FARMERS WILL SUE TO LEGALIZE HEMP CROPS

LEXINGTON, Ky. -- More than 25 years after hemp was last grown in America
legally, a group of farmers and trade organizations plans to sue the
federal government on Friday to make hemp a lawful crop again. The
plaintiffs intend to argue in U.S. District Court here that the illegal
status of hemp, by definition of the Controlled Substances Act of 1972,
violates a 1937 determination by Congress that the plant poses none of the
psychoactive problems caused by its cousin, marijuana. The plaintiffs say
in their lawsuit, the first of its kind, that Congress had stipulated hemp,
which has many commercial uses, was different from marijuana and that
hemp's prohibition by the Drug Enforcement Administration violates the
constitutional doctrine of separation of powers of government. But the
central thrust of the legal action is economics, with thousands of farmers
throughout the South and Midwest looking at hemp as another crop to include
in their annual rotations that now involve grains, vegetables and tobacco.
For many of the farmers, particularly those here in eastern Kentucky who
are almost wholly dependent on tobacco for their income, hemp would provide
a viable hedge as a disease-resistant plant -- especially when the future
of tobacco in the country is so uncertain.

As the region's most valuable crop, tobacco can generate as much as $5,000
an acre in gross sales.

Most food crops, like corn, soybeans and wheat, don't have anywhere near
that kind of return.

But farmers like Jim Barton, whose family raised hemp in Lexington when it
was last legal -- during a "Hemp for Victory" drive in World War II --
predicted that an acre of hemp could gross as much as $1,200.

"Hemp is no more controversial today than tobacco is," said Andrew R.
Graves, a plaintiff in the suit as president of the Kentucky Hemp Growers
Council, a group of 60 would-be hemp farmers, including Barton. "You go
into any store and you can buy hemp products.

But he and I as farmers" -- he pointed to Barton -- "get no portion of that
money.

That makes no sense to me." Terry Parham, a spokesman for the drug
administration, said the agency had not seen the lawsuit and, as a result,
would have no comment. Imported hemp products, now manufactured in more
than two dozen countries, including Canada, have been abundant in the
United States for years.

They include animal feed, shoes, clothes, paper products and bedding for
horses. The frustration of would-be hemp farmers and marketers in the
United States -- and the basis of the lawsuit -- centers on the
long-standing policy of the Department of Justice and the DEA to make no
distinction between hemp and marijuana because they contain the same
psychoactive chemical -- delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol, commonly known as
THC. Government officials fear that hemp would provide camouflage for
growing marijuana. But the lawsuit argues that Congress in 1937 recognized
the differences when it passed the Marijuana Tax Act and excluded hemp from
any prohibition. And scientists have determined that THC constitutes less
than 1 percent of hemp's weight, not enough to cause any psychoactive
effects, compared with 4 percent to 7 percent for marijuana.

For many years, hemp played a large role in American farming.

George Washington and Thomas Jefferson grew it, and many towns were named
after it, like Hempstead, New York. In the early decades of the country, it
was especially useful in making sails and paper products. Despite the 1937
law that made a distinction between hemp and marijuana, hemp farming
virtually died out over the three decades that followed, except for the
wartime program.

By then, rayon, nylon and other fabrics had captured its market.

The law was repealed when the 1972 act was passed, dooming hemp for good as
a domestically grown crop.

The farmers' lawsuit asks that the court rule that it was illegal for the
executive branch of government to ban hemp, that chemical distinctions
between marijuana and hemp should be recognized and that states should have
the right to regulate hemp production.

As a result, Graves said, a new market would emerge for farmers at a time
when many of them are struggling to stay in business. "If nobody considers
the plight of the farmers, then we're in a heck of a fix," he said.
"Everybody wants you to get rid of tobacco, but nobody wants to talk about
what you do to replace it."

Checked-by: Mike Gogulski