Tangle Podcast: "The Hemp Ban"

Host: Isaac Saul
Date: November 19, 2025

Episode Overview

This episode of Tangle takes a deep dive into the surprise federal ban on many hemp-derived THC products, which was discreetly included in a recent government shutdown bill. Host Isaac Saul explores the motives, fallout, and political debate surrounding this sweeping policy that is poised to reshape a $28 billion industry overnight. The discussion features perspectives from across the political spectrum, including the left, right, and industry experts, and is capped with Isaac’s own nuanced take.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Background: What’s Happening?

• A new ban on hemp-derived THC products was quietly included in the recent bill preventing a government shutdown ([02:08]-[07:24]).
• The measure reverses the 2018 Farm Bill that allowed sales of hemp products with low levels of Delta-9 THC, inadvertently launching a booming market for psychoactive hemp edibles, drinks, and vapes.
• The law redefines legal hemp and caps THC at just 0.4mg per serving—far below the levels in almost all current commercial products.
• Effective date: Law takes effect November 12, 2026, with a 1-year “grace period” ([07:24]).

Quote:
"Products more potent than marijuana can be bought off the shelves of a gas station."
—Isaac Saul, [07:14]

Job/Market Impact:

• U.S. Hemp Roundtable expects 90% of non-intoxicating CBD and THC hemp products to be banned.
• Industry employs ~300,000 people and is valued at $28 billion.

2. Why Was This Ban Introduced?

• Intent: To close a loophole inadvertently created in 2018 that allowed high-potency psychoactive hemp products (like “Delta-8” and “Delta-10”) to be sold without age or packaging regulations ([06:52]-[07:24]).
• Lawmakers’ motivations:
  • Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) spearheaded the provision for children’s safety and to respond to calls from 39 state attorneys general for tighter regulation.
  • Some opponents (notably Senator Rand Paul and Rep. Thomas Massie, both R-KY) contend it’s a thoughtless overreaction threatening farmers and jobs.

Quote:
“The new provision will cap hemp products at just 0.4 milligrams of THC per serving, a fraction of what’s nearly in all products on the market today.”
—John Lal, [06:52]

3. The Left’s Perspective

• Divided: Some see it as necessary to protect children; others criticize it as an overreach that stifles innovation and jobs ([12:07]).
• Arguments:
  • Many hemp products, especially those from reputable companies, are safe and preferred by consumers seeking alternatives to alcohol (Jeremy Burke, Ms. Now).
  • The new law should have distinguished “good actors” from “bad actors” (those selling synthetic, unsafe products to minors).
  • There are real public health concerns—but lawmakers leapt to an outright ban instead of better regulation.

Quote:
“Rather than ban synthetic cannabis products specifically or even simply mandate age-gating, McConnell and the other senators pushed for an outright ban to crush the nascent industry entirely.”
—Jeremy Burke, Ms. Now ([12:07])

• Other voices stress the ban is needed to prevent children’s access and the normalization of substance use (Lindsey Vuolo & Kevin Roy, Washington Post).

4. The Right’s Perspective

• Also mixed: Some call the bill common-sense, others decry it as anti-farmer and lacking debate ([13:42]).
• Arguments:
  • Support: Public is tired of high-potency THC products being sold to kids; enforcement should remain strong (Kevin Sabet, City Journal).
  • Opposition: The ban destroys livelihoods, undercuts state regulatory progress, and was slipped in without proper debate (Sen. Rand Paul, Courier Journal).

Quote:
“In true Washington swamp fashion, this hemp ban is not being debated on its own on the merits.”
—Sen. Rand Paul, [13:42]

5. Industry Perspectives

• Concerns ban will increase illicit sales by driving responsible vendors out and ceding market share to “bad actors” ([15:51]).
• Bans historically don’t eliminate problem substances—they push them to the black market (Comparison to failed menthol cigarette ban in California).
• Some see the ban as a potential catalyst for a broader legal cannabis movement (Adam Terry, Marijuana Moment):
  “Never before have so many people been affected in a negative way on this issue all at once... We should use this moment... to once and for all decriminalize, deschedule and regulate cannabis in the US.” [16:45]

Isaac Saul’s Take

([20:09]-[27:40])

• Shifted views: Once a proponent of legalization, Isaac now sees significant dangers in today’s hyper-potent cannabis products, especially those marketed or accessible to youth.
• Root of problem: Congress created this policy mess by failing to foresee that hemp-derived cannabinoids would be used to synthesize potent psychoactive products and sold without adequate scrutiny.
• Critique of the new ban:
  • It’s an overcorrection that endangers a huge industry and many jobs, with little evidence that it will fix the core problems.
  • It undercuts successful state-level regulatory frameworks without giving them a chance to work or enacting targeted age/marketing restrictions.
  • Public health data used to justify the ban is often out of context: For example, the much-cited “10,000 calls to poison control” is a fraction of exposures compared with medications or even cosmetics.
  • The approach is blunt: “Instead, they’re blowing up that industry overnight.”

Memorable Quotes:
"Congress created the problem with a poorly conceived piece of legislation, and now they're attempting to fix it with an equally slapdash legislative effort."
—Isaac Saul, [21:23]

“In my personal life, I know a handful of people who say CBD products have been game changers for their various chronic illnesses or pain. Non-intoxicant applications... clearly don’t create a public health concern that justifies their prohibition.”
—Isaac Saul, [22:45]

• What should be done?
  • Set federal standards based on existing state laws—none of which are as strict as the new federal limit.
  • Target labeling, marketing, and age-gating, not blanket bans.
  • Engage in genuine legislative processes with input from industry, states, and medical experts.
  • There’s a one-year window to fix this before the ban fully hits.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

| Quote | Speaker | Timestamp | |-------|---------|-----------| | "Products more potent than marijuana can be bought off the shelves of a gas station." | Isaac Saul | 07:14 | | "The new provision will cap hemp products at just 0.4 milligrams of THC per serving, a fraction of what's nearly in all products on the market today." | John Lal | 06:52 | | "Rather than ban synthetic cannabis products specifically or even simply mandate age-gating, McConnell and the other senators pushed for an outright ban to crush the nascent industry entirely." | Jeremy Burke (Ms. Now) | 12:07 | | "In true Washington swamp fashion, this hemp ban is not being debated on its own on the merits." | Sen. Rand Paul | 13:42 | | "Congress created the problem... and now they're attempting to fix it with an equally slapdash legislative effort." | Isaac Saul | 21:23 | | "Never before have so many people been affected in a negative way on this issue all at once... We should use this moment... to once and for all decriminalize, deschedule and regulate cannabis in the US." | Adam Terry (Marijuana Moment) | 16:45 |

Important Timestamps

• [02:08] – Introduction of the hemp ban issue
• [06:52] – Details of the new cap and summary of the legislative change
• [07:24] – Economic impact and details of the ban’s effects
• [12:07] – Left-leaning reactions and critiques
• [13:42] – Right-leaning reactions and critiques
• [15:51] – Industry perspectives and prediction of illicit market shift
• [20:09] – Isaac Saul’s personal analysis (“My Take”)
• [28:09] – “Ask Tangle” segment (not directly on the hemp issue)

Additional Insights

• Industry statistics:

  • Estimated retail hemp market: $28 billion ([31:48])
  • Nearly 95% of market may disappear if ban goes into effect ([31:48])

• Enforcement challenge:

  • Critics argue the ban is easier said than done, given the federal government’s limited capacity and state-level patchworks.

• Potential for reform:

  • Widespread and sudden loss of access/industry may spark new momentum for national legalization or smarter regulation.

Episode Takeaways

• The hemp ban was passed with little debate as a last-minute provision, representing a blunt and disruptive approach to regulating a complex market.
• The move has fractured typical left/right alliances, with some conservatives and progressives aligned against the ban due to its economic impact and rushed process.
• Critics from all perspectives agree that better regulation, not prohibition, would be a healthier path—including age restrictions, labeling, and product safety regulations.
• There’s a critical window for Congress to revisit and potentially reform the law before it takes full effect in November 2026.

For more balanced, detailed discussions on U.S. policy and politics, visit readtangle.com.