Wichita Falls dispensary reacts to potential hemp ban
WICHITA FALLS (KFDX/KJTL) — As bills continue to make their way through the Texas legislature, a couple of them may disrupt the THC industry in Texas.
Senate Bill 3 would ban the Texas hemp industry. However, this bill doesn't affect the state's compassionate use program. Meanwhile, another bill looks to expand the program, which allows people with certain medical conditions to get THC products at lower doses than what is sold at most dispensaries.
SB 3 was introduced to the Texas legislature and was aimed at regulating hemp THC products.
However, a last-minute amendment in the House changed the proposed regulations to a total ban.
The potential total ban leaves dispensaries in limbo.
'We have about four employees here, so pretty much their positions will be done,' Texas Cannabis Co. Owner Carlos Lopez said. 'We wouldn't be able to sustain the business with, you know, 90% of our inventory being illegal after September.'
Lt. Governor Dan Patrick began his push for the ban in 2024.. He cited abuse of the agriculture law and the sale of high-THC products to minors.
Lopez believes heavier regulation of cannabis products is a better avenue than a total ban, as his dispensary only sells to people 21 and older.
'Everybody that we dealt with, like here, the metroplex, like wholesale suppliers there, they were avoiding that just to keep from even having this problem.'
Without ready access to hemp THC products, Lopez fears the lower dosages through the Texas Compassionate Use Program might not satisfy the needs of the consumer.
'If they can't get the compassionate use right away, like, you know, maybe they might go and put themselves in a risky situation where they're trying to get stuff off the black market,' Lopez said.
Lopez hopes the revenue generated by the cannabis industry might be enough to sway lawmakers at the last minute.
'I don't know. We'll just see whenever we get there if it happens or maybe Greg Abbott steps in and vetoes it, and you know he realizes the economic implications of it,' Lopez said. 'That's the main part I'm worried about because we're really losing a lot of money.'
Regardless of Abbott's decision, by May 28, Texas dispensaries will know the final outcome of SB 3.
Last year, a similar bill in Florida was vetoed by Governor Ron DeSantis, and lawmakers instead chose to adopt more regulatory measures, which allow for the sale of hemp THC products statewide.
Although the THC ban has passed the House, another bill, House Bill 46, looks to expand the Compassionate Use Program.
It was originally intended to get low THC products to people with certain conditions, such as epilepsy. However, HB 46 would also make products available to people with conditions like chronic pain, glaucoma, or traumatic brain injuries.
Honorably discharged veterans would also be included, with the state acknowledging that veterans may have particular treatment needs.
The bill would also issue dispensing licenses to at least one location in each of the state's public health regions while providing the flexibility for each licensed location to establish satellite locations to cover more ground.
As of publication, HB 46 has already passed in the House, and it is now awaiting a decision in the Senate.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
How Tesla stands to suffer from Elon Musk's big bet on Republicans
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Also in the past few weeks, the House and Senate adopted California's rule. Advertisement While California is vowing to fight the move in court, other states are backing off voluntarily. Last week, the Healey administration said it Advertisement The loss of California and other states' minimum EV sales rules could hit Tesla hardest of all. That's because under the rules, car makers that can't meet the minimum sales threshold must buy credits from car makers that sold more than the minimum. And since Tesla only sells EVs and is well above the minimum required, it has been raking in billions of dollars a year selling credits to rival car companies. In the first quarter, Tesla made $595 million (of almost pure profit) by selling credits. Its net income for the quarter Even before the Republican policy moves, Tesla sales were under pressure amid Lately, Musk is Aaron Pressman can be reached at


USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' could ban states from regulating AI for a decade
Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' could ban states from regulating AI for a decade Show Caption Hide Caption House passes President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' The House passed President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' It will now move onto the Senate. President Donald Trump's massive bill package, dubbed the 'Big Beautiful Bill,' contains a proposal that could significantly waylay a burgeoning movement to regulate artificial intelligence on the state level. The ban is tucked into a section of the bill that would allocate $500 million over the next 10 years to modernize government systems with the help of AI and automation technologies. The ban would not only prevent new state-led regulations of AI but would also block dozens of states from enforcing preexisting AI regulations and oversight structures. The 1,000-plus-page legislation pushed forward by Republicans passed in the House by just one vote on May 22, sending it off to the Senate. Though Republicans hope to finalize the tax and policy bill by the end of July in order to avoid a debt default, it's still a ways off from becoming law, as the GOP navigates a slim majority amid party infighting over several key elements of the bill. Though misgivings center on Medicaid, tax cuts and government spending, a few high-profile Republican lawmakers have signaled the proposed AI regulation ban is also a point of friction. Trump's bill: Tax policy bill clears the House. Next up: An opinionated Senate Regulation of artificial intelligence is often likened to a wild west of sorts, as governments across the country and the globe race to keep up with the rapidly evolving technology. AI itself has proved to be an enticing tool for public and private organizations – so much so that adoption of the tech far outpaces many governments' ability to implement laws and frameworks meant to prevent misuse. As it stands, there is no centralized federal oversight of AI, leaving states to attempt to regulate the technology through an uneven patchwork of legislation. Under President Joe Biden's administration, the White House introduced a now-defunct blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights, taking a cue from the European Union's similarly named document. It directed state agencies to evaluate current uses and potential impacts of AI, evaluate potential AI-fueled risks and encourage state employee training on the subject. In its place is a new Trump-led AI framework, prioritizing accelerating AI innovation. The Trump administration's stance on regulation so far largely aligns with that of companies and much of the tech industry, who argue that regulation would stymie innovation. Trump and AI: President signs executive order boosting AI in K-12 schools Many regulations target AI scams, deepfakes and AI-assisted disinformation, with increasing focus on other possible harms from the technology. While there are many opportunities for AI to create positive changes, policy and advocacy organizations like the California Initiative for Technology and Democracy (CITED) warn of the same possibilities for negative impacts, necessitating regulation in some areas. "Many commentators believe that AI could soon be used by state and non-state actors to develop dangerous weapons, increase surveillance, and magnify existing biases and discrimination in a variety of fields, from lending, to hiring, to policing," CITED says in a January 2024 report. The letter's signatories include Georgetown Law's Center on Privacy and Technology, the Southern Poverty Law Center, Actors' Equity Association, Innocence Project and the National Union of Healthcare Workers, among others. Though Republicans largely expressed support for the provision in a House subcommittee hearing Wednesday, May 21, prominent Republican Republican Senators Josh Hawley of Missouri and Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee have recently pushed back on the ban. 'We certainly know that in Tennessee, we need those protections,' Blackburn said in a May 21 hearing on a bill to protect Americans from AI impersonations. 'And until we pass something that is federally preemptive, we can't call for a moratorium.' Hawley also pushed back on the proposed ban in a May 13 interview with Business Insider. 'I would think that, just as a matter of federalism, we'd want states to be able to try out different regimes that they think will work for their state,' Hawley said. 'And I think in general, on AI, I do think we need some sensible oversight that will protect people's liberties.' The argument against regulation is often one of innovation, with tech industry leaders and companies saying it could limit the technology and make the U.S. less competitive in the field. Others in support of the ban, such as Sean Heather, Senior Vice President of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, say states are moving too fast in regulating AI. "We should stop international patchworks and domestic patchworks in AI regulation," Heather said during the May 21 House subcommittee hearing. "We should not be in a rush to regulate. We need to get it right, therefore taking a time out to discuss it at a federal level is important to be able to support a moratorium." At least 45 states plus Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands and Washington, D.C., introduced AI bills in the 2024 legislative session, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Of those, over 30 states and territories passed legislation concerning AI, with Utah, Maryland and Florida passing regulatory and AI oversight acts. Across seven states and Puerto Rico, there are 16 AI regulation bills introduced last year still pending legislative approval, and more than a dozen new regulatory proposals introduced in statehouses across the country in 2025. Kathryn Palmer is a national trending news reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach her at kapalmer@ and on X @KathrynPlmr.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Democrats kill Texas bill to punish cities that don't clear homeless encampments
A GOP-led bid to increase enforcement of Texas' 2021 camping ban died in the state House on Monday night after Democrats challenged the bill on a technicality. The measure, Senate Bill 241 by Sen. Pete Flores, R-Pleasanton, would have required cities to establish channels for residents to report illegal homeless encampments. If a complaint were not addressed within 90 days, the state could send the Department of Public Safety to clear encampments, then charge the city for that enforcement by withholding sales tax revenues. Texas' attorney general, currently Republican Ken Paxton, would be responsible for notifying the DPS and the state comptroller about unresolved complaints. "The state has been the one footing the bill for the cities that have failed to address homeless camping in their jurisdiction," House sponsor Rep. Giovanni Capriglione, R-Southlake, said. "Whether it's in my area, in Fort Worth, or in Dallas or here in Austin, everybody knows that these camping restrictions on homeless camping restrictions have not been enforced." Rep. Gina Hinajosa, D-Austin, argued the state is contributing to Austin's homelessness problem by sending formerly incarcerated people into the city when their sentences end. She pointed to a state-licensed halfway house in East Austin, the Austin Transitional Center, where she said the majority of the population has no connection to Travis County. "We are blamed for our homelessness problem in Austin when it is the state of Texas who is in large part creating the problem," Hinojosa said. State Rep. Gene Wu, the House Democratic Caucus chair, dealt the death blow to SB 241 late Monday night. He argued its caption, "relating to prohibitions on camping in a public place," violated a House rule that requires captions to "give reasonable notice of the subject of the proposed measure." Wu said he killed the bill because it would have done nothing to alleviate the homeless crisis, but instead punish people experiencing homeless and municipalities such as Austin, Dallas and Houston that are trying to find compassionate solutions to the ongoing crisis. "It is a genuinely evil bill," Wu told the Statesman. Capriglione postponed the bill to June 3, an acknowledgement that there is not enough time to fix the caption issue before the 2025 legislative session adjourns on June 2. Tuesday is the last day for the House to give initial approval to Senate bills. The bill had passed in a bipartisan 22-8 vote in the state Senate, with Democratic Sens. Royce West of Dallas, Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa of McAllen and Carol Alvarado of Houston joining Republicans to support the measure. Austin, the seat of state government, has struggled with how to address homeless encampments. Austin voters in 2021 reinstated the city's camping ban, which the city council had repealed in 2019. In 2021, the political action committee behind the city's homeless camping ban sued, accusing Austin of failing to fully enforce the ordinance. The Third Court of Appeals affirmed in February 2025 that the group, Save Austin Now, lacked standing to bring the lawsuit. Statesman staff writer John C. Moritz contributed reporting. This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Texas Democrats kill effort to increase enforcement of camping ban