Why is the U.S. Govt. so against growing hemp for commercial purposes?

Question

With no T.H.C. in it,using hemp as in w.w.II days for rope.But utilizing it for particle board (10 times stronger than oak.) Ethanol produces more than corn does.Pellets for pellet stoves,could save on the deforestation of the land from firewood.Clothing,hemp oil, etc.It's insane that we could produce this for all of these financial and ecological reasons but don't!Why are they so against it?You can't get high off it,it has no t.h.c. it could be a huge farm crop.

Answer 1

i answered the same question 5 minutes ago ,and here it is

HEMP CREATES:
Ships and Sails
Textiles & Fabrics
Fiber & Pulp Paper
Rope, Twine & Cordage
Art Canvas
Paints & Varnishes
Lighting Oil
Biomass Energy
Medicine
Food Oils & Protein
Building Materials & Housing
Smoking, Leisure & Creativity
Economic Stability, Profit & Free Trade

there is a whole range of medicinal values as well ,

for treating neurotics ,and it helps ,chronic astma cases,in Mexico the old people use it in rubbing alcohol to relieve arthrites and other bodely pains

Marijuana also rescues tired or exhausted and compacted soils ,after cattle or mono cultures have had their way,
the deep roots open compacted soils and the plant releases nitrogen ,and it thrives in all sorts of conditions .

jeans used to be made out of Hemp fibre a far more superior material,then anything else because it does not burn ,or scorch,,just this is a huge business

a magical plant
except for one thing and this is why there contiues to be a war against marijuana to the death

WHY
look at some the articles mentioned ,and who produces the alternatives ,and who owns the source industries .

until 1920 USA and Mexico were huge producers of hemp fibre ,
then the oil business .and specifically synthetic material came on the market (under Free mason control)
and instantly the mayor competition to synthetics was oficially eliminated ,and will not easily return to the market as long as the illuminati are in control

in Holland and Africa farmers can obtain a special licence to grow marijuana for fibre ,which incidently is not the same plants that is comercial for drugs or medicens,but it is the same plant that is good for everything else you mention

all American Presidents have fanatically and doggedly remained fixed in their war against Marijuana when there have been countless reports and studies that proved that the plant was more beneficial than bad ,Alcohol claims far more deaths and social disorder than Marjuana ever will

and tobacco must be the worst from a health and addictive point of view

but only recently Bush was in Mexico to strengthen the war ,but he has alteriar motives ,the marijuana is only the accepted excuse

Answer 2

The reason the government is against growing hemp for commercial purposes, I believe, is pure politics. But I think you have to look at this question on two levels... the national level and the state level. At the national level, the Republican's want to make a statement -- "we're against drugs" -- in every form... even though hemp is not a drug, the perception is that it is. The Democrats, I guess, have other battles to fight.

Where is gets interesting is at the state level. Something like 16 states have passed laws legalizing the production/cultivation of hemp. Local politicians listen very closely to their constituents... and many are farmers. Farmers in the US are living right now on government subsidies and they would love to grow a profitable crop. In Canada and most other parts of the world, it's legal to grow hemp. But because we are so close to Canada, it is very easy for the US farmer to see how the Canadian hemp farmer is making money by growing hemp. Also, in many states, the fathers of the current farmers grew hemp. So its hard for farmers to accept that it is illegal to grow a crop in the US that is grown in Canada and many other countries, is imported into the US in every conceivable form, is a great rotation crop, grows almost year round and can be grown in every state, is profitable, and has a high demand. So farmers are putting pressure on local politicians, they are passing laws legalizing it, but the DEA (i believe) has to issue a permit and they are never going to do this with the Republicans in office.

I think once there is a Democratic President, there is a decent chance the DEA will issue permits, probably under some restrictions... test plots for research only or limiting the number of acres per farmer.

There are two main groups that strongly oppose the legalization of hemp farming in the US. The police unions and the teachers unions. These two groups killed a bill to legalize hemp farming in California in 2006. The bill had passed both the state house and sentate and then Gov. Schwartzenager veto'd it because of the pressure from teachers and police unions.

Long-term I think it will become legal as more and more people understand the benefits of hemp. There are so many uses of hemp and so many benefits that the use of hemp products will only increase. As we import more products made of hemp, and as more people use hemp, and as more stories about the benefits of hemp get out, the baseless, ignorant and false arguments against growing hemp will not be able to overcome the reality of the benefits of growing hemp domestically. But it is a combination of several things that have to come together at the same time to put pressure on federal officials to find a way to issue the permits to allow hemp farming... if the information about the benefits, uses and history of hemp is widely available, if the economics of farming hemp are overwhelmingly favorable, and if the politicians have the courage and willpower... it will happen... one day. Hopefully soon. In the meantime... spread the word! Thanks for asking this great question!

Answer 3

it is all approximately marijuana nevertheless, isn't it? I only examine slightly writing asserting the way it is no longer a "victimless" factor because of the fact the money is going to the violence in Mexico. What a crock. authentic, yet in ordinary terms because of the fact someone can get busted for turning out to be some flowers for private use. forty years in the past we've been giggling at a action picture called Reefer insanity (tell your infants). it is insane. this might properly be an hassle-free weed you possibly can advance under only approximately any circumstances and it won't be able to circulate away. thus far as i will tell, great $hitloads of money are being spent with a view to rigidity greater $hitloads of money into the arms of violent criminals. that's what the conflict against pot, after 70+ years, has all come all the way down to. it is authentic that potheads do no longer accomplish plenty, yet they do no longer reason plenty trouble the two. we don't could tax it with a view to attain an monetary income; all we could do is decriminalize it. I heard on the radio this morning that Kellogg has lost greater over the Phelps flap than it did over the peanut salmonella concern. "Off the container" is a sparkling word which ability to lose a place or status because of the fact of stupid habit however the definition is changing to intend a stupid promotion and marketing determination. That exchange into the funniest factor I heard in an prolonged time.

Answer 4

I guess the answer would be in the same question as to why these companies have to buy wheat from China when our country is chock full of wheat farms. ?? It makes sense, it would make money for the US...then again, we're trying to find logic in an illogical government. It has to come down to the almighty dollar...it usually does.

Answer 5

Its prohibited by the Church, the real US Govt.