Podcast Summary: Bulwark Takes – "Why Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul Are Fighting Over Weed Seltzers"

Host: Tim Miller (The Bulwark)
Guest: Natalie Fertig (Cannabis Policy Reporter, Politico)
Date: November 18, 2025

Overview

This episode of Bulwark Takes dives into the surprising political fight over hemp-derived THC seltzers and beverages in Congress, explaining why two prominent Kentucky Senators—Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul—have ended up in opposition, and why national cannabis and hemp policy has gotten so twisted. Guest Natalie Fertig, a seasoned cannabis policy reporter, joins host Tim Miller to break down the legal loopholes, the unlikely coalitions, and what the new federal law means for consumers and the industry.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. How the Hemp Bill Ended Up in Congress

• [01:52] Tim Miller introduces the topic, noting the oddity of the subject cropping up in shutdown negotiations, with clear Kentucky connections.
• Natalie Fertig explains:
  • McConnell and Paul, both from Kentucky (a top hemp-producing state), landed on opposite sides.
  • Growing national concern about unregulated intoxicating hemp drinks (THC seltzers) fueled legislative action—especially in states lacking legal marijuana.
  • Mitch McConnell wants to close the loophole he didn't anticipate when legalizing industrial hemp: “...when he backed industrial hemp legalization back in 2014, this was not part of what he envisioned, was not people being able to like, get high off a can of seltzer...” (Natalie Fertig, 02:23)
  • Rand Paul is fighting to protect Kentucky’s lucrative hemp sector.

2. Strange Bedfellows: Who’s Fighting For and Against

• [03:29] Tim points out the odd political alliances: teetotaler conservatives and elements of the left want to ban the drinks/formalize regulation.
• [03:58] Natalie highlights:
  • Cannabis industry advocates supporting stricter regulation, to protect their heavily regulated markets (e.g., California).
  • "It's some of the oddest bedfellows I think I've ever seen." (Fertig, 04:41)
  • Unregulated hemp drinks undercut more established, taxed, and regulated cannabis producers.

3. Legal Loopholes and How We Got Here

• [04:49-06:57] History and technicalities:
  • 2014 and 2018 Farm Bills legalized hemp (cannabis with ≤0.3% THC by dry weight).
  • “Once hemp was legalized, still not regulated, but legalized… people started going, what can we do with this?” (Fertig, 05:19)
  • The law never anticipated infused beverages: concentrated liquids (like seltzer) can contain intoxicating doses of THC while fitting the legal weight ratio.
  • Natalie: “...the limits were per... dry weight. So...you can get a lot more THC into a heavy thing like a can of seltzer.” (06:30)

4. What the New Law Actually Changes

• [08:17] Tim: “Most of these cans, like 5 milligrams, basically.”
• Fertig: “I’ve seen cans that are 50 milligrams in North Carolina, which is a wild amount.” (08:20)
• The law will restrict THC content to 0.3 milligrams total per can, essentially banning intoxicating doses.
• Implementation timeline:
  • One-year compliance period, law takes effect Fall 2026.
  • "[N]ext year, if nothing changes...this will go into effect fall of 2026 and both basically all of these products will be off the shelves." (Miller, 09:09–09:15)

5. The (Shifting) Political Battle—And the Industry’s Future

• The law passed overwhelmingly—only ~20 votes in opposition, with some surprising "no" votes (e.g., Ted Cruz).
• Less than half of Senate Democrats voted for the bill—a notable gap with popular opinion and economic reality.
  • “Most people...would say, yeah, we think these types of things should be legal. But you’re looking at cannabis [as] no longer just an emotional or philosophical vote. It’s an economic vote.” (Fertig, 10:05)
  • Senators face pressure from struggling state-legal cannabis businesses losing out to hemp competitors.
• Job losses and economic disruption:
  • Especially pronounced in red states without regulated marijuana, where hemp seltzers have thrived.
  • "[In] my district, there’s so many jobs attached to this industry. I have to be against this because people are going to lose jobs." (Derek Van Orden paraphrased, Miller, 11:17–11:40)
  • Some states (e.g., California) already ban these products, while others (Texas, North Carolina) have growing industries.

6. Public Sentiment and Political Advice

• Tim’s strategic advice: “...my advice to Democrats who have future political ambitions would be to not let Ted Cruz and Rand Paul be the face of not banning hemp products. I think that’s a winning issue for you. One man's opinion.” (13:25)
• Fertig notes the size of the industry probably isn’t big enough yet to sway voters, but “if consumers are getting really mad that they can’t get something… their voices get loud enough...what you said could be true.” (13:45)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Policy Unintended Consequences:
  • “When he backed industrial hemp legalization back in 2014, this was not part of what he envisioned…”
    — Natalie Fertig, 02:23
• On Strange Political Coalitions:
  • “It’s some of the oddest bedfellows I think I’ve ever seen.”
    — Natalie Fertig, 04:41
• How Law Was Exploited:
  • “...the limits were per bar, like by dry weight. So if you hold a flour...it doesn’t weigh a lot. If you hold a can...it weighs a lot. You can get a lot more THC into a heavy thing like a can of seltzer…”
    — Natalie Fertig, 06:26
• On the New Law’s Impact:
  • “Next year, if nothing changes...this will go into effect fall of 2026 and both basically all of these products will be off the shelves.”
    — Tim Miller, 09:12
• Red State Hemp Boom:
  • “...Texas, North Carolina, some of these states that don’t have any medical or recreational marijuana, that's where these products have really exploded...”
    — Natalie Fertig, 12:20

Important Timestamps

• 01:51: Guest Natalie Fertig introduction
• 02:15–03:29: Why McConnell and Paul split on hemp
• 03:58–04:49: Cannabis industry’s motivation to support the ban
• 05:16–06:48: Loopholes in hemp regulation and rise of intoxicating seltzers
• 08:17: Standard vs. new legal THC content in beverages
• 09:09–09:15: Law implementation timeline
• 10:05–11:00: Democratic resistance and industry pressures
• 11:16–12:09: Hemp/cannabis industry economic impact by state
• 13:25–13:45: Politics and possible future voter backlash

Conclusion

This episode untangles the complex politics, legal ambiguities, and business interests surrounding the sudden federal push to clamp down on hemp-derived intoxicating beverages. The unlikely McConnell vs. Paul feud spotlights how economic concerns, regulatory history, and partisan realignment have created a wild policy moment, with real implications for consumers, businesses, and the future of American cannabis policy.

For more updates and analysis, tune in to The Bulwark's next episode, especially if this legislation evolves.