House Agriculture Committee Chair Signals Proposed One-Year Delay Of Hemp THC Ban Is Not Germane To 2026 Farm Bill Markup
The Republican chair of a key House panel is casting doubt on whether lawmakers will even get the chance to vote on a proposal to delay a looming federal hemp THC ban, saying the amendment may not be relevant to the sweeping agriculture legislation set for consideration next week.
Shortly after Rep. Jim Baird (R-IN) filed an amendment to postpone implementation of the ban by one year, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn Thompson (R-PA) reportedly indicated he does not believe the proposal is germane to the 2026 Farm Bill, which is scheduled for markup on Tuesday.
If that determination stands, it would likely prevent the amendment from receiving a vote in committee, despite bipartisan support and growing concern from hemp industry stakeholders.
According to CQ, Thompson “doesn’t think the amendment is germane, making it unlikely that Baird could offer the provision for a vote at the markup despite bipartisan backing.” The jurisdictional issue appears to hinge on which committee oversees regulation of hemp products once they enter the marketplace.
Jurisdictional Dispute Between Agriculture And Energy And Commerce Committees Clouds Path Forward For Hemp Amendment
At the heart of the dispute is a familiar congressional turf battle.
While the House Agriculture Committee oversees farming policy and the cultivation of hemp, the House Energy and Commerce Committee has jurisdiction over the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the agency responsible for regulating hemp-derived products after they reach consumers.
Because Baird’s amendment would delay a statutory redefinition affecting consumable cannabinoid products, Thompson reportedly views the matter as falling more squarely within Energy and Commerce’s domain than Agriculture’s.
Baird has acknowledged that his proposal faces long odds of being attached to the Farm Bill. His office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
If the chair formally rules the amendment nongermane during markup, it would almost certainly block any committee vote, regardless of bipartisan backing.
Hemp Industry Warns Redefinition Of Legal Hemp Would Effectively Dismantle Market Created Under 2018 Farm Bill
The broader fight stems from language included in must-pass spending legislation signed last year by President Donald Trump. That measure redefines what qualifies as federally legal hemp, with the changes set to take effect in November.
Industry advocates argue the revised definition would effectively wipe out much of the hemp-derived cannabinoid marketplace that has flourished since passage of the 2018 Farm Bill during Trump’s first term.
Under current federal law, cannabis is classified as hemp—and therefore legal—if it contains no more than 0.3 percent delta-9 THC on a dry weight basis. That threshold allowed for the rise of products containing delta-8 THC and other intoxicating hemp-derived cannabinoids, many of which are sold in states that have not legalized marijuana.
The new provisions tighten the definition significantly. Within one year of enactment, the THC limit will apply to total THC, including delta-8 and other isomers. It also extends to “any other cannabinoids that have similar effects (or are marketed to have similar effects)” as tetrahydrocannabinol, as determined by the secretary of Health and Human Services.
In addition, the policy would ban intermediate hemp-derived cannabinoid products marketed or sold directly to consumers, as well as products containing cannabinoids that are synthesized outside the cannabis plant or not capable of being naturally produced by it.
Legal hemp products would be further restricted to no more than 0.4 milligrams per container of total THC or other similarly acting cannabinoids—a limit many in the industry say is so low that most existing consumable products would be rendered illegal.
Baird Amendment Framed As Temporary Bridge To Give Farmers And Businesses Time To Adapt Or Negotiate Regulatory Framework
Baird’s proposed amendment is relatively narrow in scope. It would delay by one year the implementation of Section 781 of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2026, which contains the revised hemp definition.
Supporters describe the measure as a temporary bridge, giving farmers, processors and retailers additional time to adjust business models, deplete inventory and work with lawmakers on a more durable regulatory solution.
Baird has separately introduced standalone legislation that would pause the policy change for two years instead of one. That longer delay, he argues, would allow Congress and federal regulators to craft a framework that regulates intoxicating hemp products rather than effectively recriminalizing them.
Industry groups say that without a delay, the November deadline could trigger widespread business closures, layoffs and crop losses, particularly in states where hemp-derived cannabinoids have become a major agricultural and retail sector.
FDA Misses Statutory Deadline To Publish Lists Of Naturally Occurring Cannabinoids, Adding To Industry Uncertainty
Compounding the uncertainty is the FDA’s apparent failure to meet a statutory deadline tied to the new hemp definition.
Within 90 days of enactment, the agency and other federal entities were required to publish in the Federal Register lists of all cannabinoids known to be naturally produced by Cannabis sativa L., all tetrahydrocannabinol-class cannabinoids known to occur naturally in the plant and all other cannabinoids with similar or marketed similar effects to THC.
Those lists are critical because the new law’s enforcement hinges in part on whether a cannabinoid is naturally occurring and how it is classified.
However, the FDA appears to have missed the deadline. A spokesperson previously indicated that the lists would be published when available, but as of this month they had not appeared.
For businesses trying to plan for November compliance, the lack of guidance creates additional confusion. Companies cannot definitively determine which products may survive the new regulatory regime without clarity from federal regulators.
Lawmakers Across The Political Spectrum Raise Concerns About Economic And Policy Consequences Of Hemp Ban
Concerns about the hemp redefinition are not confined to one party.
Rep. James Comer (R-KY) and Kentucky Agriculture Commissioner Jonathan Shell are among the critics who have warned that the policy could devastate farmers and small businesses in their state.
They recently sent a letter to Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), a longtime hemp advocate who played a central role in legalizing the crop federally in 2018, urging him to support at least a temporary delay of the new definition.
Opponents of the ban argue that Congress should focus on establishing age restrictions, labeling requirements, potency caps and testing standards for intoxicating hemp products rather than imposing an outright crackdown that could push the market underground.
Supporters of the stricter definition, however, contend that the rapid expansion of delta-8 and similar products has created a largely unregulated intoxicating market that exploits a loophole in federal law.
Farm Bill Markup Next Week Could Determine Whether Hemp Delay Gets Floor Consideration Or Dies In Committee
All eyes now turn to next week’s House Agriculture Committee markup of the 2026 Farm Bill.
If Thompson formally rules Baird’s amendment nongermane, it would almost certainly die in committee. Without inclusion in the Farm Bill, the proposal would need to advance through separate legislative vehicles, a challenging path in a crowded congressional calendar.
For hemp farmers and manufacturers, the stakes are high. A one-year delay would not resolve the underlying policy debate, but it could provide breathing room to negotiate guardrails that preserve a significant portion of the industry.
Absent that reprieve, the November implementation date looms large, threatening to upend a market that has become deeply embedded in states across the country including many where marijuana remains illegal.
Whether Congress chooses regulation or recriminalization may ultimately hinge not only on policy preferences but also on procedural rulings about what belongs in the Farm Bill. And with the committee chair signaling skepticism, supporters of the delay face an uphill battle before the debate even begins.
Topic(s):
OG source Download Article 
