Pharma Money and the War on Natural Alternatives: How Campaign Contributions Are Killing the Kratom Movement

In recent years, a troubling trend has emerged across the United States: the systematic dismantling of access to natural plant-based alternatives like kratom and hemp-derived cannabinoids.  This movement, often justified under the guise of public safety, appears to be significantly influenced by substantial campaign contributions from pharmaceutical and related industries.  These industries have a vested interest in suppressing non-patentable, natural remedies that could compete with their products.


—

The Louisiana Kratom Ban: A Case Study in Influence

In May 2025, Louisiana’s legislature passed Senate Bill 154, effectively banning kratom statewide.  This decision directly impacts over 325,000 residents who use kratom for pain management, mental health support, and as an alternative to opioids.  Senator Jay Morris, the bill’s sponsor, received over $10,000 in campaign contributions from pharmaceutical companies, private rehab centers, and health industry lobbyists during the same period the bill was introduced and advanced  .

Critics argue that this financial backing from industries that stand to benefit from kratom’s prohibition raises questions about the motivations behind the legislation.  The American Kratom Association (AKA) has urged Governor Jeff Landry to veto the bill, emphasizing that many Louisianans rely on kratom as a safer alternative to opioids  .


—

Texas: The Battle Over Hemp-Derived THC

Texas is on the brink of enacting Senate Bill 3, which would ban all consumable hemp-derived THC products, including those containing delta-8 and delta-9 THC.  This legislation threatens to dismantle a burgeoning $8 billion industry that supports approximately 50,000 jobs across the state  .

Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick, a staunch advocate for the bill, has faced scrutiny over substantial campaign contributions from the alcohol industry.  Public records reveal that Patrick received a $250,000 contribution from John Nau, CEO of Silver Eagle Distributors, a major Anheuser-Busch beer distributor, and an additional $25,000 from the Beer Alliance of Texas PAC  .

Critics argue that these contributions suggest a conflict of interest, as the ban could eliminate competition for the alcohol industry.  Moreover, the bill’s opponents, including veterans and small business owners, contend that the legislation disregards the therapeutic benefits of hemp-derived products and the economic impact on local communities  .


—

Alabama’s Restrictive Hemp Legislation

In May 2025, Alabama Governor Kay Ivey signed House Bill 445 into law, imposing strict regulations on hemp-derived products.  The law bans smokable hemp, limits THC content in edibles to 10 milligrams per serving, and imposes licensing requirements and excise taxes on retailers  .

While the bill’s proponents claim it aims to protect public health, opponents argue that it disproportionately affects small businesses and consumers seeking natural alternatives for health and wellness.  The legislation’s broad definitions and stringent restrictions have led to confusion and concern among industry stakeholders  .


—

The Broader Implications

These legislative actions in Louisiana, Texas, and Alabama reflect a broader pattern of policy decisions that favor pharmaceutical and related industries at the expense of consumer choice and public health.  The financial influence of these industries on lawmakers raises concerns about the integrity of the legislative process and the prioritization of corporate interests over individual freedoms.

Natural alternatives like kratom and hemp-derived cannabinoids offer potential benefits for individuals seeking non-addictive options for pain management and mental health support.  The suppression of these alternatives through legislation influenced by industry contributions undermines public trust and limits access to potentially life-saving remedies.


—

Taking a Stand

To counteract this trend, it is imperative to advocate for transparency in campaign financing and to support legislation that prioritizes public health over corporate profits.  Engaging in grassroots activism, contacting elected officials, and supporting organizations that promote natural alternatives can help ensure that policy decisions reflect the will and well-being of the people.

The fight for access to natural remedies like kratom and hemp-derived products is not just about individual choice; it’s about challenging a system that allows financial influence to dictate public policy.  By standing together and demanding accountability, we can work towards a more equitable and health-conscious society.