The Senate Appropriations Committee advanced House Bill 15‑66 on the regulation of kratom products after approving an amendment that sponsors said returns the measure to study rather than immediate regulatory enforcement.

Senator Magram, the committee member who described the bill to the panel, said the House initially converted the bill into a study; the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee later revived regulatory language and the human resources subdivision returned it to study. "The House decided to turn it into a study," Senator Magram said, describing the bill's path and the committee's concern that "nobody on the committee besides myself know anything about it."

Why it matters: committee members said they lacked reliable information about how widely kratom is sold, whether adulterated products are circulating, and what state-level enforcement would require. Several senators urged a cautious approach to avoid creating a new regulatory chapter until the study provides more data.

Discussion: senators described kratom as a supplement that some residents use for pain relief and as a product sold in smoke shops and convenience stores. Senator Debbert summarized a common view in the committee: "My understanding of kratom ... is that it is a natural substance, which if unadulterated actually has some positive benefits. But the illicit market ... they change it in some ways that make it not so safe." Senator Burkhart asked plainly, "So Senator, what is kratom anyway?" reflecting limited familiarity among several members.

Senator Magram told the committee the bill originally would have added two full‑time positions to the Attorney General's office to investigate sales and enforcement; committee discussion noted that staff and enforcement costs were one reason to delay regulation until the study is completed.

Committee action: after discussion, a motion to pass an amendment to House Bill 15‑66 was made, seconded and approved by the committee (voice vote recorded by the clerk). The committee then moved and approved a recommendation that the bill "do pass as amended." The committee recorded the motion outcomes as "Motion passed 16" for both the amendment and the bill as amended. Senator Magrum (as named during the hearing) agreed to carry the bill forward.

What the committee did not do: committee members repeatedly said they heard no widespread reports of harm in testimony before the panel and emphasized that the study route is intended to gather better information before establishing new regulatory staff or enforcement duties. The committee did not adopt immediate regulatory language directing licensing or enforcement beyond what already exists in law.

Next steps: the committee advanced HB 15‑66 as amended; a committee member agreed to carry the bill to the next stage of the process.