The U.S. Senate unanimously passed legislation, on the 10th of July, that contained cataclysmic wording for those in cannabinoid-hemp industry.
The Senate Appropriations Committee approved fiscal year 2026 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and related agencies Appropriations act The bill was supported by 27 lawmakers. The spending bill, which is 136 pages long, provides $27 billion of discretionary funds to help farmers, rural communities and nutrition programs. It also includes funding for medical research, food safety, health care, as well as a variety of other issues.
According to the Associated Press, however, legislators also included provisions that redefined hemp to close a “loophole” that led to the sale of intoxicating products made from hemp that are not regulated across the nation. You can read more about it here. The committee.
Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, a Republican senator, was the driving force behind the legalization and federalization of hemp as part the 2018 Farm Bill. McConnell saw the grain and fiber products from the plant as an agricultural commodity that would provide Bluegrass State farmers with a viable alternative to the tobacco industry. McConnell never expected that his 2018 Farm Bill would result in a boom of consumer demand, especially for products containing synthetic cannabinoid derivatives such as delta-8-THC gummies.
As a member on the Appropriations Committee, the former leader of majority spoke Thursday about this unintended outcome.
These intoxicating goods have been flooding the market due to the lack of regulation [of a] McConnell stated that “regulations and marketing practices often deceive children by using packaging and logos which are similar to those of existing products such as Oreos and candy. The language that I secured, in my opinion, brings us back to original intentions of the Farm Bill 2018 and closes the loophole. “My 2018 hemp bill was designed to promote the agricultural hemp sector, and not allow the sale of intoxicating hemp-derived chemicals that are made by labs without any safety framework or regulation.”
The Senate Appropriations Committee’s 2025 hemp provision is similar to those of the U.S. House Appropriations Committee. adopted Andy Harris (R-Md.) was the leader of this event on Wednesday, June 23,
Under both versions, hemp-derived cannabinoid products containing synthetic compounds and/or quantifiable amounts of THC or THCA—or other cannabinoids that have similar effects on humans or animals—would be illegal. It is up to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to define what “quantifiable amount” means.
The standard for hemp harvested or grown to be used “industrially” (for gain, fiber and other purposes) would not apply. Instead, the THC content would only be 0.3% of its dry weight.
According to the Senate’s legislation, farmers can still cultivate industrial hemp in order to produce edible microgreens (or other hemp leaf products) for human consumption. The hemp plants are harvested from immature plants. The House legislation uses the word “derived”, which refers to an immature cannabis plant.
The Senate version also delays the implementation of the new definition for hemp by one year.
While the cannabis and hemp industries argue about whether or not a “loophole’ exists in the Farm Bill of 2018, legislators from each side made their intentions clear to the Senate this week. The federal government is not interested in selling intoxicating hemp-based products to American consumers.
Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., said during the committee markup that while he supports McConnell’s effort to clarify that legislative intent, he also fears the new definition would have another unintended consequence—this time on nonintoxicating hemp products.
Merkley stated that he was concerned about an amendment or definition in its current form because it addressed one important problem but caused another. It is important to note that the amendment does not allow hemp to be used to make hallucinogenic drugs. This has unfortunately happened due to the magical power of laboratories.
There are also other hemp-derived products, like CBD. CBD is a popular health supplement that’s been used in a wide range of products in America, and it doesn’t have any hallucinogenic effects.
Merkley, who is concerned about this issue, said that he would like to continue working with McConnell in the coming year on a definition which does not eliminate CBD hemp-based products from the U.S. market.
Jonathan Miller, the general counsel of the U.S. Hemp Roundtable gave a similar view in a press release provided to Cannabis Business Times.
Miller stated that “Senator McConnell was right about hemp in the Farm Bill of 2018 and also today, when he reiterated the need to ban dangerous copycat and synthetic products and keep all hemp-based products away from children.” How this is achieved matters. U.S. Hemp Roundtable thinks that regulation is the way to go, and not prohibition.
Miller, the hemp advocacy group’s director, said that an outright ban of more than 90 percent of hemp-based products for consumption isn’t the best course.
American Trade Association of Cannabis and Hemp, (ATACH), also commented on the Senate Committee’s approval of hemp language. They denounced the current market of lab-made synthetic THC.
ATACH Vice President for Policy and State Advocacy Chris Lindsey has a slightly different perspective on CBD. According to him, the bill makes distinctions in terms of synthetic and natural product, industrial and consumer goods, and between products that are intoxicating and those which are not.
Lindsey stated that “natural and non-intoxicating hemp product, like CBD, will be recognized and protected under federal law for the very first time.” The bill specifies that Health and Human Services secretary would limit the amount of THC allowed in such products. This gives manufacturers a deadline and a defined boundary. The protections of CBD products and other similar products are both explicit and deliberate.
Committee Reportage On the bill, members of the group acknowledged “the growing consumer demand for American hemp products”, as well as “clear science-based guidelines” and regulations that would help to ensure the safety of consumers and their confidence, as companies innovated to meet this demand.
In order to support this effort, committee members instructed the FDA that it would work with all stakeholders including scientists, small businesses and researchers from academia, as well as manufacturers, public-health experts, and those in the scientific community, in order to suggest limits on the amount of THC, or other cannabinoids, found in products derived from hemp. This collaboration is intended to produce meaningful regulations in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
Apart from that, even though the Senate’s legislation does not aim to control federally illegal marijuana, its report sent an important warning to all state-sanctioned cannabis businesses.
“The Committee is concerned by the proliferation of products that are marketed in contravention of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act [FFDCA]The committee is aware that products not compliant with the FFDCA can pose health and safety risks to consumers, especially those containing cannabis derivatives. The committee is aware that non-FFDCA compliant products pose potential health and safety risks to consumers through misleading, unsubstantiated and false claims that cannabis and cannabis derivatives can treat serious and life-threatening diseases and conditions, including COVID–19 and cancer.”
The U.S. Senate unanimously passed legislation, on the 10th of July, that contained cataclysmic wording for those in cannabinoid-hemp industry.
The Senate Appropriations Committee recently approved fiscal year 2026 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and related agencies Appropriations act The bill was supported by 27 lawmakers. The spending bill, which is 136 pages long, provides $27 billion of discretionary funds to help farmers, rural communities and nutrition programs. It also includes funding for medical research, food safety, health care, as well as a variety of other issues.
According to the aforementioned article, however, legislators also included provisions that redefined hemp to close a “loophole” that led to the sale of intoxicating products made from hemp that are not regulated across the nation. You can read more about it here. The committee.
Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) spearheaded federal hemp legalization in the 2018 Farm Bill. He viewed the plant’s fiber and grain outputs as commodities, which could offer farmers in Kentucky an alternative income source amid the decline of the tobacco industry. McConnell never expected that his 2018 Farm Bill would result in a boom of consumer demand, especially for products containing synthetic cannabinoid derivatives, like delta-8 THC Gummies.
As a member on the Appropriations Committee, the former leader of majority spoke Thursday about this unintended outcome.
These intoxicating goods have been flooding the market due to the lack of regulation [of a] McConnell stated that “regulations and marketing practices often deceive children by using packaging and logos which are similar to those of existing products such as Oreos and candy. According to me, I believe that the language I helped to secure brings us back the the original intention of the 2018 Farm Bill. This loophole is closed. The 2018 hemp legislation I introduced was intended to establish an agricultural hemp industry and not to open up the market to unregulated intoxicating lab-made hemp-derived products with no safety standards.
The Senate Appropriations Committee’s 2025 hemp provision is similar to those of the U.S. House Appropriations Committee. adopted Andy Harris (R-Md.) was the leader of this event on Wednesday, June 23,
Under both versions, hemp-derived cannabinoid products containing synthetic compounds and/or quantifiable amounts of THC or THCA—or other cannabinoids that have similar effects on humans or animals—would be illegal. It is up to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to define what “quantifiable amount” means.
The standard for hemp harvested or grown to be used “industrially” (for gain, fiber and other purposes) would not apply. Instead, the THC content would only be 0.3% of its dry weight.
According to the Senate’s legislation, farmers can still cultivate industrial hemp in order to produce edible microgreens (or other hemp leaf products) for human consumption. The hemp plants are harvested from immature hemp plants. The House legislation uses the word “derived”, which refers to an immature cannabis plant.
Also, in the Senate’s version the introduction of the new definition of hemp is delayed by a year.
While hemp and cannabis industry stakeholders debate whether there is a “loophole”, senators of both political parties have made clear their intention in this week’s Senate session: The federal government will not allow intoxicating hemp-based products to be sold in America, particularly to children.
Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., said during the committee markup that while he supports McConnell’s effort to clarify that legislative intent, he also fears the new definition would have another unintended consequence—this time on nonintoxicating hemp products.
Merkley expressed concern that the amended definition or amendment addressed an important matter, but created a second problem. It is important to note that the amendment does not allow hemp to be used to make hallucinogenic drugs. This has unfortunately happened due to the magical power of laboratories.
There are also other hemp-derived products, like CBD. CBD is a popular health supplement that’s been used in many different products in America. It doesn’t have any hallucinogenic effects.
Merkley, who is concerned about this issue, said that he would like to continue working with McConnell in the coming year on a definition which does not eliminate CBD hemp-based products from the U.S. market.
Jonathan Miller, the general counsel of the U.S. Hemp Roundtable gave a similar view in a press release provided to Cannabis Business Times.
Miller stated that “Senator McConnell was right about hemp in the Farm Bill of 2018 and again when he told us today we needed to ban dangerous synthesized and replica products while keeping hemp products away from children.” How this is achieved matters. U.S. Hemp Roundtable thinks that regulation is the way to go, and not prohibition.
Miller stated that the organization for hemp businesses believes a ban of over 90% on consumable hemp is not the correct path.
American Trade Association of Cannabis and Hemp, (ATACH), also commented on the Senate Committee’s approval of hemp language. They denounced the current market of lab-produced, synthetic THC.
ATACH Vice-President of Policy and State Advocacy Chris Lindsey, however, had a very different view on CBD. He said that the bill creates regulatory lanes by separating intoxicating and not-intoxicating goods, natural and synthetic products, and industrial and consumers products.
Lindsey stated that “natural and non-intoxicating hemp product, like CBD, will be recognized and protected under federal law for the very first time.” The bill specifies that Health and Human Services secretary would limit the amount of THC allowed in such products. This gives manufacturers a deadline and a defined boundary. The protections of CBD products and other similar products are both explicit and deliberate.
Committee Report On the bill, members of the group acknowledged “the growing consumer demand for American hemp products”, as well as “the need for clear, science-based guidelines” and regulations that would help to ensure the safety and security of consumers as companies innovate in order to meet this demand.
In order to support this effort, committee members instructed the FDA that it would work with all stakeholders including scientists, small businesses and researchers from academia, as well as manufacturers, public-health experts, and those in the scientific community, to suggest limits on the amount of THC, or other cannabinoids, found in products derived from hemp. This collaboration is intended to produce meaningful regulations in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
The Senate bill itself does not intend to regulate cannabis that is illegal at the federal level, but the report of the Senate committee on the legislation sent out a warning to businesses sanctioned by states:
“The Committee is concerned by the proliferation of products that are marketed in contravention of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act [FFDCA]Many products contain derivatives from the cannabis plant. The committee is aware that non-FFDCA compliant products pose potential health and safety risks to consumers through misleading, unsubstantiated and false claims that cannabis and cannabis derivatives can treat serious and life-threatening diseases and conditions, including COVID–19 and cancer.”
Cannabis Law Resources for Poland
Discover essential legal information about the cultivation of cannabis, its sale, and regulations governing medical products in Poland. You can use these resources to learn about the requirements for certifications and permissions.
-
Polish News Registration and Interests of Cannabis Businesses
-
Permissions for Cannabis Sales in Poland
-
Authorization for Importing or Manufacturing Medical Products
-
Permission for Manufacturing or Importing Medical Products
-
Certificate of Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP)
-
Registration of Medical Products in Poland