Hemp Industry Leader Urges Congress to Regulate, Not Ban THC Products

Congress is moving toward a potential hemp ban without establishing regulatory frameworks for THC and CBD products—a reversal of the evidence-based approach lawmakers claim to support, according to a hemp industry executive.

Mike Simpson, representing Lovewell Farms, argues in a new op-ed that federal legislators should delay any prohibition measures and instead focus on creating comprehensive regulations for hemp-derived cannabinoid products. "Republicans, Democrats and independents alike understand that regulation is better than prohibition, and that good science takes time," Simpson wrote.

The commentary comes as Congress considers provisions in the 2024 Farm Bill that could significantly restrict hemp-derived intoxicating products, including delta-8 THC and similar compounds that have proliferated in the unregulated market since the 2018 Farm Bill legalized hemp.

The Regulatory Gap

Simpson's position reflects growing industry concern that lawmakers are prioritizing prohibition over establishing clear rules for a market that's already generating billions in annual sales. The hemp industry has operated in a regulatory gray zone since 2018, when Congress removed hemp from the Controlled Substances Act but provided little guidance on derivative products.

That gap has created a Wild West market for hemp-derived THC products sold in gas stations, convenience stores, and online retailers—often without age verification, potency limits, or quality testing requirements. Some states have moved to ban these products entirely, while others have implemented their own regulatory frameworks.

The FDA has yet to establish comprehensive rules for CBD products, despite being directed to do so by the 2018 Farm Bill. That regulatory vacuum has left both consumers and legitimate businesses in limbo, while allowing bad actors to flourish.

Industry vs. Enforcement

Simpson's call for regulation over prohibition puts him at odds with some law enforcement groups and cannabis regulators who argue that intoxicating hemp products undermine state-legal marijuana programs. Critics point out that hemp-derived THC products often contain higher potencies than advertised and lack the testing requirements mandated for state-licensed cannabis.

But the "ban first, study later" approach has historical precedent in cannabis policy—and it hasn't worked. The federal government classified marijuana as Schedule I in 1970, claiming it had no medical value, yet decades of research were required to demonstrate what patients already knew about its therapeutic benefits.

What's Next

The Farm Bill reauthorization remains stalled in Congress, with hemp provisions among the contentious issues holding up passage. Senate Agriculture Committee Chair Debbie Stabenow has proposed language that would restrict intoxicating hemp products, while some House Republicans have pushed for maintaining the current hemp framework.

Industry groups including the U.S. Hemp Roundtable have advocated for a middle path: establishing federal standards for hemp-derived products rather than eliminating the market entirely. That approach would include age restrictions, potency limits, testing requirements, and clear labeling standards.

For now, the hemp industry continues operating in regulatory uncertainty, with businesses unsure whether their products will remain legal and consumers lacking reliable information about what they're buying. Simpson's argument—that good policy requires good science, and good science takes time—may resonate with lawmakers who remember the failures of prohibition-first approaches.

The question is whether Congress will learn from past mistakes or repeat them with hemp.

This article is based on original reporting by www.marijuanamoment.net.