Intro: [00:00:00] Welcome to Kaya the podcast for cannabis businesses looking to launch, grow, and scale their operations.
Tommy Truong: You have a unique
position in the hemp industry in that you were, you had front row seats in somewhat of the legislative process. Can you detail maybe just a little bit to those that are listening who you are and your involvement in pushing the hemp industry forward?
Andrew Bish: Yeah, well my name's Andrew Bish and I serve as president of the Hemp Feed Coalition. And one of the things that I'm currently uh, relative to moving this industry forward legislatively, um, and, and I do all of this work our Hemp Feed Coalition is a nonprofit that's focused on education. So this is kind of a side, a side gig to the side gig. Uh, and are, we are ultimately trying to ensure that we have proper regulation in the for Um. Uh, for people that were in the United States, A lot of people are [00:01:00] aware that our appropriations bill that passed in November of this last year ultimately put a very, very heavy restriction on the hemp industry with a 0.4 milligram cap for an unknown, quantity of hemp.
And this is for THC, right 0.4 milligrams. So I looked at this from, with my hemp feed coalition cap on and said. This is a real problem. we, our mission at the Hemp Feed Coalition isn't cannabinoids, but we have residual cannabinoids. in our in our, in the grain. There's cannabinoids. that come off of the seed head, you know, that are coming in contact with the and, and, ultimately that, that leads to some cannabinoids.
So if we say. Um, for instance, we have a 0.4 milligram limit on a per container basis, and my container is the size of a semi-truck. We might have an illegal product. And so to me, I immediately started taking action to figure what, are some avenues [00:02:00] that we can go down? Who can we to to try to help, help this situation?
can, cannabinoids specifically aren't our focus. They exist and we need to try to help that side of the industry get its footing.
Tommy Truong: Wow. So you are, you
come, you're coming at
this on a different part of the industry. I know that there's a lot of people that are on the other side of the industry where cannabinoids is part of the product. is a byproduct that's not really part of the feeds and you don't want this part of the product, but it just ha happens that is there naturally when you guys are talking to the White House and the people in power, are you joining forces with other parts of the industry collectively, actively?
Andrew Bish: I would say that there's been some challenges I'm constantly reaching out to some of these other working groups, associations that are out there. Trying to join forces with them. I think that the challenge for me has [00:03:00] been, at least in terms of how we work together, that we're trying to accomplish two different things.
Tommy Truong: Yeah. No, it's true. One
is, yeah, no, it's clear as day. So maybe, if you don't mind sharing what has been the conversations like in Washington?
Andrew Bish: Yeah, well the conversations are I think. One of the big problems that we have that this industry, the cannabinoid industry is going to have to grapple with is that Congress does not have an appetite for intoxicating cannabinoids. And the, it seems like most of the dollars going into lobbying into the efforts in con in Congress are focused on. how do they carve out space for intoxicating cannabinoids? [00:04:00] And I think they're actually shooting themselves in the foot in that regard because when I walk into the room and we start talking about industrial hemp and how we need to regulate. Cannabinoids for the sake of ensuring that there is a reasonable amount of C-B-D-T-H-C-T-H-C-A-C-B-D-A-C-B-G, all the different cannabinoids, whatever they might be. You can tell from the posture of the people that were, we're talking to and, and directly, they'll tell me that they're interested in trying to find ways to do that, that don't. Allow for large milligrams of intoxicants to exist.
Tommy Truong: Got it. So what there, the motivation for the government really is we don't wanna freeze the industry, so to say, particularly not your part of the industry. But does that look like when may, maybe the sense is [00:05:00] people were being too liberal with how the rules were written, so to say.
Andrew Bish: Yeah, well, that's, yeah, they definitely found a know, a wedge in the door and pulled that door all the way relative to cannabinoids. And, and again, when we talk about cannabinoids, I think it's a problem in general, when we're dealing with Congress, for instance. These, these guys aren't these these ladies, Congress, people, whoever we're talking to, they're just not experts on So they, they, when they think, well, we want the industrial side to prosper, but we don't want THC, it's hard for them to fathom that. Well, THC just exists
and that's just a part of the plan. So we're gonna have to figure out how we're gonna rankle this.
Tommy Truong: So that's interesting. So
are talks, lack of a better word, are they progressing? Are they favorable? Where does the government stand today?
Andrew Bish: Well, when you spell it out, when you [00:06:00] get enough time to actually talk through what banning different cannabinoids means to the entire industry. They start to become more favorable to the conversation of, okay, how do we set up reasonable regulation for this? But until they understand that point, oftentimes what, at least my experience is there's an arm's length in terms of how they're pushing back against some level of intoxicants and trying to legalize that particular.
And or prevent the legalization of that intoxicant. and honestly I think that's fine because when I say we, there were a lot of people that helped legalize hemp, um, that started out a lot earlier than I did in the United States, but. The objective of hemp wasn't to figure out how do we legalize marijuana on the back of the hemp was, that wasn't the message that we sold. So I think that what has happened in the hemp industry has solely the message a little bit, and [00:07:00] for some of us that are really involved with grain and fiber, we're trying to go back and figure out, okay, how do we pick up these pieces? How do we rebuild these relationships and rebuild this trust knowing that there is.
An aspect of this industry that is causing politicians, uh, a lot of consternation.
Tommy Truong: You know what's interesting
to me is that's so true because I have the lens of looking at the farm bill from a psychoactive perspective. But it got passed from a really, from a agri as an agricultural plant, like I am from Canada, and
we're able to grow hemp and I think for the longest time in the US before the farm Bill, you're not able to grow hemp, but you can import it in, which doesn't make any sense at all.
There's this weird world that the US is operating in where you can, it's not illegal to have, but it's illegal to grow. And the farm bill. Straightened that out. It just made things less wonky and more straightforward. But that opened the door to [00:08:00] other to another industry that the farm bill wasn't designed for.
Andrew Bish: Yeah, well ultimately the farm bill didn't contemplate what to do with hemp past the farm gate. that's where we were really left with a major problem. And then the USDA actually tried to correct this issue thinking that they could resolve it with infield testing, uh, which was just the a, not, it just wasn't a work of all idea, but that that's what they tried to do with the final rule is establish infield testing that accounted for 0.3%, THC. that water really wasn't what the problem was because post the farm gate is where
all of this processing is being done and all of this concentration is being done. So it doesn't really matter what you measure it on the farm and
Tommy Truong: plan itself has is naturally low in THC.
Andrew Bish: Correct. And the USDA doesn't have any purview after it leaves the [00:09:00] farm. So this industry was able to proliferate, uh, mostly because of a dereliction in. Duty from the FDA that had the ability to step in and regulate this, but routinely has kicked back and, and said that Congress needs to be more specific in its direction, the, to the, FDA.
Tommy Truong: So Andrew, what direction is
Congress heading? Towards, I know there's still time before things kick in, but we are at a race to that day.
Andrew Bish: Yeah, that's an excellent question. so where's Congress heading? A couple different You know our conversations with the Senate in house Ag Committee. have been somewhat fruitful in the current farm. Be markup. Uh, we do see a bifurcation of hemp, so a different regulation for floral versus grain and fiber on an infield testing standpoint, which again, solves almost nothing.
there's advantage to that from a farming [00:10:00] perspective, and I think that there's a lot of advantage. From a banking and, and, uh, insurance perspective for farmers that are, that are doing grain because now we can talk about, instead of saying hemp, we can talk about industrial hemp, or we can talk about floral hemp.
So that's one aspect of what the government is doing, and we would anticipate that that will pass if the farm bill ever comes to fruition. Now. And, And, that's kind of elusive. There's a markup next week, and I've got some meetings tomorrow with some congressional offices to make sure that we've got everything in there we need to, for, from A-U-S-D-A direction.
But the farm Bill itself isn't a vehicle to regulate hemp. So what we're seeing is, uh, like, uh, Congress, congressperson, Griffith, uh, their office is. Putting has put forward a bill, uh, that's ultimately a regulatory pathway for hemp. I, I don't think it's got the legs that it needs to have. I think it's, [00:11:00] I, I think it's got some definite challenges in terms of gaining the support that it, it needs to gain.
Outside of that, there's not really a lot of energy being put. From Congress people to make any changes. I think there are a lot of people both on the house side and the Senate side, uh, fully prepared and willing to allow for McConnell's 0.4 milligram cap to, to take effect.
Tommy Truong: Oh, that's unfortunate to hear. Yeah.
Andrew Bish: Yeah, I mean, and I, I still think it's fixable because that's why we're up there. I just, I don't think it's. I think we need some support, honestly, of the rest of the cannabinoid space because what what the members that aren't working with and, and they're not necessarily working against us, but the ones that aren't working with us, which is most of them are are highly focused in on an extension of the appropriations language, but they don't have any substance behind the extension and the, [00:12:00] there's gotta be some substance behind.
Having an obs uh, having an
Tommy Truong: what do you mean by that? Can you elaborate?
Andrew Bish: I think there's an appetite for certain Congress people to be willing to support an extension of this McConnell appropriations language if that were coupled with an appropriately appropriate regulatory pathway. So if if they were to get both of those, it would make sense, but the extension itself is really gonna not have. It, it's just not gonna have any legs. They, that seems to have been an effort that people have been trying to get going for several weeks now, and I, I can't find anywhere there's, an appetite to accept that.
Tommy Truong: Wow.
you're on the ground right now. What do you think is gonna happen when we approach that date?
Andrew Bish: I think that there's another action that's gonna have to happen before that if you look at, and I think it's gonna have to come out of the White House, Donald Trump [00:13:00] already signed an executive order. He'd like to see CBD given to people on Medicaid, Medicare. He wants that to be available to people, and he wants that available to people in April. there's actually a gap in the current. Regulatory pathway because there's not a regulatory pathway that is going to stifle that effort. So if the White House actually wants to make this happen, they're going to have to give some direction to the FDA to start regulating this. Uh, the FDA was supposed to turn in a cannabinoid list already, and they failed to do that timely, which. It is not unexpected, but ultimately that, that's what I would think is going to have to happen since I, I, I don't see where, again, there's energy on Capitol Hill to do anything. Um, the White House is gonna have to take some actions to be able to put their original executive order into place.
Tommy Truong: Yeah, that's movement for sure.
Andrew Bish: Yeah, [00:14:00] that's what gives me hope that there's gonna be some, a little bit more brisk action is because there's a lot of energy in the White House trying to get CBD to certain people. Uh, and they's, they're gonna immediately stumble.
Tommy Truong: So if you
actually, Andrew what else would you like to share to to our listeners around this process?
Andrew Bish: I'd say, you know, I oftentimes talk to people and I say, you know, talk to your congressman, make sure that you support, uh, this or whatever that is. But I think there's a lot of nuance right now out there and say, calling your congressman and saying you support the hemp industry is actually.
Not the most useful tactic that there is because it's hard to sort out what that means. I think one thing that'd be useful for people to know relative to where we are is that this industry does have to find a way to come together and want to be regulated and it needs to start paying attention to [00:15:00] people that are trying not to.
Move that direction because those are the individuals that are directly in the way of the rest of the industry proliferating. It's, there's opportunity out Um, But we've gotta see this. We've gotta see the good players, the good actors come forward and say, look, we're not gonna listen to parties that actually aren't interested in trying to figure out how we get regulated. That's, I think that's an unworkable strategy I wish would change. But I do understand that most of the money coming into this space right now is coming from a space that doesn't want regulation. So there, there is that conundrum of how do you continue to drive this bus forward, while removing one of the chief gasoline supplies that you have.
Tommy Truong: Yeah. And you hit the nail on the head in that I talk to a lot of people in the industry and they do, they're not running away from regulation, but it's more what does that look like? And [00:16:00] I don't know. Yeah.
Andrew Bish: I think that's part of the And I think the industry, if I wanna flog the industry a little bit, which, I, I'm a part of this industry, so I feel like it's like talking about your own family, to a certain degree. I think it's had a lot of time to set up regulations for itself and it has.
Routinely decided not to do that because it has a fear of, of what's gonna happen if it does that, and now we're facing the a, a much worse fear, I think, than anyone ever thought of. no, nobody thought that what Mitch McConnell did, he was actually going to do. But it's a much worse situation than what would happen if the would rally around a set of regulations that it seen feels are, are reasonable, and then were to have put that forward to Congress.
Now that's water under the bridge, but I still think that's what the industry needs to be doing is subscribing to something that makes sense. [00:17:00] That they can actually get past not an idea of just not these ideas that aren't gonna work. Uh, again, not every idea.
is a good idea.
Tommy Truong: Yeah, I agree with you. I had somebody on that was talking about just the state of synthetic cannabinoids and and it's not good. It's just not good. There's very little testing that's done and extremely dangerous. So whatever it
is,
Andrew Bish: It's, it's incredible how dangerous some of these products are. And when we talk about danger and we talk about hemp products, the immediate supposition is, well, some of these hemp, it's hemp. That could be dangerous. Well, not necessarily. There's a lot of other stuff inside some of these vape cartridges or some of these gummies that.
When you're making some of these nobody's talking about cannabinoids are, are likely the least of our problems when when it comes to what are people ingesting.
Tommy Truong: Yeah, it's not the cannabinoids that you're after.
It's the byproduct to get the [00:18:00] cannabinoids and the byproducts are not tested often and consumed, and it leaves a black eye to the industry, to everybody involved, and the result really is what we have right now.
Andrew Bish: Yeah, and I think the whole thing's difficult because I, you know, I'm a person of personal freedom. Uh, one of the nice things about living in the state of Nebraska, I, come from a town of 400 people and there. You know, if I wanna drive a hundred mile an hour down the road, the likelihood that somebody's gonna notice that is nil.
There's a lot of personal freedom in central Nebraska, and I appreciate that, and I want people to have personal freedom, but if we're putting products into the marketplace that could have life altering effects and for the negative, and we don't have that sorted out as to what those effects are, and then we can't tell consumers what the.
Effect is, that's not a good thing for the industry. it would be awful if [00:19:00] what happened to the tobacco industry happened to the hemp industry because we decided not to test products and find out what the consequences of some of these products are.
Tommy Truong: Yeah, huge.
Andrew, I, these things are, I'm guessing it's happening fast. You're, you are talking to representatives right now. You're pushing towards a resolution, particularly on your side of the industry. I would love to have you back whenever things get resolved or when we're closer to an idea of what it looks like.
Andrew Bish: I'd love to keep talking about that. And just really quick, one thing, I, I oftentimes get accused of being anti cannabinoid, and I, it couldn't be further from the uh, I'm definitely pro cannabinoid, but. What, well, I guess what I'd like people to understand about my position is I'm industrial hemp first, and I, there's only so many battles I can fight in a day, so I'm gonna focus on industrial hemp, the grain, the fiber, the, the farmers that [00:20:00] I'm, I'm, I'm working to make sure that we get a true rotational crop in the United States.
'cause that's, my passion is a rotational crop and I wanna help support the cannabinoid industry any way I can. It's just, it's the cannabinoids are not my battle. To fight and I, wish that industry, that side of it would let me help them more than they are right
now.
Tommy Truong: Guys. It's true. It's the same plan.
We've gotta work together.
Andrew Bish: Yep. We do need to work together. Andrew, thank you so much for taking your time to come on. Give us an update on the forefront of what's happening in the hemp industry from a legislative perspective.
Yeah. Thank you. Glad to be here. Looking forward to the next time we talk.
Outro (2): Thanks for listening to the Kaya Cast Podcast. We hope you enjoyed the show. Don't forget to subscribe to our podcast in your favorite podcast or visit our website.
