News (Media Awareness Project) - US ND: Editorial: It's Time to Grow Hemp Support |
Title: | US ND: Editorial: It's Time to Grow Hemp Support |
Published On: | 2008-01-04 |
Source: | Bismarck Tribune (ND) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-11 15:41:47 |
IT'S TIME TO GROW HEMP SUPPORT
Supporters of industrial hemp have suffered a double setback.
First, U.S. District Judge Daniel Hovland dismissed a lawsuit against
the federal government by two North Dakota farmers. The farmers
argued the government considered industrial hemp the same as
marijuana, which is an illegal drug.
Farmers want to raise hemp as a crop. It can be used for products
ranging from rope to lotion.
While ruling against the farmers, Hovland suggested they ask Congress
to change the definition of industrial hemp.
The chances of that happening don't look good. North Dakota's
congressional delegation says it won't introduce or push legislation
to change the definition.
Sens. Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan along with Rep. Earl Pomeroy, all
Democrats, say they are being practical.
They argue that as long as the Drug Enforcement Administration is
taking a hard line, any legislation can't get through Congress. The
delegation says Congress doesn't want to be seen as weak on drugs.
In interviews and statements to the Associated Press, the
delegation's support of industrial hemp could be described as lukewarm at best.
There is pro-hemp legislation in Congress. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas,
introduced the measure, but it shows no signs of going anywhere.
Dave Monson, one of the plaintiffs in the hemp case, wants the
delegation to fight for the legislation even if it appears doomed.
Monson, a Republican state legislator, argues that a congressional
fight would show courts there is an interest by lawmakers in a change.
Going unsaid by the state's delegation is the apparent lack of
support in the state for a change.
Despite Monson's arguments that North Dakotans favor a change and the
North Dakota Agriculture Department establishing hemp regulations,
there likely isn't widespread support for industrial hemp.
Dorgan, Conrad and Pomeroy haven't been reluctant to fight for "lost
causes" that have solid North Dakota support.
Hemp supporters need to launch a public relations campaign to prove
the merits of hemp to the state populace. Then they need to prove to
the delegation that they have broad-based support in the state.
If they can do that, the delegation might fight for them.
However, it will take a long fight to turn a "lost cause" into victory.
Supporters of industrial hemp have suffered a double setback.
First, U.S. District Judge Daniel Hovland dismissed a lawsuit against
the federal government by two North Dakota farmers. The farmers
argued the government considered industrial hemp the same as
marijuana, which is an illegal drug.
Farmers want to raise hemp as a crop. It can be used for products
ranging from rope to lotion.
While ruling against the farmers, Hovland suggested they ask Congress
to change the definition of industrial hemp.
The chances of that happening don't look good. North Dakota's
congressional delegation says it won't introduce or push legislation
to change the definition.
Sens. Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan along with Rep. Earl Pomeroy, all
Democrats, say they are being practical.
They argue that as long as the Drug Enforcement Administration is
taking a hard line, any legislation can't get through Congress. The
delegation says Congress doesn't want to be seen as weak on drugs.
In interviews and statements to the Associated Press, the
delegation's support of industrial hemp could be described as lukewarm at best.
There is pro-hemp legislation in Congress. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas,
introduced the measure, but it shows no signs of going anywhere.
Dave Monson, one of the plaintiffs in the hemp case, wants the
delegation to fight for the legislation even if it appears doomed.
Monson, a Republican state legislator, argues that a congressional
fight would show courts there is an interest by lawmakers in a change.
Going unsaid by the state's delegation is the apparent lack of
support in the state for a change.
Despite Monson's arguments that North Dakotans favor a change and the
North Dakota Agriculture Department establishing hemp regulations,
there likely isn't widespread support for industrial hemp.
Dorgan, Conrad and Pomeroy haven't been reluctant to fight for "lost
causes" that have solid North Dakota support.
Hemp supporters need to launch a public relations campaign to prove
the merits of hemp to the state populace. Then they need to prove to
the delegation that they have broad-based support in the state.
If they can do that, the delegation might fight for them.
However, it will take a long fight to turn a "lost cause" into victory.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...