Thursday, March 22, 2007

Industrial Hemp Back On The Table

Looks like another effort to legalize the growing of Cannabis Indica(?), better known as Industrial Hemp, is back in the works again. According to the Contra Costa Times, this looks like an even more bipartisan effort than the last one- that one having been vetoed by the Governator.

Looks like our our very own assemblybabe, Patty Berg, co- authored the bill. Good for her. And, once again, past gubernatorial candidate, Tom McClintock has entered the fray on the pro- hemp side.

If someone can get the Governator to dump his "I'm only protecting potential hemp growers by vetoing this bill" attitude, this bill should make it. He's the only one that stopped it from passing last time.

I'm wondering just who the behind the scenes interests are that are opposed to legalization of Industrial Hemp?

9 Comments:

At 3:39 PM, Blogger Bodie Pfost said...

I heard that back in the Reefer Madness era it was none other than newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst who opposed industrial hemp. Nowadays, who knows?

Dupont also, according to:
http://www.reefermadness.org/propaganda/essay.html

 
At 6:12 PM, Anonymous mresquan said...

Who opposes industrial hemp? Pot growers.

 
At 6:33 PM, Blogger Fred said...

Perhaps. Maybe that and law enforcement.

I can't help but wonder what happened when Virginia Strom- Martin started this thing some years ago.

Her similar bill failed to even make it through the Assembly Agriculture Committee- dominated by Democrats, as it is today.

It failed without comment by the Committee members. Virginia S-M commented on her disappointment that no comments were even given as to why they rejected her Industrial Hemp bill.

There must be some powerful forces at work here.

Then again, looks like we're moving forward. Still...who the hell are the people opposing this? Pot growers? Timber companies? I don't know.

As an aside, I read something a while back that said Industrial Hemp was made illegal, years ago, after Dupont Corp. developed and patented nylon. I suppose the opposition must be something along that line?

 
At 7:19 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Industrial hemp will have no effect on pot growers, unless it seeds their stash.It's like comparing a poodle to a wolf.

 
At 9:01 PM, Anonymous mresquan said...

7:19, I argue that point because once industrial pot is legal and producers are making money,they will establish the monetary influences necessary to woo enough elected officials and organizations into outright pot legalization,with those idustrial producers taking the lead in dominating and controlling the pot market.

 
At 5:40 AM, Blogger ΛΕΟΝΙΔΑΣ said...

mresquan, you may be right but most of the pot growers I know believe that the prices for their product will still remain high even if they are no longer hasseled by "the man". They seem to have no concept of economics.

 
At 3:08 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

9:01, I think you are making associations. Hemp farmers wouldn't have any more or less motivation than corn, wheat or soy farmers to get pot legalized. It is already legal to grow hemp some places, are they playing out your grand conspiracy theory?

 
At 3:51 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Pot growers are assholes. Crooks, criminals, lazy pieces of shit.

Patty Berg is a sad excuse for an elected official. But she's not alone.

 
At 11:18 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You sir, are a potty mouth, but sadly, you are "not alone" either.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home