menu

111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 1866
To amend the Controlled Substances Act to exclude industrial hemp from the definition of marihuana, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 2, 2009
Mr. PAUL (for himself, Ms. BALDWIN, Mr. CLAY, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. HINCHEY, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mr. STARK, and Ms. WOOLSEY) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned


A BILL
To amend the Controlled Substances Act to exclude industrial hemp from the definition of marihuana, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the `Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2009′.

SEC. 2. EXCLUSION OF INDUSTRIAL HEMP FROM DEFINITION OF MARIHUANA.

    Paragraph (16) of section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802(16)) is amended–
    (1) by striking `(16)’ at the beginning and inserting `(16)(A)'; and
    (2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
    `(B) The term `marihuana’ does not include industrial hemp. As used in the preceding sentence, the term `industrial hemp’ means the plant Cannabis sativa L. and any part of such plant, whether growing or not, with a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration that does not exceed 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis.’.

SEC. 3. INDUSTRIAL HEMP DETERMINATION TO BE MADE BY STATES.

    Section 201 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 811) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    `(i) Industrial Hemp Determination To Be Made by States- In any criminal action, civil action, or administrative proceeding, a State regulating the growing and processing of industrial hemp under State law shall have exclusive authority to determine whether any such plant meets the concentration limitation set forth in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (16) of section 102 and such determination shall be conclusive and binding.’.

2 comments

  1. M Cirillo

    Well…the bottom line is that it’s not too late to fix the damage humanity has done to humanity thru our ignorance of the connectiveness of all things. We are all related! If we wish to survive as a species then we must incorporate those ways that support life and our sustainability! Thanks to all of you dedicated to bringing this most amazing plant back to the USA and around the world! Why is this plant illegal? As always is the case let’s follow da money! Namaste

    View Comment
    Posted on 5 November, 2011
  2. Stephanie Bishop

    Everyone should be supporting HR 1866. Using Hemp to clean up out air and dirt is an excellent way to recover from all of the damage done. Eating Hemp foods helps to repair our bodies on a cellular level. Economically, American Farmers should be allowed to sustain their families growing Hemp. American factories could be reopened to create sustainable, non-toxic products we can be proud to ship all over the World. The Time for Hemp is NOW! S

    View Comment
    Posted on 17 June, 2012

Leave your reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Go to top