KRATOM REGULATION GAINS MOMENTUM IN NEBRASKA AFTER DUELING BILLS INTRODUCED IN UNICAMERAL

A pair of opposing bills in the Nebraska legislature set the stage for a familiar discussion around kratom policy: Regulation vs. prohibition. 

Now that the state appears to have chosen a side, advancing the regulatory framework to the governor's desk has become a race against the legislative clock. 

At the beginning of the Nebraska legislative session, two bills were introduced: one seeking an outright ban on kratom and the other to adopt a Kratom Consumer Protection Act (KCPA). The bills had a joint hearing in January before the KCPA bill advanced, and the attempted ban remained stuck in the process. 

With less than three months left on the legislative calendar, advocates hope there will be enough time and legislative space to codify kratom policy in the Cornhusker State after years of debate. 

The bill to ban kratom was not the first effort by Sen. Loren Lippincott and remained virtually unchanged from previous years: Legislative Bill 431 would schedule all products derived from kratom leaf, or products that contain the alkaloids found in kratom, as Schedule I. In past years, efforts to schedule kratom in Nebraska have received little support, outside of Lippincott.

What is new to this year’s discussion in the Nebraska Unicameral Legislature is the introduction of a bill that would ratify a robust KCPA. Sen. Bob Hallstrom is the sponsor of Legislative Bill 230, which would regulate kratom as a dietary supplement and implement product restrictions that have been adopted in more than a dozen states across the country. 

Safety Through Regulation

Those restrictions include a cap on the potency of kratom products, a ban on synthetic alkaloids and specific label requirements for any product sold in the state. At a hearing to consider the two bills side-by-side, Hallstrom explained the KCPA in simple terms: “To provide definitions and regulations to protect consumers from untested and potentially harmful products, while allowing safe products to remain on the market.”

Lippincott offered similar testimony to his previous attempts to ban kratom, pointing to serious adverse effects that were linked to kratom and the lack of federal approval for kratom. Rather than run from that criticism, Hallstrom said there is a risk associated with kratom, but instead of banning it in all forms, he felt the best approach was to target those products that elevate those risks. 

“New, highly concentrated synthetic products claiming to be kratom or kratom derived have entered the US market,” Hallstrom said. “These products have been identified as a risk to public health by the leading kratom scientists.” 

Hallstrom was also willing to listen to industry advocates and feedback from the Judiciary Committee. Following the hearing, an amendment was filed by the committee to bring the measure back to the floor of the Nebraska Unicameral–a legislative structure with only one chamber of lawmakers. Once the bill was back on the General File, Hallstrom proposed another amendment, which was adopted alongside the amendment proposed by the committee to send the bill to the Select File after a review. 

The Select File is the final floor discussion and vote on a bill before it goes to the Final Reading. Bills can either advance from the Select File or be held indefinitely, leaving the fate of kratom regulations in the hands of the Unicameral. 

Lippincott’s measure to ban kratom has received no action since the initial hearing. Nebraska’s legislative session runs until the end of May.

Public Support for Regulation

That disparity in favor of support for the KCPA started at that hearing. A vast majority of voices who spoke about kratom supported Hallstrom’s attempt at regulation, including unlikely allies from the legal community. 

Other attempts to ban kratom have received support from lawyers who represent families suing kratom companies. In this instance, the legal community came out in opposition to legislation that would target everyday citizens. Spike Eickolt spoke on behalf of the Nebraska Criminal Defense Attorney Association and said a ban on a product with kratom’s popularity is the wrong way to control bad actors in the industry. 

“We see it as a trap on the unwary,” Eickold said. “You see it everywhere, you see it sold in stores…you’re not going to realize that what you have is now contraband.” 

Public support also came from more likely sources: Christine Vanderford was one of the handful of industry workers who showed up to let the committee know that reasonable regulation would protect those who sell kratom products. 

“We believe this regulatory structure is possible, and it’s certainly welcomed by those of us who are in the industry,” she said. 

Vanderford’s testimony echoed that of Joseph Fraas, a local shopowner whose store sells kratom products. Fraas has sold kratom products for a decade in his stores and pointed out the safety profile of products derived from natural kratom sources. A ban would favor the same bad actors who are selling dangerous products and instead target kratom consumers for using a natural supplement, Fraas said.  

“If it is banned, these good actors will not be able to compete with the bad actors,” Fraas said. “There are tens of thousands of Nebraskans who rely on the supplement who will be made felons by this government overreach, and it still will not be able to stop kratom from being used in Nebraska.”

Fraas continued: “But it will succeed in destroying Nebraska businesses, tax revenue, employment, economic activity and consumer choice.