Key Takeaways

• Joe Rogan accused the alcohol lobby of influencing the federal hemp ban, and lobbying records show major beer, wine, and spirits groups did push Congress to eliminate hemp-derived THC products.

• McConnell’s political career has included significant financial support from alcohol- and tobacco-connected donors, reinforcing accusations of industry influence.

• Big Alcohol has already invested heavily in the THC beverage industry, giving them strong motives to clear out unregulated hemp competitors before federal regulation arrives.

• A documented lobbying timeline shows that industry groups contacted Congress right before the hemp ban was inserted into the Farm Bill, and the bill’s language mirrors their requests.

• The hemp ban functions as a temporary prohibition that will reshape the market around corporations — not a consumer safety measure — aligning closely with Rogan’s claim.

Rogan’s Claim: What Initially Sounded Like a Rant Has Serious Backing

When Joe Rogan discussed the incoming federal hemp ban on The Joe Rogan Experience, his criticism wasn’t just about CBD access or regulatory overreach. He pointed directly at a powerful group he believes helped engineer the reversal: the American alcohol industry.

Rogan argued that alcohol lobbyists are fighting to suppress hemp-derived intoxicants because cannabis — whether smoked, eaten or consumed in beverage form — cuts directly into alcohol sales. And unlike many of his more speculative takes, this one holds up under scrutiny.

Once you follow campaign contributions, lobbying letters, corporate investments, and the legislative timeline, the hemp ban starts looking less like a public safety intervention and more like a strategic industry reset.

The McConnell Factor: From Hemp Champion to Hemp Executioner

The story begins in 2018, when Mitch McConnell spearheaded the Farm Bill that legalized hemp nationwide. His goal was to support Kentucky farmers. What he unintentionally created was a legal loophole that allowed businesses to produce intoxicating THC from hemp, launching a multi-billion-dollar industry in record time.

By 2024–2025, McConnell had completely reversed his position. He pushed aggressively to close the loophole and remove most hemp-derived THC products from the market.

This dramatic shift is more understandable when you examine the financial backdrop.

McConnell’s Alcohol-Industry Contributions

Over the course of his political career, McConnell has consistently received campaign support from alcohol and tobacco interests. In recent election cycles, PACs linked to major beverage companies — including whiskey, beer and spirits producers — have contributed to his campaigns. While no single donation is massive in isolation, the pattern across decades paints a clear picture: these industries have long-standing access to him.

McConnell’s alliance with Kentucky-based alcohol producers, particularly the bourbon industry, is well documented. Kentucky’s spirits sector is one of the state’s most powerful economic engines. Any legislation affecting intoxicating products naturally intersects with the interests of those donors and corporate partners.

This context gives Rogan’s accusation more weight.

The Alcohol Lobby Letter: The Moment Everything Shifted

Just weeks before Congress finalized the Farm Bill that included the hemp ban, a coalition representing nearly every major alcohol company in the United States sent a coordinated letter to congressional leaders. The coalition included:

• Beer Institute

• Distilled Spirits Council of the United States (DISCUS)

• Distilled Spirits Alliance

• Wine Institute

• WineAmerica

These groups collectively represent the vast majority of beer, liquor, and wine sold in the U.S.

Their message was carefully calibrated. They claimed they did not want prohibition. Instead, they urged Congress to remove hemp-derived THC products from the market until federal regulation is created.

Functionally, that is prohibition — just framed in more acceptable language.

And here’s the key point:

The language in the final hemp ban mirrors the language in the alcohol lobby’s letter.

The timing and alignment are too precise to be dismissed as a coincidence.

Big Alcohol’s Investment in THC: A Motive Hiding in Plain Sight

If the alcohol industry were anti-intoxicant or anti-THC, their lobbying could be framed as moral or safety-driven. But the opposite is true.

Major alcohol companies are not fighting THC — they’re investing in it.

Concrete Examples of Alcohol-Industry Investment in Cannabis/THC Beverages

• Constellation Brands, the company behind Corona and Modelo, invested billions into cannabis company Canopy Growth to develop THC beverages and infused products for future national markets.

• Molson Coors partnered with cannabis producer HEXO to launch multiple THC beverage brands, explicitly calling the cannabis drinks sector one of its “next big growth pillars.”

• Anheuser-Busch InBev entered a research partnership with Tilray to explore THC and CBD beverages, publicly signaling that cannabinoid-infused drinks could become a major category.

• Boston Beer Company (makers of Samuel Adams) created a dedicated cannabis beverage subsidiary in Canada, producing THC iced teas and seltzers.

These companies are not dabbling. They are preparing to dominate the cannadrink category once federal legalization or federal regulation arrives.

The catch?

They cannot easily enter the market while thousands of hemp entrepreneurs are producing unregulated THC drinks and edibles at scale.

In other words:

Big Alcohol isn’t trying to eliminate the sector — it’s trying to eliminate its competitors.

The Legislative Timeline: How Lobbying Became Law

When you line up the dates, the mechanics of influence become clear:

1. Alcohol lobby sends Congress a coordinated letter requesting the removal of hemp-derived THC products until regulation is established.

2. McConnell and other lawmakers publicly shift tone, framing hemp-derived THC as a loophole that must be shut down.

3. Language nearly identical to the lobby’s request appears in the Farm Bill, calling for the elimination of most hemp-derived intoxicants.

4. The bill is passed, giving the industry under a year before a de facto national prohibition takes effect.

Because the request came from some of the most powerful corporate lobbying groups in the country — representing billions in tax revenue and political influence — the response was swift.

This sequence is not proof of corruption. But it is a clear illustration of how influence shapes policy, especially when emerging markets threaten established industries.

Acknowledging the Nuance: The Debate Isn’t One-Sided

To maintain credibility, it’s important to note:

• Not all studies agree on the scale of alcohol substitution.

• Some economists argue that cannabis legalization has neutral or mixed effects on alcohol consumption, depending on demographics.

• Regulators did have legitimate concerns about underage access, mislabeled potency, and inconsistent testing in the hemp sector.

But none of this contradicts the larger point:

The alcohol industry had strong financial motives, lobbied aggressively, and the legislative outcome aligns extremely closely with their requests.

That is the core argument Rogan was making.

And the evidence supports him far more than many expected.

So Does the Evidence Prove Rogan Right?

When you step back, a clear picture forms:

• The hemp ban emerged rapidly despite the industry’s economic size.

• The alcohol lobby’s coordinated pressure preceded the ban directly.

• McConnell’s political history shows decades-long alignment with alcohol and tobacco donors.

• Alcohol companies have a financial incentive to eliminate cheap, fast-growing hemp THC products before federal THC beverage regulation arrives.

• The final law echoes lobbyist language almost verbatim.

This doesn’t mean the alcohol industry wrote the bill single-handedly. Politics is rarely that simple.

But Rogan’s claim — that alcohol lobbyists played a significant role in the federal hemp ban — is not speculation.
It is an accurate interpretation of the economic incentives and political mechanisms that produced the law.

The hemp ban is not about safety.

It is not about morality.

It is not about public health.

It is about who controls the next trillion-dollar intoxicant market in America.

And right now, those who already control alcohol are positioning themselves to control THC as well.