The Swamp Strikes Back: D.C. Sneaks Hemp Ban That Hits Texas Farmers First
After forty-one days of furloughs, stalled paychecks, and shuttered government offices, the U.S. Senate late Monday finally passed H.R. 5371, the Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2026, ending the longest government shutdown since 2018. But hidden deep inside the stopgap spending bill that reopens Washington lies a provision that may devastate one of America’s fastest-growing agricultural and manufacturing industries—the hemp market.
What was meant to keep the lights on in D.C. may soon snuff out the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of farmers, processors, and small business owners across the country.
A Hidden Sting in a Lifeline Bill
The Senate approved the measure by a 60-40 vote just before midnight on November 10, ensuring that federal agencies would receive temporary funding through January 30, 2026. On paper, the legislation restores pay to federal workers, secures funding for food assistance programs, and prevents further disruptions to air travel and the military.
But tucked among those spending provisions is language that rewrites federal hemp law—with implications few Americans realize. The so-called “hemp loophole,” which since 2018 has allowed hemp-derived THC products such as delta-8 and delta-10 to be sold legally in most states, has now been effectively closed.
Under H.R. 5371, any consumable product exceeding 0.4 milligrams of total THC per serving, a threshold so low that it disqualifies nearly every existing hemp-derived THC product, will be banned nationwide. The restriction applies to edibles, beverages, tinctures, vapes, and even topicals marketed for personal or household use. Only non-intoxicating CBD and industrial hemp for fiber or seed will remain exempt.
“This Isn’t Regulation—It’s Eradication”
Within hours of passage, hemp producers across the country flooded social media with outrage. Jim Higdon, co-founder of Cornbread Hemp, called the bill “a declaration of war against an entire American industry.” Farmers in Kentucky, Tennessee, Texas, and North Carolina—many of whom had transitioned from tobacco or cotton to hemp after the 2018 Farm Bill—now face the prospect of bankruptcy.
“This isn’t regulation,” said one Texas grower, J. L., who runs a small hemp processing facility near Waco. “It’s eradication. The federal government just made my business illegal overnight.”
Industry analysts estimate the decision could wipe out more than $10 billion in annual economic activity and eliminate up to 400,000 jobs, many of them in rural communities that have few other viable cash crops… all for nothing more than a two and a half month continuing resolution. Poof. It’s all gone.
A Battle Between the Bluegrass and the Beltway
Ironically, the most heated debate came not from Democrats but from within the Republican Party. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) staged a procedural delay to block the bill, warning that the hemp provision would “obliterate” Kentucky’s hemp farmers—many of whom had relied on federal assurances since 2018 that hemp was a lawful, profitable crop.
But Paul’s effort failed. His amendment to strike the ban was tabled 76–24 after intense lobbying from Senate leadership, including Mitch McConnell, the same Kentucky senator who had shepherded hemp legalization into the 2018 Farm Bill.
McConnell, once hailed as the industry’s patron, has since become one of its fiercest critics. He now argues that the “unintended consequences” of hemp legalization—chiefly the unregulated sale of psychoactive THC derivatives in gas stations and convenience stores—have created a public health crisis.
Paul, in floor remarks before the vote, shot back that McConnell’s about-face “betrays the very farmers he once claimed to champion.”
The Texas Angle: Cruz and Cornyn Back the Ban
Both Texas Senators, Ted Cruz and John Cornyn, voted in favor of H.R. 5371. Their “Yea” votes helped secure the 60-vote threshold needed to end the shutdown—and, in doing so, endorsed the controversial hemp restrictions which has put thousands of Texas farmers out of business.
The move stunned many Texas growers who had looked to Cruz and Cornyn as defenders of market freedom and state-level autonomy. “It’s disappointing,” said one Central Texas farmer who shifted to hemp after drought destroyed his corn crop in 2023, according to High Times Magazine. “They talk about fighting big government, but this was Washington picking winners and losers. And we just lost.”
The Political Chess Behind the Hemp Ban
Supporters of the ban, including Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick and a bipartisan coalition of 38 state attorneys general, claim the new restrictions are necessary to curb youth access to intoxicating products that have flooded the market. Patrick had previously pushed for similar restrictions in Texas under Senate Bill 3, which was vetoed by Governor Greg Abbott earlier this year.
But critics suggest corporate money and political convenience played as large a role as public safety.
Documents reviewed by industry watchdogs show major beer and spirits lobbies have quietly funneled campaign donations to lawmakers who supported the hemp restrictions. Hemp-infused seltzers and THC beverages have been eating into alcohol sales, and the new federal limit—0.4 mg per serving—essentially eliminates that competition.
“The alcohol lobby couldn’t regulate us out of existence at the state level,” said Higdon, “so they went to Washington.”
Economic Fallout Already Underway
The hemp sector, which ballooned from a niche market to a $30 billion industry in just seven years, now faces a regulatory cliff. Distributors and manufacturers that invested heavily in delta-8 and delta-10 production facilities may be forced to shutter within months.
“We’ll lose 70% of our revenue,” said C. M., owner of a hemp beverage company in Austin. “We employ local people. We pay taxes. Now Washington has lumped us in with drug cartels.”
Even as markets reel, state officials warn of ripple effects far beyond small business closures. Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller, who has supported hemp as a diversification crop, said in a statement that “federal overreach like this punishes responsible farmers and rewards black markets.”
The ban’s 90-day implementation window gives agencies until February 2026 to issue enforcement rules. The FDA and DEA will jointly determine which cannabinoids are deemed “naturally occurring” and which are prohibited. Businesses caught in the gray area could face criminal penalties for noncompliance.
Political Consequences on the Horizon
Strategists are already warning that the move could alienate younger and libertarian-leaning voters ahead of the 2026 midterms. A Gallup poll from November 2025 found that only 40% of Republicans still support marijuana legalization, but nearly 70% of voters under 40 favor looser restrictions on cannabis and hemp.
“The GOP just handed the Democrats a culture-war gift,” one Republican campaign consultant said privately. “You can’t preach free markets and then destroy an entire industry because a beer company made a few phone calls.”
Still, the political establishment appears unmoved. President Trump has not publicly commented on the hemp ban but is expected to sign H.R. 5371 into law, given his administration’s emphasis on “law and order” and curbing intoxicating products.
The Road Ahead
The House is expected to approve the bill swiftly, eager to claim credit for ending the shutdown before Thanksgiving. Once signed, the hemp restrictions will take effect within three months, leaving the industry little time to adjust.
In Kentucky, Texas, and dozens of other states, warehouses filled with unsold hemp beverages and gummies may soon become evidence in federal enforcement actions.
What began in 2018 as a bipartisan success story—an effort to revive rural economies and replace illicit markets with legitimate commerce—has ended in yet another cautionary tale of Washington politics.
The Senate’s passage of H.R. 5371 may reopen the government, but in doing so, lawmakers—including both Texas senators—have closed the door on a generation of American entrepreneurs who staked their livelihoods on the promises of deregulation and innovation.
For them, the lights in Washington may be back on—but the future of the Republican Party just went dark.
Austin
Texas GOP Wants Closed Primaries. New Secretary of State Robert Howden Is Preparing to Fight Them.
Austin, TX – Texas Republicans spent years demanding control of their own primary. Now they have a new Secretary of State, Robert S. Howden, appointed by Republican Governor Greg Abbott, and the man taking over the state’s election machinery is inheriting a lawsuit in which his office is expected to defend the very open primary system the GOP wants to dismantle.
The Republican Party of Texas filed the federal lawsuit in September 2025, arguing that Texas’ open primary system violates the party’s First Amendment right of association. Under the current system, Texas voters do not register by party and may choose which party’s primary to vote in during an election cycle. The GOP wants only registered Republicans participating in Republican primaries.
The case is pending in federal court in Amarillo before U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk.
And Robert S. Howden has now inherited it.
Howden Steps Into the Fight
Gov. Abbott appointed Howden as Texas’ 116th secretary of state on July 17, effective July 18. Howden previously served as Abbott’s senior adviser and director of legislative affairs and has worked in the administrations of four Republican governors. As secretary of state, he is Texas’ chief elections officer.
Abbott has been quite clear about where he stands.
At the 2026 Republican Party convention, he said Texas would eventually make clear that “only Republicans vote in Republican primaries.” Abbott has also said lawmakers “can and should be more responsive to Republicans than a judge may be,” indicating that he expects the Legislature to address the issue during the 2027 session.
But that doesn’t mean the Secretary of State’s office is supposed to simply surrender in court.
That was the position taken by Howden’s predecessor, Jane Nelson.
Nelson argued that changing Texas’ primary system was a job for the Legislature, not a federal judge. In an October 2025 statement, she said it was her responsibility to defend existing election laws and that she would implement whatever changes the Legislature lawfully enacted.
The Attorney General’s office took the opposite position.
Attorney General Ken Paxton sided with the Texas GOP, asking the federal court to strike down portions of the Texas Election Code governing open primaries. According to reporting by The Texas Tribune, Nelson’s lawyers said Paxton’s office gave them less than an hour’s notice before taking the opposing position.
So the Republican Party sued the Republican-controlled state government. The Republican Attorney General joined the plaintiffs. And the Republican Secretary of State fought the lawsuit.
That’s not exactly the tidy party unity politicians like to advertise.
The Real Fight Is Over Who Controls the Nomination
The GOP argues that crossover voting allows Democrats and independents to influence Republican nominations, potentially helping candidates who are less conservative than the party base.
The lawsuit specifically pointed to the 2024 Republican primaries involving former House Speaker Dade Phelan and Rep. Gary VanDeaver. Both won their races by fewer than 800 votes, and the party argued that crossover voters helped determine the outcomes.
The party has already made closing primaries an official priority. Republicans adopted rules supporting closed primaries in 2024 and renewed that push at their 2026 convention.
But changing the system is not as simple as flipping a switch.
Texas has more than 18 million registered voters, and the state’s registration system was never designed around party registration. Moving to closed primaries could require new registration procedures, computer-system changes and a method for existing voters to establish party affiliation.
The GOP wants the courts to clear the way, preferably in time for 2028.
San Angelo, TX – San Angelo’s battle over massive data centers has moved from City Hall chambers to the ballot box, and two council members could soon have to defend their seats before voters angry about how the city has handled the projects. What began as a fight over water, power, development and transparency is now a full-blown political revolt, with recall efforts targeting Council Members Harry Thomas and Joe Self.
And the controversy comes at an interesting moment for Texas. Gov. Greg Abbott has ordered state regulators to conduct a comprehensive audit of data centers moving through the state’s electric grid interconnection process, saying the review must be completed before any data center project moves forward. ERCOT subsequently told Fox News Digital that Abbott’s directive “effectively pauses all data center projects” while the state reviews their demands on the grid.
That means the questions being shouted at San Angelo City Hall are no longer merely local complaints from residents opposed to a particular development. Texas officials are now asking some of the same questions.
Abbott directed the Public Utility Commission of Texas and ERCOT to examine pending data center projects and gather information, including projected annual and peak electricity demand, water consumption, water sources, and whether facilities intend to generate some of their own electricity. ERCOT reported that roughly 90 percent of the 474 gigawatts of large-load interconnection requests currently under review are associated with data centers, more than five times Texas’ record peak electricity demand.
Back in San Angelo, the San Angelo Data Center Citizen Coalition has been pushing its own accountability campaign.
A petition seeking the recall of Council Member Harry Thomas, who represents Single Member District 3, was submitted July 15 with more than the required signatures. The city clerk later certified the petition after determining 53 signatures were sufficient, clearing the way for a recall election.
Following public comment, the City Council voted 6-1 to call the recall election.
Thomas has maintained that he has no intention of resigning.
“I weigh every decision I’ve ever made on behalf of the 100,000 citizens in San Angelo,” Thomas said after the petition was submitted. “Every time I vote, I vote for all the citizens. I have no plans to resign from my position.”
Self is now facing his own recall effort.
The coalition submitted an affidavit seeking Self’s recall and subsequently collected the signatures necessary to move forward. On Aug. 6, Self issued a statement saying he supports residents’ right to seek a recall but rejected what he described as misinformation about his involvement with data centers.
“I have not signed any non-disclosure agreements,” Self said. “I have not benefited financially. I have not voted in favor of a data center.”
Self said the council has instead voted on regulations that would apply if a data center is established in San Angelo.
That distinction between approving a specific project and approving regulations governing potential projects has become one of the central arguments in the political fight. San Angelo officials have considered rules addressing land use, water and wastewater issues as the city confronts proposals for large-scale data center development.
The proposed Skybox project has become particularly contentious. City officials have described it as a potential $7.2 billion investment, while opponents have raised concerns about water consumption, electricity demand, infrastructure, noise and transparency surrounding the development process.
The political consequences are spreading beyond San Angelo.
Residents in Temple and Granbury have also launched recall or charter efforts amid disputes over data center development. In Temple, opponents have cited concerns about land, water consumption and heat generated by facilities. In Granbury, activists gathered signatures seeking recalls involving the mayor and most members of the City Council.
Election
Texas Senate Hopeful James Talarico Shared Pride Event Stage With 11-Year-Old Child Drag Performer
Federal Court Upholds State Limits on Minors at Adult Drag Shows
Taylor, TX – A federal appeals court has just upheld a Florida law restricting minors from attending certain adult live performances, including some drag shows. Within hours of that ruling, renewed attention was focused on Texas Democratic U.S. Senate candidate James Talarico after reports resurfaced showing he headlined a 2021 Pride fundraiser featuring an 11-year-old child drag performer promoted as one of the event’s main attractions.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled in HM Florida-ORL, LLC v. Secretary of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation, allowing Florida to enforce its law restricting minors from attending certain adult live performances. Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier announced the decision, calling it a victory for protecting children. The ruling does not prohibit drag performances for adults, but it recognizes that states may impose limits when minors are involved.
The timing has drawn renewed scrutiny to Talarico’s record as he campaigns for the U.S. Senate against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.
According to promotional materials first highlighted by the Washington Free Beacon, Talarico was a featured speaker during Taylor PRIDE’s June 26, 2021 fundraiser in Taylor, Texas. The event was organized to raise money for “rural LGBTQ communities” and included live music, Drag Story Hour, adult drag performers, and an 11-year-old performer using the stage name “Kween Kee Kee.”
Taylor PRIDE advertised the child as “the absolute cutest & youngest of our drag performers.” Promotional posts stated the child would perform a drag routine and host “Kee Kee Storytime,” where children would participate in Pride-themed craft activities. The event was held at Texas Beer Company.
Photographs published from the event show Talarico addressing attendees from the stage and posing with participants. Additional photographs and video posted publicly show Kween Kee Kee, a local preteen named Keegan, performing in a shimmering blue dress, platinum blonde wig, and theatrical makeup during what organizers described as a Youth Drag Show. One attendee shared video of the child performing the splits before the audience.
The fundraiser also featured several adult drag performers, including Brianna Brinxx, Belladonna Dior, Felecia Enspire, and a performer using the stage name Sedonya Face.
Following criticism from conservative activists who protested the event, Taylor PRIDE defended the festival on social media. The organization rejected claims that the event was sexually explicit or exploitative and encouraged the public to review photographs from the event and decide for themselves.
Talarico’s campaign did not respond to requests for comment from the Washington Free Beacon regarding his participation.
The resurfaced event adds to a broader record that Republicans have highlighted throughout Talarico’s political career. While serving in the Texas House, Talarico opposed legislation restricting drag performances in the presence of children and argued lawmakers should avoid harming what he described as Texas’ drag performers. He has also opposed Republican-backed legislation restricting certain transgender medical treatments for minors and has frequently spoken in support of LGBTQ causes.
More recently, however, Talarico has attempted to present himself as a more moderate statewide candidate. He has described previous remarks, including referring to God as “nonbinary,” as “cringey” and has removed some progressive messaging from campaign materials as he seeks to broaden his appeal beyond Democratic primary voters.
The renewed attention comes as cultural debates surrounding children and drag performances continue playing out both politically and legally. Florida’s appellate court victory represents one of the most significant recent rulings supporting a state’s authority to restrict minors from attending certain adult-oriented live performances, even as litigation over similar laws continues elsewhere.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login