[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 133 (Friday, August 1, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5182-S5183]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Hemp
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the original
intent of the 2018 farm bill's Federal hemp legislation and the need to
restore it.
Earlier this year, a report from the University of Kentucky found
that cannabis-related poisonings among Kentuckians under 18 rose by 43
percent between 2023 and 2024. As you can see here, emergency room
visits are rising steadily as well: ``Cannabis-Related Emergency
Department Visits Climb in Kentucky, Especially Among [Young People].''
Calls to poison control centers in Kentucky regarding cannabis have
doubled in the last 5 years, and more than 40 percent--listen to this--
have been about children under 12.
Children all over the Commonwealth, from Laurel County to Jefferson
County, are facing serious health and safety concerns due to THC
poisoning from hemp-derived products, and so are children all across
the country. It is not just a Kentucky problem.
How did we get here? Let's go back to the beginning.
Back in 2014, I lead the effort to secure pilot programs for
industrial hemp, and I led the effort to legalize the crop in 2018.
This industry has seen tremendous growth, 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.
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 candylike products and distribute them in familiar packaging.
Here, it gives you an example of how these hemp-related, THC-related
factors are packaged in candy that looks very much like candy being
consumed by kids all over the country. This is, by definition, a real
problem.
Children love candy. They can recognize well-known brands of candy
before they can even read. As you can see from the chart that we were
just talking about, the packaging on these snacks is nearly identical
to Oreos, Doritos, or Skittles. Little do kids know that these products
are laced with intoxicating synthetic chemicals. Young children are
consuming these snacks thinking they are candy, not poison.
On top of that, these products are easily accessible and can be
purchased at convenience stores. Some of them are even more
intoxicating than actually smoking marijuana. Let me repeat that.
Products more potent than marijuana can be bought off the shelf of a
gas station.
Look, for years, I have called on the FDA to regulate these products.
They have not taken the initiative to do so, which has certainly been
an ongoing disappointment.
That is why we are here today. The language I recently attempted to
secure in the Agriculture appropriations bill would have kept these
products out of the hands of children while preserving the hemp
industry for farmers.
For the sake of those misguided by my opponents on this issue, let me
clarify a few things: You will hear from some that this language would
have meant the total destruction of the hemp industry. Well, obviously,
that is wrong. Under my language, industrial hemp, and CBD would have
remained legal, period. Period.
Some predicted there would be widespread economic downturn to farmers
should this language become law. Wrong again.
Hemp makes up less than one-hundredth of 1 percent of all farmed
acres in the United States. I want the number to grow and to grow a
lot. That is why I secured the legalization of hemp production back in
the first place.
As long as I have been a Senator from Kentucky, I have supported our
farmers. I am proud to have served on the Agriculture Committee my
entire career in the Senate because of its importance to Kentucky. From
the tobacco buyout program to tax relief for the sale of farmland, I
have made sure our farmers have the tools they need to be successful in
volatile markets. My language would not have changed that.
This language would have remained in the appropriations package had
one Senator not derailed the process. You know, it is one thing to call
yourself an advocate for hemp farmers, but if you didn't support the
2014 pilot program and you didn't support the 2018 farm bill that
legalized hemp production and you would have blocked a major step
forward on this appropriations package if it had included my language
to close the bad-actor loophole, then what does being an advocate
actually mean?
This package funds a significant portion of the Federal revenue, from
Agencies that provide critical resources to our farmers to law
enforcement, military, and our veterans, just to name a few.
We need the appropriations process to function. Congress needs to do
its job and fund the government. And I, for
[[Page S5183]]
one, do not intend to be an obstacle. So in order to move the package
forward, I allowed my language to be stripped from the bill. But my
effort to rule out bad actors, protect our children, support farmers,
and reaffirm our original legislative intent will continue.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Moody). The Senator from Florida.