Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

hightimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 583 posts

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#171

Post by whoisthemachine »

ronsor wrote: post #162
Gunax wrote: post #159

This is going to be controversial because it steps into the shutdown blame game. I think I am more interested in the mechanics of how this happens. Why do we need to attach riders / sneak in legislation? What changes could we make to the constitution to avoid this?

> Why do we need to attach riders / sneak in legislation? Because they can't agree on anything normally, so the only way to make changes is to shove them in with things they must agree on. > What changes could we make to the constitution to avoid this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-subject_rule Multiple states already have this.

This can have interesting consequences, because politicians are going to be politicians.

> The Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus sued, arguing that the omnibus bill, whose original title is over 300 words before it keels over in repetition of the word “subdivision,” violated the single-subject rule.

https://www.minnpost.com/state-government/2025/09/the-minnes...

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#172

Post by ceejayoz »

ronsor wrote: post #162
Gunax wrote: post #159

This is going to be controversial because it steps into the shutdown blame game. I think I am more interested in the mechanics of how this happens. Why do we need to attach riders / sneak in legislation? What changes could we make to the constitution to avoid this?

> Why do we need to attach riders / sneak in legislation? Because they can't agree on anything normally, so the only way to make changes is to shove them in with things they must agree on. > What changes could we make to the constitution to avoid this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-subject_rule Multiple states already have this.

Scoping the single subject gets a bit tough, in practice.

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#173

Post by tastyfreeze »

Gunax wrote: post #159

This is going to be controversial because it steps into the shutdown blame game. I think I am more interested in the mechanics of how this happens. Why do we need to attach riders / sneak in legislation? What changes could we make to the constitution to avoid this?

Single subject bill amendment. Several states require single subject bills in State legislature. The same must be required at the federal level. The pushback has always been "then nothing will get done". From where I am standing that would be a good thing. No more sneaking shit in at the last minute. Vote on every single issue. People will still try to sneak stuff in. I remember seeing a video of a Minnesota legislator admonishing his colleges for trying to do omnibus bills after they passed a single subject amendment.

To get such an amendment passed it would have to come from the States. Nobody that is already in congress is going to vote for this. It is a huge restriction on their power to spend our money.

Here is Alaska's single bill requirement: The Alaska Constitution Art II, Section 13. Form of Bills reads: Every bill shall be confined to one subject unless it is an appropriation bill or one codifying, revising, or rearranging existing laws. Bills for appropriations shall be confined to appropriations. The subject of each bill shall be expressed in the title. The enacting clause shall be: “Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Alaska.”

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#174

Post by nickff »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #169
candiddevmike wrote: post #149

The party of small government killing a new, billion dollar industry because Mitch McConnell's state beverage is seeing declining sales.

I thought that was because of the tit-for-tat with Canada. I'd think a joint and a glass of bourbon would go hand-in-hand. Personally, I don't drink or smoke, but I think the "war on drugs" has been a miserable failure that has been, for the most part, a footgun.

It is my understanding that neither Canada nor the USA allows for the importation of products containing THC, so I don't see this as having anything to do with Canada. Perhaps I do not understand what you mean to say?

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#175

Post by tastyfreeze »

rootusrootus wrote: post #165
Gunax wrote: post #159

This is going to be controversial because it steps into the shutdown blame game. I think I am more interested in the mechanics of how this happens. Why do we need to attach riders / sneak in legislation? What changes could we make to the constitution to avoid this?

Playing devil's advocate, the positive of allowing legislation to include unrelated riders is that it promotes compromise. And compromise is how a healthy democracy should operate.

The compromise should be on the content of the bill specific to the subject. It is not a compromise to allow a rider that funnels money to some pet project. That is buying votes.

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#176

Post by Gunax »

rootusrootus wrote: post #165
Gunax wrote: post #159

This is going to be controversial because it steps into the shutdown blame game. I think I am more interested in the mechanics of how this happens. Why do we need to attach riders / sneak in legislation? What changes could we make to the constitution to avoid this?

Playing devil's advocate, the positive of allowing legislation to include unrelated riders is that it promotes compromise. And compromise is how a healthy democracy should operate.

Yes, that's a really good point!

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#177

Post by pessimizer »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #169
candiddevmike wrote: post #149

The party of small government killing a new, billion dollar industry because Mitch McConnell's state beverage is seeing declining sales.

I thought that was because of the tit-for-tat with Canada. I'd think a joint and a glass of bourbon would go hand-in-hand. Personally, I don't drink or smoke, but I think the "war on drugs" has been a miserable failure that has been, for the most part, a footgun.

> I'd think a joint and a glass of bourbon would go hand-in-hand.

They don't. Drunkenness just kind of nullifies pot. I might have a beer when I'm stoned, but only a very tasty one, and only one.

I think that extremely light pot smoking is killing alcohol sales. The tiniest bit of pot is just as pleasing as a mild alcohol buzz, and an alcohol buzz kills the effect of pot. I know I got in the habit for a while of smoking a tiny, tiny bit when I got home, with the effect long gone before I went to sleep. Back in the day (and sometimes still), I would have had one beer, or one glass of wine.

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#179

Post by ramesh31 »

candiddevmike wrote: post #149

The party of small government killing a new, billion dollar industry because Mitch McConnell's state beverage is seeing declining sales.

>The party of small government killing a new, billion dollar industry because Mitch McConnell's state beverage is seeing declining sales.

McConnel sponsored the original bill. Kentucky is historically one of the largest hemp producing states. The whole thing just shows how inept the entire administration is. DJT 45 signed the original law himself, after it was drafted and passed by his Republican house and senate.

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#180

Post by mrguyorama »

mullingitover wrote: post #10

[flagged]

Why is the hemp ban shady at all?

Using farm bill hemp to produce CBD and THC is not the intended point of that bill. Plenty of states have set up actual, real legalized cannabis industries that benefit from regulation (like required mold testing).

The products created from this oversight are a dumb loophole. If you want cannabis, just vote for people to legalize it, it's really not hard. The only reason it continues to be illegal federally is the GOP, and most of their voters say they want it at minimum decriminalized. Even my brother who thinks we shouldn't give addicts narcan (let them die) thinks it's dumb that we punish people for smoking weed.

But they vote for people who want to keep it illegal so....

Post reply on HN