Blog

Congressional Deal Would Ban Many Hemp THC Products, While Excluding Provisions To Let VA Doctors Recommend Medical Marijuana

Newly released spending legislation negotiated by congressional leaders would federally recriminalize many hemp-derived products. It also excludes provisions previously passed by the House and Senate that would have allowed Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) doctors to begin issuing medical marijuana recommendations to their patients.

The new measure, if enacted into law, would ban certain hemp products that were legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill signed into law by President Donald Trump during his first term.

The negotiated bill “prevents the unregulated sale of intoxicating hemp-based or hemp-derived products, including Delta-8, from being sold online, in gas stations, and corner stores, while preserving non-intoxicating CBD and industrial hemp products,” a summary published on Sunday by the Senate Appropriations Committee says.

Under current law, cannabis products are considered legal hemp if they contain less than 0.3 percent delta-9 THC on a dry weight basis.

The new legislation specifies that, within one year of enactment, the weight would apply to total THC—including delta-8 and other isomers. It would also include “any other cannabinoids that have similar effects (or are marketed to have similar effects) on humans or animals as a tetrahydrocannabinol (as determined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services).”

The new definition of legal hemp would additionally ban “any intermediate hemp-derived cannabinoid products which are marketed or sold as a final product or directly to an end consumer for personal or household use” as well as products containing cannabinoids that are synthesized or manufactured outside of the cannabis plant or not capable of being naturally produced by it.

Legal hemp products would be limited to a total of .4 milligrams of total THC or any other cannabinoids with similar effects.

Within 90 days of the bill’s enactment, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other agencies would need to publish list of “all cannabinoids known to FDA to be capable of being naturally produced by a Cannabis sativa L. plant, as reflected in peer reviewed literature,” “all tetrahydrocannabinol class cannabinoids known to the agency to be naturally occurring in the plant” and “all other know cannabinoids with similar effects to, or marketed to have similar effects to, tetrahyrocannabinol class cannabinoids.”

The deal was agreed to by Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-ME) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), the ranking minority member on the panel, as well as House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-OK). But Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), the top Democrat on the House panel, did not sign off.

The language slightly differs from provisions included in legislation that had previously advanced out of the House and Senate Appropriations panels, which would have banned products containing any “quantifiable” amount of THC, to be determined by the HHS secretary and secretary of agriculture.

Separately, the newly released appropriations legislation excludes language that had been passed by either chamber earlier this year to let VA doctors recommend medical cannabis to their military veteran patients in states where it is legal.

Keep reading

Trump administration demands states ‘undo’ full SNAP payouts as states warn of ‘catastrophic impact’

President Donald Trump’s administration is demanding states “undo” full SNAP benefits paid out under judges’ orders last week, now that the U.S. Supreme Court has stayed those rulings, marking the latest swing in a seesawing legal battle over the anti-hunger program used by 42 million Americans.

The demand from the U.S. Department of Agriculture came as more than two dozen states warned of “catastrophic operational disruptions” if the Trump administration does not reimburse them for those SNAP benefits they authorized before the Supreme Court’s stay.

Nonprofits and Democratic attorneys general sued to force the Trump administration to maintain the program in November despite the ongoing government shutdown. They won the favorable rulings last week, leading to the swift release of benefits to millions in several states, and the Trump administration belatedly said the program could continue.

On Friday night, however, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson temporarily paused the two rulings ordering the SNAP disbursement while the nation’s highest court considered the Trump administration’s appeal. That led the Department of Agriculture on Saturday to write state SNAP directors to warn them it now considers payments under the prior orders “unauthorized.”

States could face penalties for paying benefits

“To the extent States sent full SNAP payment files for November 2025, this was unauthorized,” Patrick Penn, deputy undersecretary of Agriculture, wrote to state SNAP directors. “Accordingly, States must immediately undo any steps taken to issue full SNAP benefits for November 2025.”

Penn warned that states could face penalties if they did not comply. It was unclear if the directive applies to states that used their own funds to keep the program alive or to ones relying on federal money entirely. The Department of Agriculture did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In a filing in federal court on Sunday, the agency said states moved too quickly and erroneously released full money SNAP Benefits after last week’s rulings.

U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, a Republican, on Sunday called the directive “shocking” if it applies to states, like hers, that used their own money to prop up the program.

“It’s one thing if the federal government is going to continue its level of appeal through the courts to say, no, this can’t be done,” Murkowski said. “But when you are telling the states that have said this is a significant enough issue in our state, we’re going to find resources, backfill or front load, whatever term you want, to help our people, those states should not be penalized.”

Keep reading

Federal Officials Revise Sentencing Guidelines For Drug Selling Convictions

New amendments to federal sentencing guidelines will put less of an emphasis on the quantity of drugs someone was charged with, and give more consideration to the scope of their role in the overall drug distribution chain. The United States Sentencing Commission implemented the amendments November 1.

Federal sentencing is calculated using a deeply convoluted scoring system that assigns a base offense level (BOL) between 1 and 43, according to how serious a conviction is perceived to be. For drug-trafficking, this is determined partly through a Drug Quantity Table that uses the number of grams involved to assign a BOL that—prior to the new amendments—could be between 6 and 38. But about two out of three people were being sentenced using a BOL of between 30 and 38.

The fixation with quantity as the biggest factor in how serious each case made it easy to prosecute local distributors as if they were high-level members of drug trafficking organizations. Neighborhood sellers who might only deal in relatively small quantities could still be assigned a BOL for much larger quantities, if the number was measured over a long period of time or manipulated in other ways.

The length of someone’s prison sentence also depends on other factors like prior convictions, but a higher BOL correlates to a longer sentence. For a BOL of 37 or higher, the upper end of the sentencing range can be life in prison, depending on the person’s criminal-legal history.

Now, BOL will be capped at 32 for people determined to have a “mitigating role” in the violation—meaning those at the lower end of the supply chain—and the USSC is supporting a broader application of that standard. A BOL of 32 means a sentencing range of roughly between 10 and 22 years.

“An adjustment…is generally warranted if the defendant’s primary function in the offense was plainly among the lowest level of drug trafficking functions, such as serving as a courier, running errands, sending or receiving phone calls or messages, or acting as a lookout,” state the guidelines. “[Or] if the defendant’s primary function in the offense was performing another low-level trafficking function, such as distributing controlled substances in user-level quantities for little or no monetary compensation or with a primary motivation other than profit.”

Primary motivations other than profit could include personal relationships, or being threatened or coerced. The USSC is still considering whether to apply the adjustment retroactively.

Keep reading

FIREWORKS! “DO NOT ANSWER THAT!” – Fulton County Board of Elections Chair LOSES IT When Member Asks “Do We Have the 2020 Ballots?”

During an tense exchange at a Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections meeting on Friday, boardmembers had a revealing argument over the 2020 elections records, including ballots, which are now subject to a Department of Justice investigation as well as previous Georgia State Election Board subpoenas. 

The only question is: where are the ballots?

This was asked by the lone Republican boardmember, Julie Adams, sparking a heated debate.

Chairwoman Sherri Allen immediately interjected when Adams asked Elections Director Nadine Williams, “Do we have the 2020 ballots?”

“Miss Williams, Do not answer that. That is a matter that is currently, I believe, in litigation as well. And Ms. Adams, you well know that as well,” Allen shot back before Adams defended her right to ask the question.

Williams contempously told Adams, “As you’ve been told several times, the ballots are in the possession of the Clerk of Superior Court. She continued, “They are physically in the Clerk of Superior Court warehouse and secured in that location. They have been there for five years.”

When Adams stated that she was told the ballots were in the County’s posession at the warehouse, Williams accused her of lying, stating, “ Nobody told you that. They are in the clerk’s posession.” Chairwoman Allen then shut the debate down, arguing that the matter is before the court and the public will just have to wait for their ruling “soon.”

The board faced numerous public comments about the outstanding questions surrounding the 2020 election and ongoing investigations by the DOJ. Prior to the exchange over 2020 ballots, Julie Adams had questioned whether decisions about the subpoenas and 2020 election are subject to backroom executive session discussions. Sherri Allen had refused to hold any further public discussion or actions on the 2020 election subpoenas when Adams asked the golden question.

Keep reading

US Freezes Arms Deliveries To NATO Allies For Ukraine Due To Shutdown

Deliveries of American arms to NATO allies, including those intended to support Ukraine, have been temporarily suspended due to the federal government shutdown. This was reported by Axios, citing sources in the US State Department.

“This is causing great harm to both our allies and partners, as well as American industry, by hampering the delivery of many of these critical capabilities abroad,” a senior State Department official told the publication.

According to sources, the delay affected deliveries of weapons such as AMRAAM missiles, Aegis systems, and HIMARS. Countries awaiting these deliveries include Denmark, Croatia, and Poland.

The freeze was caused by the forced furlough of some State Department employees. This particularly affects specialists responsible for interacting with Congress and processing export licenses.

As the official explained, last month the staff of the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, which handles U.S. arms sales abroad, was reduced to approximately a quarter of its usual level. This has significantly slowed the approval and shipment of weapons.

Keep reading

The Pipe Bomber’s Actions Were Necessary to Enable Speaker Pelosi to Certify the 2020 Election for Joe Biden

It turns out that the pipe bomber on Jan 6 was not a man, as had been assumed for more than four years.  Reports over the past 48 hours claim that the pipe bomber was a Capitol policewoman by the name of Shauni Rae Kerkhoff.  This comes after more than four years of not knowing who the pipe bomber was.

It appears that the FBI and Capitol Police were not interested in identifying the person who planted pipe bombs on the evening of January 5th near the RNC and DNC buildings in DC. Is this because the pipe bomber was one of them, and if it were found out that the Capitol Police were involved with the pipe bombs found on Jan 6, Americans would be outraged with the news?

Perhaps an even bigger reason to cover up the identity of the pipe bomber is that the planting of pipe bombs at the Capitol on the eve of Jan 6 was necessary to ensure the certification of the 2020 election for Joe Biden. 

Keep reading

IRONY: Zohran Mamdani’s Victory Party Featured a CASH Bar With Very Expensive Drinks

After months of promising the voters of New York City all kinds of free stuff, Zohran Mamdani’s post-election victory party featured a cash br with very pricey drinks. How’s that for irony?

People who showed up were probably expecting some free treats, and not just because it was a party for Mamdani. It’s pretty standard for an event like this to feature an open bar, at least for part of the evening.

This may be a metaphor for things to come under the new mayor. Won’t it be funny if that’s the case?

The New York Post reports:

Zohran Mamdani’s push to make NYC ‘affordable’ doesn’t extend to victory party — with $13 beers at pricey bar

Zohran Mamdani’s freebie-filled agenda didn’t extend to his victory night party that featured a pricey cash bar for his throngs of supporters – including $13 beers.

The jubilation at the Brooklyn Paramount was fueled by Mamdani’s win over former Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Guardian Angels founder Curtis Sliwa – as well as espresso martini coolers that reportedly cost $22 and $15 glasses of Riesling white wine.

The music venue’s menu – including PBR beers at $13, Montauk Summer Ale at $16, Indian Wells Chardonnay for $15 and shaker cup cocktails that cost as much as $22 – was posted on X by Politico reporter Jeff Coltin Tuesday night.

Hampton Water Wine cost $13 while the Paramount old fashioned went for $22 a pop.

Non-alcoholic drinks and pretzel-wrapped hot dogs were a more modest $12 and $10, respectively.

Keep reading

How Americans Want AI To Support Them

Three years after the release of ChatGPT in November 2022, there’s little remaining doubt that artificial intelligence, or AI as it’s usually referred to, will change our lives in many ways.

In some ways, it already has.

For example, people are searching the web differently, often relying on AI summaries instead of scrolling through and clicking on search results. That is, if they even use a search engine anymore and don’t just ask a large language model like ChatGPT instead.

The potential for AI tools to make our everyday lives a little easier here and there is virtually limitless, but what do people actually want AI to help them with?

Statista’s Felix Richter reports that, according to a recent survey by Statista Consumer Insights, 3 in 10 Americans want AI to act as a personal assistant to them, which it is already capable of.

Keep reading

The Fraud That Won’t Die: Obamacare’s Endless Deceptions

While the government shutdown continues and health-care reform remains gridlocked, Obamacare (the Affordable Care Act) burdens taxpayers with out-of-control costs. For more than a decade, Obamacare has been riddled with systemic fraud that has been denied by Democratic Party bureaucrats, ignored by much of the media, and paid for by weary taxpayers.

Built on lies including “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor,” Catholics continue to bitterly recall the duplicitous role that Sr. Carol Keehan, CEO of the Catholic Healthcare Association, played in passing Obamacare—despite the pushback by the Catholic bishops because of its inclusion of abortion funding and the contraception mandate. Sr. Keehan’s mendacious shepherding of the health-care program was rewarded with a silver signing pen from President Obama.

Intensifying the pressure today on an already overburdened health-care system, the influx of several million undocumented immigrants has pushed government-funded health care to a breaking point. According to an October 2024 CBO report to Rep. Jodey Arrington, federal and state governments spent $27 billion on Emergency Medicaid for noncitizens ineligible for full Medicaid coverage between 2017 and 2023. In 2023, the estimated cost of health care for undocumented immigrants in the United States was approximately $3.8 billion, specifically for Emergency Medicaid services.

Hospitals are bound by law to provide emergency services to undocumented patients under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), enacted in 1986. This is a federal law that requires hospitals to provide emergency medical care to all individuals, regardless of immigration status or ability to pay. Under EMTALA, any hospital that receives Medicare funding must conduct a medical screening exam for anyone who arrives at the emergency department and must provide stabilizing treatment for emergency medical conditions, including active labor. This mandate applies to undocumented immigrants as well as uninsured citizens and legal residents—and most of us strongly support the provision of this care to all on an emergency basis.

Unfortunately, such care is costly. According to the Trump administration, the estimated cost of emergency health care in 2024—including labor and delivery and postnatal care of the mothers and newborn babies—of undocumented immigrants in the United States rose 142 percent from the year before to an astonishing 9.1 billion dollars of taxpayer funds to pay for the emergency health care of those in the country illegally. Between 2020 to 2024, Medicaid taxpayer health-care dollars provided to illegal immigrants tripled.

Though critics argue that the Trump administration’s numbers are inflated, few challenge the fact that the nation’s hospitals are facing a fiscal crisis. In January 2024, Dr. Donna Lynne, CEO of Denver Health, publicly voiced concern over the financial strain caused by uncompensated care for undocumented individuals. Speaking at a finance and governance committee meeting, she stated, “Where do you think the migrants are getting care? They are getting care at Denver Health…It’s going to break Denver Health in a way that we didn’t even anticipate.” Her remarks highlighted the hospital system’s mounting fiscal challenges, noting that Denver Health treated over 8,000 undocumented immigrants in 2023, accounting for approximately 20,000 visits. Uncompensated care costs surged from $60 million in 2020 to $136 million in 2023.

Keep reading

Some Kids Getting Double or Triple Vaccinated, California Nurse Says

Babies and children who lack paper vaccination records sometimes receive two or three times the number of vaccines recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), according to experts who spoke with The Defender. Children whose parents immigrated to the U.S. and who don’t speak English are at the greatest risk.

Many medical providers assume that if there’s no record of a vaccination, the best way to ensure that a child receives the recommended vaccine is to readminister it, according to Rena Maculans, a registered nurse in California. “That’s the mentality of the providers,” she said.

Maculans — who spent 10 years as an emergency department (ER) nurse and later processed autism treatment claims — said urgent care and ER staff typically follow protocols that tell them to vaccinate a child if there’s no documentation of a prior vaccination.

Maculans said she followed those protocols before she realized that vaccines can cause harm. “We were all under the impression, well, if you double up on it, it’s a good thing. You have extra protection.”

Now, Maculans, whose daughter was injured by a COVID-19 vaccine, urges people to carry their immunization record with them. “That’s why I tell people, anytime you go to the doctor or urgent care, bring your immunization records with you.”

Maculans said she began piecing things together while processing medical claims for Partnership HealthPlan of California, a healthcare provider that serves over 900,000 Medi-Cal members in Northern California.

Medi-Cal is the state’s Medicaid program that provides free or low-cost health coverage for low-income individuals and families.

Maculans was a “utilization management nurse coordinator,” which meant she processed medical claims for continuation of services, including autism treatment services. It was her job to determine whether a patient should continue receiving autism treatments, including speech therapy visits, or whether the patient no longer needed the treatments.

She noticed that a highly disproportionate number of the claims were submitted by families that spoke only Spanish. In other words, more Spanish-speaking children reported having continued or increased autism symptoms that required treatment, compared to English-speaking or bilingual kids.

Knowing the link between certain vaccine ingredients and increased autism risk, she suspected that Spanish-speaking Medi-Cal families — such as migrant workers — may experience increased vaccinations due to language barriers and not having their children’s immunization records on hand to prove prior vaccination to medical staff.

California has among the highest autism rates in the country — 1 in 12.5 boys, according to the latest available CDC data.

Maculans acknowledged that she is speculating and that, under HIPAA laws that protect patients’ private health records, she could not take screenshots of the claims that she said would reveal the trends she observed.

Keep reading