganicConsumers.org).
Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has years of pot smoking experience, made a stupid comment about hemp that may either display his ignorance about hemp, or his goal to spread misinformation about hemp. He made the ridiculous comment when he appeared on the ecology-themed episode of the MTV show Pimp My Ride, which takes cars, trucks, and vans and transforms them into hot rods. Upon finding the 1965 Chevy Impala he submitted to be transformed into a biofuel hot rod contained hemp fabric seats, Schwarzenegger made the comment that he made hemp illegal in California. He made a “joke” that someone could end up smoking the seats. An unfortunate choice of words from someone who has the power to approve or veto a bill that could allow hemp farming in one of the largest and most populated states in the country and that ranks in the top ten world economies. To his benefit, he did appear on the show to promote biofuel vehicles, which the Impala was made into with the installation of a diesel engine capable of running on plant oils.
The California Industrial Hemp Farming Act was reintroduced in February 2007. Its sponsors were conservative Republican Assemblyman Chuck Devore and liberal Democrat Assemblyman Mark Leno.
In response to the reintroduction of the California bill, John Lovell of the California Narcotic Law Officers Association stated: “The problem becomes those people who are illicitly growing marijuana and who will use hemp as a blind, if you will, to conceal their marijuana activities.” It should be quite clear to someone such as Lovell that marijuana growers wouldn’t want their plants anywhere near hemp plants. Maybe Lovell is being evasive in expressing his viewpoints in order to continue the big lie for career sake. Or, maybe he is ignorant about the hemp issue, which would be surprising. Or, perhaps, all of the above.
The bill didn’t make it into law.
“It’s absolutely criminal that American farmers, the most productive and efficient farmers on the planet, cannot be allowed to grow a naturally occurring plant that grows wild in America.”
– California’s conservative Republican Assemblyman Chuck Devore, appearing on ABC KGO-TV/DT San Francisco the day before reintroducing the California Industrial Farming Act of 2007, which he co-authored with liberal Democrat Assemblyman Mark Leno; February 19, 2007
On January 4, 2007, an industrial hemp farming bill was introduced in New Hampshire. The bill, HB 424, was the seventh hemp farming bill to be introduced in that state in the past nine years. It was referred to the House Environment and Agriculture Committee with the note that “the development and use of industrial hemp can serve to improve the state’s economy and agricultural viability, and the production of industrial hemp can be regulated so as not to interfere with the strict regulation of controlled substances in the state.”
For each person who is educated about hemp there seems to be a room filled with those who don’t understand the issue. Unfortunately the rooms are often the meeting and hearing rooms of lawmakers whose words usually expose their ignorance on the topic of hemp.
When Idaho Agricultural Committee Chairman Representative Tom Trail (R-Moscow, ID) introduced a resolution to urge the U.S. Congress to eliminate federal barriers to industrial hemp farming, the resolution was killed. Lawmakers expressed their ignorant concern that legalizing hemp farming would make it easy for farmers to grow marijuana with the hemp. As Vote Hemp explained it, “Apparently, they weren’t aware that marijuana growers don’t want to have their specially selected female plants anywhere near industrial hemp, whose male plants would ruin the illicit crop with hemp pollen. The threat industrial hemp poses to marijuana is so serious that last year [2006] in California, legal medical marijuana growers vocally opposed an industrial hemp bill because it didn’t contain a clause they desired that would have limited commercial industrial hemp production to agricultural areas of the state where marijuana isn’t widely cultivated.”
As mentioned earlier, in January 2007, North Dakota began issuing permits to allow hemp farming, but hemp farming remains illegal under federal law. On February 13, 2007 North Dakota’s Agricultural Commissioner Roger Johnson delivered two industrial hemp farming applications to the Drug Enforcement Administration. The applications were filled out by two farmers, Wayne Hauge, and more interestingly North Dakota State Representative and Assistant Majority Leader David Monson, a Republican. Johnson said that the DEA officials were “reluctant to accept the applications.”
“I felt that we’ve got a long way to go with the DEA. They made it quite clear that they still do not understand or believe the distinction between industrial hemp and marijuana. That’s a pretty fundamental issue.”
– Roger Johnson, North Dakota Agricultural Commissioner, after submitting industrial hemp farming applications to the Drug Enforcement Administration; February 2007
On February 13, 2007, a Republican Representative, Dr. Ron Paul from Texas, introduced the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2007 (H.R. 1009) into Congress. Written with the help of Vote Hemp, if it had been voted into law, it would have removed restrictions on the cultivation of hemp. In addition to Paul, the sponsors of the bill included nine representatives from seven states, including Congressman Dennis Kucinich, chair of the Domestic Policy subcommittee. As chair of that committee Kucinich could hold hearings on federal barriers to the farming of industrial hemp.
Paul had introduced the Federal Industrial Hemp Farming Act in 2005, but that was defeated. When that bill had been introduced, a luncheon was held that served hemp foods. Speaking at the luncheon were supporters of the bill, including North Dakota Agriculture Commissioner Roger Johnson and North Dakota State Representative David Monson.
When I spoke with Monson in November 2006 he said that he would file a lawsuit against the federal government if they deny his permit to grow hemp in North Dakota. And he did.
“The DEA has the power to waive federal registration for state-licensed industrial hemp farmers, but if they won’t, it’s up to Congress to keep the promise our government made to industrial hemp farmers in 1937 when they passed the first federal law regulating marijuana – that they [the farmers] could go ahead raising hemp just as they always had.”
– VoteHemp.com, February 2007. Comment refers to the farmers being told in 1937 that they could keep growing hemp. But after the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 was passed, the Federal Bureau of Narcotics required that all hemp grown be stripped of its leaves, and only the stalks could be sold. When the stalks were sold a heavy tax had to be paid. This greatly increased the cost of producing hemp. This damaged the emerging hemp industry of the 1930s. Investors were lost and the hemp industry folded under pressure and harassment by the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, which was working to protect the interests of the paper, fossil fuel, pharmaceutical, petrochemical, and other industries.
“Let’s not be naïve, the pro-dope people have been pushing hemp for 20 years because they know that if they can have hemp fields, they can have marijuana fields. It’s stoner logic.”
– Tom Riley, White House Office on National Drug Control Policy, responding to the introduction of the 2005 Federal Industrial Hemp Farming Act; November 2005
“It’s a silly argument. Does (Representative Dave Monson) sound like a druggie?
… It’s legal for us to import hemp stalks and the seed and turn them into clothes and food, but it’s not legal for us to grow it. What’s the sense in that?”
– Roger Johnson, North Dakota Agricultural Commissioner; November 2005
“It is indefensible that the United States government prevents American farmers from growing this crop. The prohibition subsidizes farmers in countries from Canada to Romania by eliminating American competition and encourages jobs in industries such as food, auto parts, and clothing that utilize industrial hemp to be located overseas instead of in the United States.
By passing the Industrial Hemp Farming Act the House of Representatives can help American farmers and reduce the trade deficit – all without spending a single taxpayer dollar.”
– Republican Representative Dr. Ron Paul of Texas, introducing the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2007 to Congress, February 13, 2007
“The DEA has taken the Controlled Substances Act’s antiquated definition of marijuana out of context and used it as an excuse to ban industrial hemp farming. The Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2007 will bring us back to more rational times when the government regulated marijuana, but told farmers they could go ahead and continue raising hemp just as they always had,”
– Eric Steenstra, President of Vote Hemp, February 14, 2007; VoteHemp.com
As of this writing, the federal laws outlawing hemp farming in America still stand. Even if states allow hemp farming, the federal government could put an end to it by tilling it under and taking legal action against those involved with cultivating it.
The Drug Enforcement Administration restrictions on the possible farming of industrial hemp in North Dakota include the following outlandish measures to “alleviate law enforcement concerns”:
• Farmers must consent to a criminal background check, including fingerprints
• Who the farmer sells to and how much is sold must be documented within 30 days of sale
• The location of the hemp field must be provided using geopositioning (GPS) coordinates
• Planted hemp must contain less than three-tenths of one percent tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)
“While North Dakota’s progress could get hung up by DEA disapproval, lawyers with the hemp industry are preparing a court challenge if the DEA fails to cooperate with North Dakota or California when hemp legislation becomes law. The legal theory supporting the right of these states to regulate hemp farming stems from language in the Controlled Substances Act, which exempts hemp from federal control. Using this legal theory the Hemp Industries Association created a legal precedent when the group [which represents 300 hemp businesses] won their lawsuit in 2004 against [the] DEA, protecting sales of hemp foods and body care the agency tried to ban.”
– Adam Eldinger, May 12, 2006; OrganicConsumer.org
“Although the United States permits trade in nonviable hemp seed, oil, and fiber, it is the only major industrialized nation that prohibits the growing and processing of hemp.”
– Hemp Industries Association, TheHIA.org
“We currently import hemp products from China, Thailand, England, France, Spain, Holland, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Ukraine, Canada, and Australia. Hemp is grown legally in most industrialized countries of the world. What do these countries know that we don’t?”
– Hemp: A True Gift from God(ess), by Dr. Heather Anne Harder; SeattleHempFest.com/Facts
“Used to make rope, build and insulate houses, form the interior panels of cars and even provide the fuel to power them, industrial hemp is also a popular ingredient in organic foods. Sales of industrial hemp foods in natural products supermarkets are growing by 50 percent each year. Seventy-seven percent of all sales of hemp food and body care products are earned by California companies, but California farmers are still out of the loop.”
– Organic Consumers Association, OrganicConsumers.org; 2006