You are here: Home > Hemp News and Legislation > U.S. Legislation > California Industrial Hemp Bill > California
AB 684 passed the Senate by a vote of 26-13 on September 11th, 2008 The Senate changed the bill from a statewide hemp farming bill to a five-year pilot program in four counties — Imperial, Kings, Mendocino and Yolo. The Assembly needed to agree to the amendments that were made in the Senate. This was done on the next day, September 12th, and the vote was 46-29. The bill was sent to the Governor for his signature and was vetoed on October 11th. The Gubenator vetoed a watered-down version of the bill in 2009 as well. The HIA was led to believe, after a meeting with him in Sacramento, that he would sign the bill. He did not. We think that he had or has aspirations of a Senate run, and that supporting an Industrial Hemp bill might be perceived as political suicide. He's dead wrong. He might have a better chance of election if he supported the bill.
During a conversation with Ralph Nadir in Washington DC (at the Green Festival) in October 2009, he pointed to Capitol Hill and said, "...they're all f.... cowards. I've supported industrial hemp for 20 years...."
See more about HR 1866 (Ron Paul/Barney Frank Congressional Industrial Hemp Bill)
Read below about California.

Recent California Legislation
Bill AB 1147 introduced by Assemblymen Mark Leno(D) (San Francisco), and Check Devore(R) (Newport Beach) in 2006. It passed both the Calif. State Assembly, Senate, and Senate Agriculture committee. The Governor of California, in his infinite wisdom, vetoed this important bill in October 2006, was re-introduced in 2007 and was called AB 684. Again, in October, 2007, the governor vetoed this watered-down version. We suspect he wants to run for the US Senate, and did not want to be perceived as being "pro-pot". He's simply out of touch with the people of California. A 2007 poll showed that approx. 75% of Californians are in favor of legalizing industrial hemp. He knows in his heart of heart that the "rope is not the dope", but lacked the courage to legalize this vitally important plant. Hopefully a true environmentalist with the guts to do what is right will become the next governor. Below is a reprint, courtesy of Votehemp.com California Legislature Passes Industrial Hemp Bill for Second Time in Two Years AB 684 Would Allow Farmers to Grow Non-Drug Varieties of Cannabis New Compromise Legislation is Ripe for Governor's Support SACRAMENTO, CA — Last night, California's Senate and Assembly each voted to approve AB 684, the California Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2007. The legislation gives some California farmers the right to grow non-psychoactive industrial hemp which is commonly used in everything from food, clothing, paper and body care to bio-fuel and even auto parts. The bill now goes to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger for his signature. The text of the legislation can be found online. AB 684 was authored by Assemblyman Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) and Assemblyman Chuck DeVore (R-Irvine). Thanks to their leadership, this is the second time in two years that a bi-partisan hemp farming bill has passed the legislature. Last year, Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed a similar bill, AB 1147. The new version of the bill addresses his concerns. "The new legislation significantly limits the scope of hemp farming to just four agricultural counties, includes a sunset provision, and contains rules on testing crops to ensure the industrial hemp contains less than 3/10 of 1% (0.3%) THC," says Vote Hemp legal council and San Francisco attorney Patrick Goggin. "This bill is a response to the Governor's detailed explanation of his veto last year. Everyone knows hemp farming is consistent with California's efforts to be a leader on U.S. environmental policy. We believe this new hemp legislation is deserving of the Governor's signature," adds Goggin. Farmers would only be able to grow industrial hemp as a pilot program in four counties — Imperial, Kings, Mendocino and Yolo. Sales of industrial hemp products, especially in the food and body care markets, are skyrocketing, prompting the TODAY Show to dub hemp "a hot food trend" for 2007. Exports from Canada of hemp seed grew 300% between 2006 and 2007. Today more than 30 industrialized nations grow industrial hemp and export it to the U.S. Hemp is the only crop that is illegal for American farmers to grow yet legal to import. There is strong support for hemp in California. A telephone poll of likely California voters, taken from February 22-26 of this year, showed a total of 71% (+/- 3.5%) support changes to state law that would allow farmers to grow hemp. The survey was conducted by the respected research firm Zogby International on behalf of Vote Hemp and five manufacturers of hemp food products, including ALPSNACK, French Meadow Bakery, Living Harvest, Nature's Path Organic Foods and Nutiva. Poll questions and results regarding industrial hemp farming policy and consumer attitudes on hemp products and nutrition can be viewed online. See: Industrial hemp’s double dividend: a study for the USA BILL ANALYSIS _ AB 1147 _ Page 1 CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS AB 1147 (Leno) As Amended August 7, 2006 Majority vote _ ----------------------------------------------------------------- |ASSEMBLY: |44-32|(January 26, |SENATE: |26-13|(August 16, | | | |2006) | | |2006) | ----------------------------------------------------------------- _ _ _ Original Committee Reference: _ PUB. S. _ _ SUMMARY _ : Clarifies the definition of "marijuana" contained in the Uniformed Controlled Substance Act (CSA) to exclude industrial hemp. _ The Senate amendments _ : 1)Include in the definition of "industrial hemp" the seeds produced from non-psychoactive varieties of the plant Cannabis sativa L. 2)Delete the requirement that the industrial hemp be cultivated from seeds originating in the State of California. 3)Require the industrial hemp be cultivated only from seeds imported in accordance with the laws of the United States (U.S.) or from seeds grown in California from feral plants, cultivated plants, or plants grown in a research setting. 4)Mandate a person who grows industrial hemp prior to the harvest of each crop to obtain a laboratory test report indicating the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) levels of a random sampling of the dried flowering tops of the industrial hemp grown. 5)Require a laboratory test report be issued by a laboratory registered with the federal Drug Enforcement Administration to state the percentage content of THC, and indicate the date and location of samples taken. 6)Specify that if the laboratory test report indicates a percentage content of THC that is equal to or less than three-tenths of 1%, the words "PASSED AS CALIFORNIA INDUSTRIAL _ AB 1147 _ Page 2 HEMP" shall appear at or near the top of the laboratory test report. If the laboratory test report indicates a percentage content of THC that is greater than three-tenths of 1%, the words "FAILED AS CALIFORNIA INDUSTRIAL HEMP" shall appear at or near the top of the laboratory test report. 7)Provide that the person who grows industrial hemp shall retain a copy of the laboratory test report for two years from its date of sampling, make the laboratory test report available to law enforcement officials upon request, and shall provide a copy of the laboratory test report to each person purchasing, transporting, or otherwise obtaining the oil, cake, or seed of the plant. 8)Clarify that notwithstanding the provisions of this bill, a person may not engage in the cultivation, production, or possession of resin, flowering tops, or leaves that have been removed from the field of cultivation and separated from the other constituent parts of the industrial hemp plant unless it is necessary for a grower, agent of a grower, employee or agent of an employee of a laboratory registered with the federal Drug Enforcement Administration to perform the laboratory testing provided by this bill. 9)Except conduct in accordance with the laws of the U.S. from the prohibition against transportation or sale across state borders of seed of any variety of Cannabis sativa L. that is capable of germination. 10)Provide that all industrial hemp seed sold for planting in California shall be from a crop having no more than three-tenths of 1% THC contained in a random sampling of the dried flowering tops and tested, as specified. 11)State sampling shall occur as practicable when the THC content of the leaves surrounding the seeds is at its peal and shall commence as the seeds being to mature, when the first seeds of approximately 50% of the plants are resistant to compression. 12)Provide that the entire fruit-bearing part of the plant including the seeds shall be used as a sample. The sample cut shall be made directly underneath the inflorescence found in the top one-third of the plant. _ AB 1147 _ Page 3 13)Specify if the required laboratory test report indicated a percentage content of the THC that is greater than three-tenths of 1% and does not exceed 1%, the person who grows industrial hemp shall submit additional samples for testing. 14)Require a person to destroy industrial hemp grown upon receipt of a first laboratory test report indicating a percentage content of THC that exceeds 1% or a second laboratory test report, as specified, indicating a percentage content of THC that exceeds three-tenth of 1%. The destruction shall take place as soon as practicable but no later than 45 days after the receipt of a laboratory test report that requires crop destruction. 15)State crop destruction, as defined, shall not apply to industrial hemp grown in a research setting if the destruction of the industrial hemp grown will impede the development of types of industrial hemp that will comply with the three-tenths of 1% THC limit, as specified. 16)Make clarifying, technical amendments. _ EXISTING LAW _ : 1)Provides that "marijuana" is all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of the plant; and, every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant, its seeds or resin. It does not include the mature stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the mature stalks (except the resin extracted there from), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of the plant which is incapable of germination. 2)States that except as authorized by law, every person who possesses any concentrated cannabis shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not more than $500, by both such fine and imprisonment, or shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison. _ AB 1147 _ Page 4 _ AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY _ , this bill: 1)Defined "industrial hemp" as an agricultural field crop limited to the non-psychoactive varieties of the of the plant Cannabis sativa L., having no more than three-tenths of 1% THC contained in the dry flowering tops and cultivated from seeds originating in California, and processed exclusively for the purpose of producing the mature stalks of the plant and by-products of the stalk and seed. 2)Stated that nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize the cultivation, production, or possession of resin, flowering tops, or leaves that have been removed from the field of cultivation and separated from the other constituent parts of the industrial hemp plant. 3)Prohibited the transportation and/or sale of a seed capable of germination across state lines of any variety of Cannabis sativa L. and any cultivation of the industrial hemp plant that is not grown in a research setting or as an agricultural field crop. 4)Found and declared the following: a) Industrial hemp is produced in at least 30 nations including Canada, Britain, France, Germany, Romania, Australia, and China and is used by industry to produce thousands of products including: paper; textiles; food; oils; automotive parts; and, personal care products; b) The U.S. Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit has ruled in _ Hemp Industries v. Drug Enforcement Administration _ that the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 explicitly excludes non-psychoactive hemp from the definition of marijuana, and the federal government has declined to appeal that decision.; c) The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. Section 812(b)) specifies the findings to which the government must attest in order to classify a substance as a Schedule I Drug and those findings include that the substance has a high potential for abuse, has no accepted medical use, and has a lack of accepted safety for use, none of which apply _ AB 1147 _ Page 5 to industrial hemp; d) According to a study commissioned by the Hemp Industries Association, sales of industrial hemp products have grown steadily since 1990 to more than $250 million in 2005, increasing at a rate of approximately $26 million per year; and, e) California manufacturers of hemp products currently import from around the world tens of thousands of acres worth of hemp seed, oil, and fiber products that could be produced by California farmers at a more competitive price and intermediate processing of hemp seed, oil, and fiber could create jobs in close proximity to the fields of cultivation. _ FISCAL EFFECT _ : According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs. _ COMMENTS _ : According to the author, "While hemp fiber, oil and non-viable seed are used by many sectors of the economy for a variety of purposes, the Federal Government restricts the growing of hemp and the sale of viable hemp seed." "In 1937, the United States Government mistakenly categorized hemp with marijuana due to their physical similarities and the fact that hemp contains THC (although hemp contains only a negligible amount of the chemical). Hemp has so little THC that it physically cannot be used as an intoxicant and is 100% safe for the consumer. Because hemp has no psychoactive properties, the Federal Government has allowed hemp products of every kind to be manufactured and sold in the United States. Californians can buy hemp clothing and food products in stores throughout the state, but state law is silent on the legality of growing hemp in California for in-state commerce." Please see the policy committee analysis for full discussion of this bill. _ Analysis Prepared by _ : Kimberly Horiuchi / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744 _ AB 1147 _ Page 6 FN: 0015953