IBJNews

Bill legalizing hemp advances after changes

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Editor's Note: This story has been corrected from an earlier version. The story now reflects that the bill must receive approval from the House and Senate before it moves to Gov. Mike Pence for consideration.

A legislative conference committee has reached a compromise on a bill geared toward legalizing the production of industrial hemp, but the deal must now get approval from both the House and Senate.

The House of Representatives had previously amended the bill to cover a broader spectrum of hemp production and its uses, including fuel manufacturing. However, the committee, including the bill’s authors, Sen. Carlin Yoder, R-Middlebury, and Sen. Richard Young Jr., D-Milltown, decided to limit the bill strictly to the legalization of hemp.

Young said the bill is important in light of the federal government’s move toward allowing some hemp production.

“It will get us ready for when the federal government gets their act together and legalizes hemp so we can start growing the product and benefitting economically from it,” he said.

Young said hemp has great potential and could put Indiana on the map when legalized.

“I’m not sure why we would allow other countries to benefit at our expense,” he said. “It’s a travesty that we can’t benefit ourselves from it. This bill is important because now Indiana will be at the forefront when it happens.”

The bill must get final approval from the House and Senate before it moves to Gov. Mike Pence for consideration.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. PJ - Mall operators like Simon, and most developers/ land owners, establish individual legal entities for each property to avoid having a problem location sink the ship, or simply structure the note to exclude anything but the property acting as collateral. Usually both. The big banks that lend are big boys that know the risks and aren't mad at Simon for forking over the deed and walking away.

  2. Do any of the East side residence think that Macy, JC Penny's and the other national tenants would have letft the mall if they were making money?? I have read several post about how Simon neglected the property but it sounds like the Eastsiders stopped shopping at the mall even when it was full with all of the national retailers that you want to come back to the mall. I used to work at the Dick's at Washington Square and I know for a fact it's the worst performing Dick's in the Indianapolis market. You better start shopping there before it closes also.

  3. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  4. If you only knew....

  5. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

ADVERTISEMENT