Hearing held on legislation of Texas hemp industry
There was a hearing on legislation regarding the Texas hemp industry
SB 3 would ban the sale of all products with THC
HB 28 bans synthetic THC and products like gummies, but it allows hemp-infused beverages which would be regulated in alcohol
AUSTIN, Texas - On Monday, members of the House State Affairs committee took up two bills that would dramatically reign in what's grown into a multi-billion-dollar industry.
A House bill scales back sales with new regulations, while a plan from the Senate is essentially a ban on all products with THC.
The sale of hemp products with low levels of THC was allowed about seven years ago.
The backstory
"Members, the unregulated industry that currently exists is a public health hazard. And it is our duty to ensure that we're protecting Texas against harmful products," said Committee Chairman Ken King (R) Canadian.
SB 3 would ban the sale of all products with THC, except those authorized by the Compassionate Use law.
HB 28 bans synthetic THC and products like gummies, but it allows hemp-infused beverages which would be regulated in alcohol.
"This regulatory structure will also maintain the federal restriction on THC of no more than 0.3%, as well as limiting the amount a person can buy in a single day to 10 milligrams. House Bill 28 intends to stop advertising to children by making the legal age of consumption of these products 21, requiring ID verification during the purchase, and by creating regulations on advertising," said Chairman King.
What they're saying
The committee heard opposition to both bills.
The police chief of Allen, Texas, Steve Dye, spoke to the committee about the crime linked to hemp stores in his town. He is with the Texas Police Chief's Association, which wants a tougher approach.
"Our concerns with House Bill 28, as written include THC beverages, it should not be considered as a carve out. To us, the beverage is just another delivery method as vapes, waxes and edibles. We can't rush this decision as it will only create another loophole that we'll be addressing again in 2027," said Chief Dye.
One loophole came up in the questioning a beverage distributor. It involved moving across the state line.
Chairman King asked Ben Meggs of Bayou City Hemp if he moved out of Texas, would he still be able to ship his product to Texas residents?
"Yes sir, we would. It's federally legal. We believe we can't stop interstate commerce," said Meggs.
Lawmakers were also warned they could be helping those in the black-market.
"If we ban everything on the market and don't have a solution for that $8 billion, then all we are doing is creating a bigger problem," said David Mukpo, the owner of Pamos Beverages.
Concerns about over-regulation and unintended consequences were raised. That was a topic in the questioning from Dallas Democrat, Rafael Anchia, to cannabis law expert Susan Hays.
Anchia noted how the House plan allows drinking a THC product but not allowing it to be put under a tongue as an oil.
"To carve off these delivery systems as a crime and this is okay makes no sense to me. There are plenty of good manufacturers and retailers in this state," said Hays
The committee was urged to regulate not to eliminate.
"We want you to want our product. I want you to use my sleep gummies tonight. I just want you to believe in us enough to know that we will regulate for you and with you," said Katie Frazier, who runs a hemp product business in Austin.
The owner of a company in Louisville, Kentucky, told the committee the reforms would close off Texas for his business.
"Our Texas customers are not criminals, and neither am I, unless Texas makes me one," said Jim Higdon with Cornbread Hemp.
The committee did hear strong support for banning synthetic THC products.
Christine Scruggs, a mom from Pearland, testified her son was hooked on items he bought at a store in Georgetown, believing they were safe.
"He was diagnosed with cannabis-induced psychotic disorder. He worked through a dual diagnosis program for eight and a half months. His therapist told him he's lucky not to have been converted to a long-term diagnosis of bipolar or schizophrenia," said Scruggs.
What's next
The House committee worked into the evening on the Senate Bill.
Regardless of which regulatory hammer is sent to the full House, modifications are expected before any legislation is sent to the governor.
The Source
Information from the Texas legislative session
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
6 minutes ago
- The Hill
Texas Democrat says she was threatened with arrest after escort lost her on trail
A Texas state House Democrat said she was threatened with arrest after an officer assigned to follow her lost track of her on a walking trail. Texas state Rep. Sheryl Cole (D) said in a post on X on Tuesday that an escort from the Texas Department of Public Safety, whom she said 'was forced upon me to track my every movement,' lost track of her on the trail, became angry and 'made a scene' in front of her constituents. 'While a little shaken up from the incident, I remain undeterred by this intimidation tactic by House Republicans to have a 24/7 state police presence to intimidate me and my colleagues,' Cole said. Cole's account of the incident comes as a fellow Democratic state representative, Nicole Collier, has chosen to stay on the floor of the state House chamber for more than 24 hours rather than having a law enforcement officer shadow her. After the state House Democrats returned to the Lone Star State on Monday, ending their two-week out-of-state stint to prevent Republicans from passing a new map, state Speaker Dustin Burrows (R) declared that those who came back would have an officer with them to ensure they didn't leave the state again. Collier chose to stay in the state House overnight instead and told MSNBC's Ali Vitali in an interview that she would stay 'as long as it takes.' 'At the moment that the directive was issued, I felt like it was wrong. It's just wrong to require grown people to get a permission slip to roam about freely. So I resisted,' she said. Cole said she stands in solidarity with Collier, who has 'refused to go along with this charade.' 'We will not be intimidated by this, and history will remember this,' she said. The Texas state legislature is expected to approve a new map as soon as this week, with enough Democrats back in the state for the body to conduct business.
The Hill
6 minutes ago
- The Hill
There is a solution to America's gerrymandering problem
The redistricting war going on across the country began with the president asking — or, as some see it, directing — Texas to redraw its congressional map to give the GOP as many as five additional House seats in the 2026 midterm elections. Given that the party that holds the White House typically loses House seats in the midterms, and with a thin GOP majority after the 2024 election, the president is looking for any advantage to hold the House. This action has elicited outrage among Democrats, pushing the most populous state, California, to redraw its map. Several other states, including Ohio, Florida and Indiana, are also investigating the possibility of redrawing their maps, in an all-out gerrymander fest to squeeze every last seat out of Congress. Yet the maps drawn after the 2020 census were already well gerrymandered. Of the 435 total seats, just 36 were deemed competitive in 2022, defined as winners determined by a margin of victory below 5 percent. In 2024, the number of competitive seats jumped to 43. Though the problem appears to be the gerrymandering of congressional maps, the real problem is how representation is determined. The popular vote in each congressional district determines its winner, but the way the population of each state is dissected into discrete districts partitions the popular vote across each state. Since each district seat is represented by a winner-take-all vote, the design of each state's congressional map effectively determines how its voters are represented in Congress. Take, for example, Massachusetts. Its nine congressional seats are all represented by Democrats. In the 2024 election, five of the seats were uncontested. Among the four contested races, the closest margin of victory was 13 percent. Yet in the presidential race, 36 percent of the votes cast were for Donald Trump, the same percentage that voted for the Republican candidates in the four contested seats. This begs the question: Should these 36 percent of voters have some GOP representation? A similar situation occurred in Oklahoma, with all five of its congressional seats held by Republications, even though 32 percent of the votes cast were for Kamala Harris. Given that computational redistricting can draw House maps that are either maximally gerrymandered, provide sensible voter representation, or anything in between, there is no need for maps to be drawn by redistricting commissions, whether they are independent or made up of partisan legislators. The necessary mapping criteria specified by state laws can now be incorporated into mapping algorithms. Examples of such criteria include compactness of districts or preserving communities of interest. The only role for redistricting commissions is to specify the desired bias of the map. Gerrymandered maps demonstrate that we no longer have representation of the people but of the parties, making Congress a de facto House of Mis-Representatives. At the core, the problem is how members of the House are elected, and indirectly, the Electoral College. As long as voter preferences are packed into discrete ongressional district seats, the current gerrymandering wars will continue to discount and ignore voters. In fact, Trump told a group in 2024 during his campaign that they would not need to vote again if he were elected. Despite not knowing precisely what he had in mind, he may indeed be correct, given that representation of voters is mostly predetermined. Is there a solution? Continue to hold elections with congressional districts. However, the number of seats won by each party should be allocated by each party's state popular vote. Then the top vote getters, either in absolute number or in percentage of votes won, across all the districts from each party are assigned seats, up to the number of seats won by the party. This means that all the representatives in each state would be at-large, representing all the people of the state. A formula for rounding would be needed to determine which party gets the partial seat fraction, much like how congressional apportionment is used after each census to determine the number of House seats in each state. With such a system, in Massachusetts, Republicans would have won two congressional seats and Democrats would have won seven. In Oklahoma, Republicans would have won four seats and Democrats would have won one. Such a process would neutralize the impact of gerrymandering, since each state's haul of seats would be determined by the state popular vote, giving every eligible voter the added incentive to cast their vote. The net effect of such a system would likely not yield a difference in the overall number of House seats held by each party. It would, however, redistribute party representation across all 50 states. Most importantly, it would neutralize the benefits of gerrymandering to the parties, since each state's popular vote would determine representation. —Such a new system would require a change in the Constitution something that is highly unlikely in this vitriolic political environment. Yet without such a change, gerrymandering will continue to erode the influence of voters and elevate the power of parties. Texas's actions to redraw their congressional map midterm has unleashed a war on democracy. More accurately, it has taken gerrymander politics to unprecedented levels. The final outcome will be less voter representation and more partisan party politics. What the Texas 'seat steal' effort demonstrates is that, in the eyes of parties, voters are no longer relevant. Every voter in the 2026 midterm elections who is disgusted with such disrespect should write in an unnamed candidate, 'Other' — if such a name won a seat, it will send a strong message that gerrymandering is no longer acceptable, that the current toxic mapping system is shattered beyond repair, and a new model for earning representation is needed. Sheldon H. Jacobson, Ph.D., is a computer science professor in the Grainger College of Engineering at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. As a data scientist, he uses his expertise in risk-based analytics to address problems in public policy. He is the founder of the .
Bloomberg
7 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Navarro Reminds Modi of America's Exorbitant Privilege
Without saying anything really new, Peter Navarro has revealed something important. If India wants to keep earning dollars by selling goods and services to America, it has to recycle them as per Washington's diktats. The White House trade adviser's op-ed in the Financial Times is aimed at critics who have been shocked by the summary disdain with which President Donald Trump has alienated an ally that past administrations have spent a quarter-century cultivating. Navarro's main message: 'If India wants to be treated as a strategic partner of the US, it needs to start acting like one.'
