House Status:
Senate Status:
Senate Status:
Minutes for HB2400 - Committee on Federal and State Affairs
Short Title
Creating the kratom consumer protection act.
Minutes Content for Thu, Jan 30, 2020
Chairperson Barker opened the hearing on HB2400. Jason Long, Revisor, provided an overview of the bill (Attachment 1). Representative Eplee had a question for the Revisor regarding who would be doing the quality assurance. The revisor stated that he would presume inspections would be pursuant to the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
Chairperson Barker recognized Pete Candland as a proponent on behalf of the American Kratom Association (Attachment 2) (Attachment 2A) (Attachment 2B) (Attachment 2C). Kratom is a plant grown in Southeast Asia that is ground up and put in coffee, tea or juice. It is used for pain management or a mild mood boost. It is not an opioid and does not provide any type of reinforcing euphoric effect. It does not impact the respiratory system and it is not highly addictive. It is about as addictive as coffee or caffeine. The FDA tried, but failed, to get the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to classify it as a Schedule I substance. The American Kratom Association supports the Kratom Consumer Protection Act. It would protect consumers by banning adulterated kratom products, would require vendors to put proper labeling on their products, and prohibit the sale of kratom to anyone under the age of 18. Questions were asked by Representatives Ruiz, Humphries, Arnberger, Eplee, and Smith.
Chairperson Barker stated that kratom is legal in Kansas. The only thing this bill does is create a Kratom Consumer Protection Act. He talked to the KBI about this, and although they are against kratom, they think it is a good bill.
Chairperson Barker stated that there was written proponent testimony from Jeff Zimmerman (Attachment 3); Michael Webb (Attachment 4); and Sarah Storment (Attachment 5).
Chairperson Barker recognized Kenneth Titus, who testified as an opponent on behalf of the Kansas Department of Agriculture (KDA) (Attachment 6). He stated that they are not opposed to regulation of kratom as a substance. However, the way the bill is written causes them some concern. Kratom is typically advertised as having some medicinal benefit, and that creates a fuzzy line with FDA rules. There are also concerns about the makeup and adulteration of the products. The KDA is not equipped to handle the regulation of kratom. There is also no licensing regime attached to this bill. Without licensing, they don't know who is selling or making the product. Enforcement is another issue. Questions were asked by Representatives Resman, Karleskint, Carpenter, Eplee, Highberger, Jacobs, and Lusk.
There being no further conferees, Chairperson Barker closed the hearing on HB2400.
