| For Immediate ReleaseJanuary 31, 2002
 Contact Adam Eidinger / Mintwood 
                          Media at (202) 986-6186 DEA HEAD CLARIFIES NEW RULE ON HEMP 
                          FOODAsa Hutchinson Says Final Rule Has Not Been 
                          Promulgated
 WASHINGTON, DC — Drug Enforcement 
                          Administration (DEA) head Asa Hutchinson appeared on the National Public Radio program Public 
                          Interest this week with Vote Hemp President Eric 
                          Steenstra to discuss the DEA's new "Interpretive 
                          Rule" which bans safe and nutritious hemp foods 
                          containing "any THC." The DEA issued this 
                          rule despite the fact that the trace infinitesimal THC 
                          present in Congressionally-exempted hemp seed and oil 
                          is thousands of times below the psychoactive threshold 
                          and poses no threat to drug-testing programs under the 
                          hemp industry's TestPledge program (see http://www.TestPledge.com).
 Mr. Hutchinson's appearance was the first 
                          time he has publicly defended the controversial new 
                          rule that has spawned protests at DEA offices in 76 
                          cities, a high-profile legal confrontation with the 
                          hemp industry, a $20 million NAFTA lawsuit, and criticism 
                          from thousands of hemp food consumers. To read more 
                          about the "Interpretive Rule" issued on October 
                          9, 2001 and other related documents, please visit http://www.VoteHemp.com/legal_cases_DEA.html. Mr. Hutchinson clarified for the first 
                          time that the new rule is not necessarily final and 
                          could be changed following a complete review of the 
                          public comments. "The Interpretive Rule puts the 
                          public and companies on notice as to how we're going 
                          to apply and interpret the law... But we seek comments 
                          on it and we are obliged and should consider these comments, 
                          and after we evaluate those comments we can issue a 
                          Final Rule that will discuss the comments from the public, 
                          make any adjustments that are reasonably justified and 
                          necessary, and then that Final Rule will be implemented," 
                          said Mr. Hutchinson. When asked if the rule has been 
                          "promulgated" yet, the DEA Administrator said 
                          "No."  "We're pleased that the DEA appears 
                          to be backpedaling from enforcing their rule, but they 
                          are misinterpreting the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) 
                          period, which clearly exempts sterilized hemp seed and 
                          oil. We will not stop our grassroots, legal and legislative 
                          efforts to ensure nutritious hemp foods remain on over 
                          10,000 store shelves until this rule is invalidated 
                          and set aside by either the Court, Congress or the DEA 
                          itself," said Mr. Steenstra. Despite explicit language in the CSA that 
                          exempts hemp seed and oil from the DEA's control under 
                          the statutory definition of marijuana (exactly like 
                          the exemption for poppy seeds under the statutory definition 
                          of opium poppy), Mr. Hutchinson continues to wildly 
                          misinterpret the law. "There is no such exemption 
                          for any part of the Cannabis plant that contains THC. 
                          We are bound by the law," said Hutchinson.  "I don't know what law he is reading; 
                          he is simply wrong," says Steenstra. "The 
                          DEA doesn't want to admit that in the exact same section 
                          as the poppy seed exemption there is an exemption for 
                          hemp seeds and oil. This duplicity leaves hemp companies 
                          no choice but to look to the courts to invalidate the 
                          DEA's rule." During the program, Mr. Hutchinson admitted, 
                          "We have received thousands and thousands of comments 
                          on this ... clearly the public and the industry has 
                          submitted their comments and (they) will be considered 
                          before any Final Rule is adopted." After receiving 
                          numerous hostile calls from listeners, Hutchinson said 
                          "At the DEA, we certainly are not against the hemp 
                          industry. We're against THC which is what we are concerned 
                          about under the law."  Steenstra, clearly frustrated, repeatedly 
                          pointed out to Hutchinson that the THC defined in the 
                          CSA is defined as synthetic THC only, and has nothing 
                          to do with the infinitesimal trace natural THC present 
                          in the exempted hemp seed and oil. Hutchinson had no 
                          explanation for why the DEA is not similarly trying 
                          to override the poppy seed exemption because of its 
                          trace opiate content, even though the separate definition 
                          in the CSA for opiates, unlike THC, refers to natural 
                          as well as synthetic.  Listen to the show by visiting http://www.wamu.org/pi/index.html. 
                          The show is listed under Wednesday, January 30th, 2002. 
                          Visit www.VoteHemp.com to read court 
                          documents and numerous scientific 
                          studies concerning hemp foods. For more information, or to arrange interviews 
                          with representatives of the hemp industry, please call 
                          Adam Eidinger at 202-986-6186 or 202-744-2671 (cell). END   |