[tacticalogic]

However, if we are talking about a product such as hemp that is intended to be grown and used on a national basis, then that is interstate commerce and regulation of it is constitutional.

You should read the Federalist Papers, and other writings of the founders on the issue of what is and is not "commerce", as well as what their concept of what "regulation" of said commerce involved. I don't beleive you can objectively justify that statement without rejecting their definitions of those terms and replacing them with others that are substantially different.

[Enterprise]

I think the ban on hemp growing should be lifted. I disagree with Government prosecutions of medicinal marijuana users. That much we may agree upon.

The free flow of products across state lines is the purview of the Federal Government. For instance, a farmer may grow corn in one state and ship it to, or through, another state which also grows corn, without worries that the corn will be taxed by the neighboring State or some other State. Commercial hemp would fall under that type of regulatory protection also. If it is shipped from one state to, or through another, it is interstate commerce.