"The biggest source of conflict is over a provision that would shield pesticide makers - a powerful lobbying force with agriculture state Republicans - from lawsuits. Removing the measure would stoke backlash from Trump officials and farm state Republicans."
"MAHA activists feel betrayed after voting for Trump in hopes that his administration would crack down on chemical exposure they blame for driving up chronic illness and disease."
"House Agriculture Chair G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.) said during the bill's markup the provision is 'critical for securing access to the well-regulated pesticide tools' in line with Republicans' focus on food affordability ahead of the midterms."
A significant conflict exists over a provision that protects pesticide manufacturers from lawsuits, supported by agriculture state Republicans. The Trump administration's actions to safeguard a key pesticide have raised concerns among chemical manufacturers about regulatory uncertainty. MAHA activists, feeling betrayed after supporting Trump, are collaborating with House Democrats to remove this provision. Some Republicans threaten to oppose the entire bill if the provision remains. Despite concerns, many Republicans believe the bill clarifies pesticide regulations and is essential for food affordability ahead of the midterms.
Read at POLITICO
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]