Mitch McConnell Blasts Rand Paul Over Hemp Dispute, Saying He ‘Derailed’ A Push To Criminalize THC Products

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.