Cannabis News Cannabis TV
  Bill Would Allow Hemp Farming in California
Posted by CN Staff on August 16, 2006 at 16:49:00 PT
By Don Thompson, Associated Press 
Source: Associated Press 

hemp Sacramento -- California farmers could legally grow industrial hemp under a bill approved Wednesday by the state Senate that distinguishes hemp from its widely grown distant cousin: marijuana.

Hemp "bears no more resemblance to marijuana than a poodle bears to a wolf," said Sen. Tom McClintock, R-Thousand Oaks. "You would die from smoke inhalation before you would get high."

He said industrial hemp was improperly lumped into the ban on marijuana in 1937 after it had been grown commercially for decades by American farmers, including George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.

But Sen. Dennis Hollingsworth, R-La Mesa, said he hadn't seen much support from California farmers for the bill. If farmers support legalization, Hollingsworth asked, "why is it the calls and letters I get (supporting the bill) are from San Francisco and not Fresno?"

The legislation would require that the hemp crop be tested before harvesting to make sure it has only a trace amount of tetrahydrocannabinols, or THC, the drug in marijuana.

No matter the concentration of THC, hemp currently can't be legally grown in the United States without a difficult-to-get permit from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.

The bill attempts to avoid federal restrictions by requiring farmers to sell the hemp only to California processors to avoid any interstate commerce that could bring federal intervention.

The crop can be used in a variety of products, including clothing, cosmetics, food, paper, rope, jewelry, luggage, sports equipment and toys. As food, supporters say it is high in essential fatty acids, protein, B vitamins and fiber.

The advocacy group Vote Hemp estimates that sales of legal hemp products in the United States now tops $270 million a year, using hemp grown in other nations.

The Office of National Drug Control Policy has opposed legalizing hemp cultivation, saying hemp crops could be used to hide marijuana cultivation by mixing the two plants in the field.

But Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Santa Monica, said testimony during committee hearings on the bill showed that industrial hemp could contaminate and diminish the potency of nearby marijuana crops.

The Senate debate produced a bumper crop of California stereotype jokes, several aimed at McClintock, an outspoken conservative who carried the bill in the Senate for it author, liberal Democratic Assemblyman Mark Leno of San Francisco.

"There must be some mistake," Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, told McClintock, the Republican nominee for lieutenant governor. "You'll get a parade in San Francisco."

The measure was approved by a 26-13 vote, sending it back to the Assembly for a vote on Senate amendments. The Assembly passed a somewhat different version in January, 44-32.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has not decided whether he would sign the bill, said spokesman Darrel Ng.

The Senate also approved bills that would:

_ Allow parents to anonymously abandon newborns at hospitals, fire stations and other designated "safe surrender" sites for 30 days after birth, instead of the current 72 hours, under a bill passed on a 27-9 vote. The Senate sponsor, Sen. Jackie Speier, D-Daly City, said the extra time would save babies' lives by encouraging parents to give up unwanted children for adoption instead of abandoning them to die in remote locations. The 27-9 vote sent the measure back to the Assembly for consideration of Senate amendments.

_ Make it illegal to let passengers ride in car trunks. Sen. Bob Margett, R-Arcadia, said he agreed to carry the bill in the Senate because the growing practice has recently resulted in several tragic accidents. A first offense would bring a $100 fine, with $250 fines for repeat offenders. A 31-2 vote sent the measure back to the Assembly for consideration of Senate amendments.

On the Net:

Read AB1147, AB1873, AB1850, at: http://www.assembly.ca.gov

Source: Associated Press (Wire)
Author: Don Thompson, Associated Press
Published: August 16, 2006
Copyright: 2006 Associated Press

Related Articles:

Hemp Bill Passes Senate Public Safety Committee
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21949.shtml

Calif. Assembly Passes Hemp-Farming Bill
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21525.shtml


Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help

 
Comment #4 posted by mayan on August 17, 2006 at 03:40:42 PT
whig
Maybe he's not controlled by Bush himself, but by Bush's handlers or Bush's handler's handlers. He was installed as a republican governor of the most powerful state of the Union through a "voter recall." There were some very powerful forces wanting to amend The Constitution to allow naturalized citizens to become President. Guess who would benefit? That movement has become very quiet since Arnold and George are not very popular right now.

Arnold has an unquenchable thirst for absolute power and he will kiss the asses of the elite to gain it. I seriously doubt if they would want him endorsing industrial hemp but I could be wrong. At some point it will become economically feasible for the elite to support industrial hemp but finite resources are their cup of tea right now.

Here's a video with some very enlightening info...

The 4th Reich And Arnold Swarzenegger: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2005/080405schwarzenegger.htm

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #3 posted by Wayne on August 16, 2006 at 21:29:26 PT
idiots
"The Office of National Drug Control Policy has opposed legalizing hemp cultivation, saying hemp crops could be used to hide marijuana cultivation by mixing the two plants in the field."

Umm, I thought if you mixed the two, it was always hemp that won?

"No matter the concentration of THC, hemp currently can't be legally grown in the United States without a difficult-to-get permit from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration."

Do they have any clue how much this could help our environment and our atmosphere? "Oh no, we can't legalize hemp, it looks too much like pot. It's MUCH better to keep breathing SMOG."

Idiots.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #2 posted by whig on August 16, 2006 at 18:34:21 PT
mayan
The thing about Arnold is, he is actually independently wealthy, and he's married to a Kennedy.

So how does Bush have control of him?

I think he has an ideological commitment to fascism, presumably from his childhood in Austria, and without prior political experience before Governor he had never really tested his ideology on reality. Then there's all his supporters who he'll lose when and if he blows them off, but here's the thing... He can. He should.

If Arianna Huffington is a liberal now, why couldn't Arnold change his mind? Of course now that he's Governor I bet he wouldn't smoke pot (again). He should. It's not like anyone drug tests elected public officials.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #1 posted by mayan on August 16, 2006 at 17:58:56 PT
Arnold
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has not decided whether he would sign the bill, said spokesman Darrel Ng.

Arnold is toast. He knows the people support hemp and probably doesn't want to admit he'll veto it. What a Bush puppet! I hope he proves me wrong if it makes it to his desk though!



[ Post Comment ]


  Post Comment
Name:        Password:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comment:   [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]

Link URL:
Link Title:


Return to Main Menu


So everyone may enjoy this service and to keep it running, here are some guidelines: NO spamming, NO commercial advertising, NO flamming, NO illegal activity, and NO sexually explicit materials. Lastly, we reserve the right to remove any message for any reason!

This web page and related elements are for informative purposes only and thus the use of any of this information is at your risk! We do not own nor are responsible for visitor comments. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 and The Berne Convention on Literary and Artistic Works, Article 10, news clippings on this site are made available without profit for research and educational purposes. Any trademarks, trade names, service marks, or service names used on this site are the property of their respective owners. Page updated on August 16, 2006 at 16:49:00