“Republicans, Democrats and independents understand that regulation is better than prohibition, and that good science takes time.”

By Mike Simpson, Lovewell Farms via Rhode Island Current

At a time when Americans across the political spectrum say they want evidence-based policy, Congress is on the verge of repeating a familiar mistake: ban first, learn later.

Bipartisan legislation recently introduced in the US House and Senate would delay it federal ban on hemp-derived products. This is not to legislate anything new, but to give regulators, researchers and farmers time to do what Congress says they want to do: collect data, set clear rules and regulate responsibly.

I write this as a hemp farmer and small business owner. Having started Lovewell Farms in 2018, I know firsthand the effects a ban on hemp-derived products would have on my farm, the only USDA-certified organic hemp farm in Rhode Island. Here’s what lawmakers don’t fully understand: Hemp isn’t something that can be turned on and off with a vote. Farmers need to know in the next 100 days whether the plant they will harvest in October will be legal in November.

The seeds are planted in April. The fields are cultivated all summer. The crops are harvested in October. The federal ban, which takes effect in November, lands after farmers commit to a full season of labor, capital and compliance costs. There is no back button for farming. This uncertainty is already forcing farms to close. A sudden ban would end the job.

The Senate bill (S.3686) was introduced by Senator Amy Klobuchar, Democrat of Minnesota, and co-sponsors Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, and Jeff Merkley, Democrat of Oregon. delaying the ban on hemp-derived products by two yearsAllowing Congress to explore regulatory alternatives rather than default to a ban. A House Bill (H.7010)Led by Republican Jim Baird, the Indiana Republican, also with bipartisan sponsors, would do the same.

Together, these bills recognize a basic agricultural reality: Farmers need predictability before they plant.

It is important to note that Congress is not only proposing a delay, but is debating the regulations. The Hemp Enforcement, Modernization, and Protection (HEMP) Act is another bipartisan bill introduced in the House (H.7212) that would establish a federal framework for hemp-derived products, including clear safety standards, labeling requirements, enforcement authority, and potency limits defined by product type. The proposal demonstrates that per-serve and per-package limits can achieve consumer protection and responsible oversight for oral, inhalable, topical, and THC-containing hemp products.

Taken together, these bills show that Congress has viable, bipartisan alternatives to an outright ban, should it choose to use them.

At this point, this is not a discussion about the limits of THC. The question is whether hemp policy will be driven by science or fear. That distinction matters because federal science is finally catching up. In 2025, the Trump administration issued an executive order directing federal agencies to expand cannabis and cannabidiol (CBD) research, including using large federal health data sets, such as Medicare records, to analyze safety, efficacy and outcomes.

The order did not legalize CBD or add it as a Medicare benefit, but it did expressly recognize that cannabinoids require rigorous scrutiny before policy decisions can be made. Congress is pushing for a ban at a time when the federal government is building the science-based research infrastructure needed to answer tough questions.

Concerns raised by opponents of hemp-derived products also argue for regulation, not bans. Whether the products require clearer labeling, age restrictions, potency standards or enforcement tools like those already in place in Rhode Island are state-by-state regulatory challenges. Rhode Island already regulates hemp products. Farmers and businesses here should not be penalized because other states have dragged their feet to create a regulated market.

Prohibition does not solve these problems; it simply pushes them out of sight, into unregulated markets that are less safe for consumers. Banning hemp would push production overseas. If hemp cultivation in the United States collapses, demand will not disappear. It will shift to cannabinoids imported from countries like Canada or China, where regulators in the United States have far less visibility or control. The result harms local farmers, consumers and public safety.

Rhode Island Reps. Gabe Amo and Seth Magaziner previously voted against a federal hemp ban embedded in a larger spending bill. That was the right call. Senators Jack Reed and Sheldon Whitehouse, however, specifically voted to keep the hemp ban language in the same bill. Rhode Island senators have an opportunity to support local farmers and small businesses by cosponsoring this bipartisan delay bill (S.3686). Rhode Island representatives can do the same with the corresponding House bill (H.7010).

This is one of the few issues in Congress that remains truly bipartisan. Republicans, Democrats, and independents understand that regulation is better than prohibition, and that good science takes time. Congress should not dismantle the $30 billion domestic agriculture industry with more than 300,000 jobs when meaningful investigations begin. A temporary delay protects farmers, supports small businesses, keeps hemp farming rooted here in the United States and allows policymakers to regulate with evidence rather than panic.

Prohibition without evidence is not politics. Rhode Island’s delegation should stand with farmers, small businesses and science by sponsoring bipartisan bills that delay this ban and allow the regulations to catch up to reality.

He is the creator of Mike Simpson Lovewell FarmsRhode Island’s only US Department of Agriculture (USDA) organic hemp farm. He is also a historian, educator, and longtime advocate for policy reform. He previously served as Deputy Director of Regulate Rhode Island and Initiative Coordinator for the Marihuana Policy Project in Maine. He currently resides in Providence and farms in the town of Hope Valley in Hopkinton.

This story was first published by the Rhode Island Current.

Max Jackson’s photo.