Did you miss the USDA Listening Session? Listen now to a recording of public comments
On March 13th at 12 pm EST the USDA hosted a hemp listening session to receive feedback from stakeholders regarding regulation of hemp under the 2018 Farm Bill. Approximately 50 people submitted verbal comments including Vote Hemp president Eric Steenstra.
If you missed this session, you can still listen to the comments.
Click below to listen to a recording of the USDA Hemp Listening Session:
USDA via email. Please send your comments to [email protected] and make sure to include your name, company name (if applicable), address, email and phone number.
For the first time since Cannabis was included in the Single Convention drug treaty, the scheduling status of Cannabis within International law is being updated. The World Health Organization (WHO), the only agency mandated to do so, has officially assessed all available evidence and is issuing scientific recommendations on the therapeutic value and harms related to Cannabis sativa L.
The very positive outcome clearly acknowledges medical applications of Cannabis and cannabinoids, re-integrates them into pharmacopeias, balances harms, and de facto repeals the WHO position from 1954 according to which “there should be efforts towards the abolition of cannabis from all legitimate medical practice.”
Such a move is a major breakthrough in international Cannabis policy, and a clear victory of evidence over politics. Policies will be affected globally and reform inspired at the national level. Many countries rely on the Treaty’s schedules: changes will affect them directly. Countries that have their own schedules will be eased in their reforms. Also, other international bodies such as the INCB (International Narcotics Control Board) will now provide guidance to countries, and monitor access and availability of Cannabis and cannabinoids in our health systems globally. Their next report expected in February will give insights on their new position.
53 UN countries now have to approve these WHO recommendations, thus amending the Convention’s schedules if the simple majority vote is positive. Initially planned for March 2019, it is entirely possible that the 2-months delay in the publication of the results postpones the vote until March 2020.
FAAAT think & do tank has been a driving force throughout this process and has served as a watchdog to ensure the independence, objectivity, and comprehensiveness of the assessment.
WHO has shown great resolve in delivering these strong recommendations: they now need to be understood, respected and implemented.
This international scheduling proposed by WHO provides a highly simplified and normalized international control as well as an increased possibility for countries to provide legal and safe access for medical use and research in a pragmatic, coherent, and rights-enhancing manner. This un-exceptionality of Cannabis should allow other UN programs to get more involved with Cannabis and cannabinoids.
Our webpage compiling 5 years of work and monitoring of the process:www.faaat.net/cannabis
Our statements to the ECDD39, ECDD40 and ECDD41 (1, 2, 3).
Our report outlining the history and details of Cannabis scheduling in the Treaties.
Recommendations are attached below or available at this link.
‘The Marijuana News Reform in Congress could be the answer to so many challenges we’re all facing in this country and around the world. Once Cannabis is completely legal to grow, consume, buy and sell across all borders, the landscape of our world could change for the extreme positive; environmentally, economically and through whole health wellness of course. Set the plant free and let our farmers grow!’ It’s time to push had on your congressperson!comments Darlene Mea CEO of HempingtonPost
From MMJ DAILY Jan 24, 2019
The U.S. Congress always has been slow to act, but that’s been especially true for marijuana reform, which has been a stigmatized issue for decades.
As a result, cannabis companies have been waiting and hoping for years that Congress will take action to guarantee banking access to law-abiding marijuana businesses and ease the excessive tax burden from 280E.
Those hopes may actually be realized in 2019.
One of the biggest reasons for encouragement is a bill that many cannabis advocates believe could end up on President Trump’s desk:the States Act, which would formally leave marijuana regulation to the states instead of the federal government. That single piece of legislation – while far short of what many MJ activists want – would be a “quantum leap” forward, in the words of Cannabis Trade Federation CEO Neal Levine.Perhaps the foremost factor that could prove the dealmaker for marijuana reform in 2019 is the change in congressional makeup.“A lot of the things that were stopping us in the past were chairmen in positions of power that just refused to engage at all,” said U.S. Rep. David Joyce, a Republican from Ohio.
On December 21st, 2018, I posted a story I called “What did the FDA bring you for Christmas”. This story was meant as a ‘wake-up call’ to the hemp/CBD industry in America. The story was intended to let those of you in the industry know that the newest policy released by the FDA was a ‘warning shot’ over the bow of the CBD industry in America.
The responses ran the gambit, from those I referred to as the “Wishful Thinkers”, who would prefer to ignore a problem than acknowledge it, and hope that it would simply go away, if ignored long enough, to those who were rightly concerned about the future of their businesses….and still should be.
Some accused me of trying to ‘spread panic’, for some unexplained personal gain. I should point out that I am neither, growing hemp for CBD, or selling CBD products, at least at this time, so I have no dog in this fight.
My only intent was, and is, to warn those in the industry of a real-life threat to that industry, and that threat has absolutely not gone away at this point.
Within the first 10 days, after I posted my article, there were seizures by the US Postal Service of CBD products, produced by Chis Martin’s company in Arizona, followed by an FDA raid, without a federal warrant, of a store in Yuma, Arizona, in which they confiscated CBD products. While these were not the only product seizures during this time period, my next article will focus on some attention on this particular raid, because it will help explain the rest of this story and what you can expect in the future from law enforcement and regulatory agencies in the US and Europe.
I didn’t offer any solutions in the first article, because, frankly, I didn’t see any at that point. I hadn’t had the time, nor the facts, that I have now, to offer more insight into this issue, let alone be able to suggest any solutions. Now I have more of both.
This article will likely be the first of several on this issue because those that have visited this plague on our CBD/hemp industry were very clever and the explanations are not simple. What I’m going to attempt to do in this first article is to explain the fallacies of the FDA’s position on hemp-derived CBD products and how you can take the first steps in defending yourself from the type of raids, and seizures, we’ve already seen since December 26, 2018.
These are complicated legal issues and I’m going to attempt to explain them as simply as humanly possible. Before I go any further, I realize that there are those of you in the industry that may want a more thorough legal explanation than what I’m providing here. If you do, please contact me privately.
So let’s get down to the meat of this issue. On December 20, 2018, the FDA put out a press release explaining their latest position on CBD. While this was a very long statement, I’d like to get to the issues where the FDA is completely wrong.
The FDE stated the following in their press release:
“Additionally, it’s unlawful under the FD&C Act to introduce food containing added CBD or THC into interstate commerce, or to market CBD or THC products as, or in, dietary supplements, regardless of whether the substances are hemp-derived. This is because both CBD and THC are active ingredients in FDA-approved drugs and were the subject of substantial clinical investigations before they were marketed as foods or dietary supplements. Under the FD&C Act, it’s illegal to introduce drug ingredients like these into the food supply, or to market them as dietary supplements. This is a requirement that we apply across the board to food products that contain substances that are active ingredients in any drug.”
For the FDA to say that it makes “no difference” whether or not CBD is “hemp-derived” or not, flies in the face of the 2004 Federal Court Ruling in HIA v. DEA. The Court ruled that there is a very clear difference between CBD and THC derived from hemp and those same cannabinoids derived from ‘marijuana’.
CBD & THC are already legally part of food products that have now been determined to be GRAS, or “generally accepted as safe”, by the FDA, in this very same press statement. Both hemp oil and hemp seed contain both substances, and the FDA is well aware of that. These two substances have also been in both food products and dietary supplements long before GW Pharmaceutical submitted their CBD product for FDA approval, contrary to the FDA’s statements to the contrary. This argument has already been settled by the Federal Court of Appeals in 2004 and has never been challenged. It is still the current law of the land, which trumps the FDA’s ‘opinion’ on this issue.
So if the CBD contained in industrial hemp, has now been determined as“generally accepted as safe” in food products, by the FDA, and has been determined to be a different substance than CBD or THC produced from marijuana, by the Federal Courts, how can the FDA now claim that there is no differencewhether those substances come from marijuana or hemp?
The fact is that the CBD that is contained in Epidiolex, is a Schedule 5 drug under the Federal CSA, while all substances that are contained in ‘hemp’ have been removed from the Federal CSA and been determined to be GRAS by the FDA themselves. So anything contained in the seed or oil of the hemp plant can now be added to both food and dietary supplements, in any form you choose.
So let’s take this argument one step further. When we are talking about CBD from hemp, this substance would now, under the FDA’s own rule, be considered a“botanical substance” and would not qualify under FDA rules as either a “drug ingredient” or as an OTC (over the counter) drug ingredient.
The same goes for isolates. Epidiolex contains an isolate from a Schedule 1 drug, and is, itself, a Schedule 5 CSA substance. It’s not a“botanical substance”. It’s considered a “synthetic substance” because it’s a single molecule substance. Isolate extracted from hemp, on the other hand, is still just an extract of a non-CSA scheduled plant that has never been used as a component of any FDA approved drug, so it cannot be considered a “drug ingredient”.
So, contrary to the FDA’s statement, where the CBD comes from does, absolutely matter, both under the FDA’s own rules, as well as the current case law from the Federal Courts.
So let’s talk about how you, as a CBD product manufacturer can take steps to protect yourself from the seizure of your products from the USPS and FDA, or, at the very least, give you legal recourse to prevail in court should they insist on taking illegal action against you.
I was truly disturbed to hear from an industry insider that there are actually a number of companies out there producing CBD products that have removed any mention of CBD from their labeling!
I can’t imagine who told you to do that, but if they have a law degree, or you paid them for this advice, please take my advice and fire them immediately. Tomorrow would not be too soon. Mislabeling your products can subject you to incredible liability risks that you have apparently not considered when you made this foolish decision.
First, there are numerous documented reports of individuals that have ingested CBD products and have experienced“psychoactive type reactions” to this CBD, some to the point where they stated that they didn’t feel that they were safe to drive a motor vehicle.
While the FDA rules on dietary supplements do not require that you put a warning regarding this issue on your labeling, if someone were to claim that they got in a motor vehicle crash due to impairment caused by the product you sold them, and the CBD did not appear on the label of that product, you will have no defense in court from an experienced attorney and you could very well lose your company, or worse.
The other reason you don’t want to leave this information off your labeling is simply that the very fact that your product contains a hemp extract’ will help protect you from a seizure of your products by the FDA and USPS!
I don’t have to tell you not to make any medical or health claims on your labels, but here is the wording I suggest to help protect your company from the Feds:
“This product contains cannabidiol (CBD), a beneficial plant extract, made from American grown hemp.”
This clearly shows where the CBD came from, hemp not marijuana, and that it’s a plant extract, and not a “drug ingredient”. The word “beneficial” is not a claim that you are required to prove, according to the FDA’s rules, nor is the word “natural”, and you can add that if you like too. If your CBD didn’t come from “American grown” hemp, just replace that with “industrial hemp”.
This wording should work if you are using full-plant, crude, distillate, or even isolate. However, I should point out that the FDA does NOT agree with me on the isolate argument. But if you add this to your label, without spelling out that the product contains isolate, the statement alone should stop them from seizing your products. If you are selling products to those who have decided to use this CBD for health reasons, by all means, stop using isolate. This will be more beneficial for your customers and definitely provide you with much stronger legal protections! Win-Win!
In the next installment, I will explain how I know that this legal argument will work, and I will explain how the “nefarious” people are already aware of this! I will also explain along why only some, and not all, of Chris Martin’s CBD products, were seized by the FDA.
This is just the tip of the iceberg, folks, and now you understand why this is just the first of a series of articles that I intend to write that will both help protect you, expose the nefarious players in this industry, and warn you about new regulatory dangers that are absolutely headed your way, in time for you to protect yourselves and your businesses.
If you found this article useful, please share it around among your friends in the industry. The better-educated everyone is, the better chance we can fight off the assault that I still believe is headed our way, and not just in the United States.
Reposted from
Steve Sarich President CannaBiogen Research Chiang Mai, Thailand
Feds Legalize Hemp But Not CBD; States Can Continue to Nullify Prohibition
Last week, Pres. Trump signed the Farm Bill into law. Beyond all the unconstitutional funding in the bill, a bit of a bright spot, the feds will no longer treat industrial hemp as a controlled substance. So what does this mean for the hemp industry – and for CBD as well? Is everything “legal” now as many people are reporting, or is there something else going on behind the scenes? Michael Boldin helps unravel the many layers of federal prohibition in this episode of Good Morning Liberty.
Farm Bill Socialism in Senate – 99% of the Bill is total garbage says
As the Washington Post noted, Congress passed the $867 billion farm bill “with strong bipartisan support, spurred in part by pressure from farmers battered by President Trump’s trade war with China.”
Sorry, don’t blame the trade war with China for this debacle. The Farm Bill is a disaster on its own. It’s filled with literally hundreds of billions of dollars of market-distorting subsidies to U.S. farmers. But the bill that passed excluded the one good idea it originally contained: A work requirement for able-bodied welfare recipients.
How bad is the bill? Even Iowa Republican Sen. Charles E. Grassley, himself a farmer, was outraged because the package granted federal subsidies even to distant relatives of farmers that don’t farm.
“I’m very disappointed the conferees decided to expand the loopholes on farm subsidies,” Grassley said. “I’ve been trying to make sure the people who get the subsidies are real farmers … I’ve been trying for three years, and it gets worse and worse and worse.”
Subsidies For ‘City Slickers’
Scott Faber of the Environmental Working Group, a left-leaning environmentalist organization that has been critical of farm subsidies, notes that more than 1,000 “city slickers” who live in major American cities get farm subsidies. It’s absurd.
All in all, the nearly $1 trillion a year spent on farm subsidies and food aid is a massive waste, given that farmers on average have higher incomes than those who are taxed to subsidize them
Meanwhile, the the new bill also provides “promotional funds” for farmers markets, research for organic farming, and money to train more farmers. It also grants more money to veteran and minority farmers. Everyone gets a handout, it seems, whether needed or not.
ObamaCare For Farmers
Outrageously, two major subsidy programs created in the last farm bill, the Price Loss Coverage and Agricultural Risk Coverage insurance programs, quietly got a major funding boost, even though they’re running 72% over their allotted budget. These programs, in some cases, could subsidize farmers even when prices go up, notes Daren Bakst, writing for the Daily Signal. This is farm socialism, plain and simple. And a trillion dollars is a lot of money.
“This is the Obamacare of agriculture subsidies because it fixes prices on crops, inflating the costs, and expands the concept of insurance to non-catastrophic and cyclical revenue declines,” wrote Daniel Horowitz in the Conservative Review.
Today, our farm bill is used for so many dubious projects, it’s tough to list them all.
Farm Bill Socialism
But let us name just two of the worst: sugar subsidies, which line the pockets of a handful of sugar-making families by $4 billion a year, forcing Americans to pay more than twice the world price for sugar. And then there’s subsidies for farmers that sell corn for ethanol, which the government requires American cars to use. This has driven up prices for food globally and farmland here in the U.S., as more and more of our food supply goes into our automobile fuel tanks instead of our stomachs.
Just like the old Soviet 5-year plans, the U.S. Farm Bill is passed every five years. Which means we’re stuck with it. This time, American politicians of both parties have colluded to create an even bigger mess of a bill than usual, one that wastes money to subsidize things no one wants, delivers aid to crops and people who don’t need it, and hands money to people for doing nothing. They distort markets both here and abroad, making it harder — and costlier — to feed Americans.
In our increasingly socialized farm economy, nearly everyone is too big to fail. Which means the rest of us pay for it. President Trump, focused on other things, will likely sign this awful Farm Bill. After all, it has that golden seal of congressional approval: It was “bipartisan.” All that means is both sides found ways to rip off taxpayers.
Republicans have criticized the socialism of Democrats such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, but they should reflect on their own party’s socialist vote in the Senate yesterday. The upper chamber voted 87-13 for the bloated monstrosity known as the farm bill, which funds farm subsidies and food stamps. Republicans in the Senate voted in favor 38-13.
It is not hyperbole to call the farm bill “socialism.” It will spend $867 billion over the next decade, thus pushing up government debt and taxes. It includes large-scale wealth redistribution in the form of food stamps. At its core is central planning, which is obvious when you consider that the bill is 807 pages of legalese laying out excruciating details on crop prices, acres, yields, and other micromanagement. Furthermore, the bill lines the pockets of wealthy elites (landowners), which is a central feature of socialism in practice around the world.
The bill does not represent incremental reform toward smaller government. It is an extension and expansion of big government programs.
Many Republican senators who claim to be conservative voted for farm bill socialism yesterday. They voted for wealth redistribution, central planning, and ultimately higher taxes. Yet on their official Senate websites, these members who approved socialism yesterday nonetheless claim to favor conservative budget policies.
In alphabetical order …
Sen. Roy Blunt: “Unfortunately, bigger government, more spending, higher taxes, and more debt has created an inequality crisis of opportunity in our country.”
Sen. Bill Cassidy: “The national debt is more than $20 trillion. Fiscal responsibility is not an option, it’s a necessity to ensure the long term financial health of the United States. We must get federal spending under control by cutting wasteful, duplicative programs and ensuring taxpayer dollars are spent wisely.”
Sen. Bob Corker: “A key leader on our nation’s fiscal challenges, Bob is one of the few members of Congress to put pen to paper and produce a bill that would set our country on a path to fiscal solvency. As one of the most fiscally conservative members of Congress, he continues to fight against Washington’s all too common practice of generational theft.”
Sen. John Cornyn: “Congress must also be careful stewards of your tax dollars, focusing on lowering annual deficits and recovering from our $18 trillion debt so future generations can enjoy the same opportunities available today. By eliminating excessive spending and increasing economic activity over time, we can reduce the current budget deficit.”
Sen. Mike Crapo: “Our nation faces many threats but perhaps the biggest is our growing, unsustainable national debt … It is an urgent issue for many Idahoans who agree we must reduce our spending and balance the federal budget.”
Sen. Ted Cruz: “He has consistently voted against raising the debt ceiling, insisting that any debt ceiling increase be accompanied by structural reforms, such as a balanced budget amendment, to better control the way Washington spends money. Sen. Cruz believes that Washington’s out-of-control spending robs prosperity from our children and grandchildren, and that economic growth necessitates a smaller, less regulation-heavy federal government.”
We are only up to “C” in the alphabet here, but you can see the dissonance between the conservative self-image of many Republican members and their actual behavior.
These folks get elected because they claim to be conservative and claim to be worried about overspending and debt. But actions speak louder than words.
President Trump signed into today an $867 billion farm bill that provides billions in aid to U.S. farmers while rejecting deep cuts to the federal food stamp programs sought by some House Republicans.
“We have to take care of our farmers and ranchers, and we will take care of them,” Trump said at the signing ceremony, going on to praise congressional Democrats for what he called their hard work on the bill.
The hemp provision, which was secured in the final version of the bill under the leadership of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), will allow farmers to apply to cultivate and sell the crop. The industry will be lightly regulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
It’s been decades since hemp was banned in the country as part of the broader prohibition against marijuana. But even as the crop remained illegal to grow, the market for hemp-derived products ballooned. It’s just that the products have had to be imported.
Now, after months of debate on various other aspects of the legislation, the Farm Bill has finally arrived on the president’s desk—and with Trump’s signature, the long-awaited end of hemp prohibition.
