Bipartisan Effort Aims to Block Federal Hemp Ban, Give States Regulatory Power

Led by Sen. Rand Paul, lawmakers aim to prevent a November federal hemp ban, advocating for state control as farmers face planting uncertainties.

Angela_Dawson_21_07_31_USA_MN_Hemp_Cooperative_0G4A0672.jpg

The Minnesota Hemp Cooperative

FarmHER, Inc.

NASHVILLE, TENN. (RFD NEWS) — Right now in Washington, there is an ongoing bipartisan push to stop a planned national ban on certain hemp products, set to take effect in November. Lawmakers warn the move could have a major impact on farmers and the multibillion-dollar hemp industry.

The proposal would allow states to opt out of the federal ban if they enforce strict safety rules, including limits on synthetic hemp compounds. Supporters say the goal is to protect consumers while preserving a rapidly growing market, but uncertainty is already affecting decisions on the farm.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) is making the case for producers, arguing that states should have the authority to regulate hemp rather than a one-size-fits-all federal approach.

“No one in Washington discussed the issue. There was no investigation, no hearings,” Paul said. “When Kentucky passed it, they studied it for six months. They decided they wanted to keep it out of the hands of children, regulate the age, and punish stores that sell to underage minors. They handled it in a thoughtful manner, and we ought to let that become the law rather than have people in Washington who never studied the issue make the final decision.”

Paul says the timing of the proposed ban is creating real challenges for farmers, who must decide months in advance whether to plant hemp.

“It’s difficult for those in the hemp business right now because it’s a crop — it has to be planted,” he said. “If it’s going to be made illegal in November, farmers are wondering whether they should plant it this year. They’ve probably already had to make that decision.”

He added that he is working across the aisle with a Democratic senator to ensure states that already regulate hemp can continue to do so, even if federal restrictions move forward.

The proposal is expected to be part of broader discussions around the next farm bill, as lawmakers weigh shifting more authority over hemp regulation to the states while the federal debate continues.

For now, producers are left navigating uncertainty — balancing market opportunity against the risk of sudden regulatory changes.

Related Stories
USDA says Americans are eating at home more often, but convenience continues driving food choices.
A new insurance option aims to help alfalfa farmers manage risk as the industry seeks more support in federal agriculture programs.
Supporters say mandatory country-of-origin labeling would improve transparency, while analysts say the proposal still faces hurdles.
The setback leaves the 2018 Farm Bill operating under its third consecutive extension. That authorization expires September 30.

Marion is a digital content manager for RFD News and FarmHER + RanchHER. She started working for Rural Media Group in May 2022, bringing a decade of digital experience in broadcast media and some cooking experience to the team.

LATEST STORIES BY THIS AUTHOR:

Farm CPA Paul Neiffer explains how sequestration reduces ARC and PLC payments by 5.7 percent and what farmers should know when planning for payments.
USDA Under Secretary Richard Fordyce explains new crop insurance changes, including payment flexibility and expanded prevented planting coverage.
The Farm Bureau is encouraging officials to strengthen the USMCA agreement while ensuring U.S. producers continue to have reliable access to key North American markets.
Shaun Haney provides an update as U.S.-Canada trade talks continue ahead of an August 19 deadline, with leaders negotiating tariffs, metals trade, and potential impacts on agriculture.
The Senate Agriculture Committee’s failure to advance the bill means negotiations will continue as lawmakers look for a path forward before the end of the year.
Sen. Roger Marshall says Democrats rejected legislation over SNAP provisions despite bipartisan farm priorities.