Latest action: Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
Requires companies to share information about pesticide ingredients and safety data.
The problem
The public and regulators lack easy access to complete pesticide ingredient and safety information, making it hard to assess health and environmental risks from these products.
The proposal
The bill would require pesticide manufacturers to publicly disclose detailed data about pesticide ingredients, chemical formulations, and safety test results through a centralized system.
The impact
Farmers, agricultural companies, manufacturers, consumers, and regulators would gain access to pesticide information. Companies would face new reporting requirements and potential competitive concerns.
Transparency helps doctors, researchers, and families understand what chemicals they may be exposed to. This could lead to better health decisions and faster identification of harmful products.
Regulators and environmental groups can better track pesticide impacts on water, soil, and wildlife. Public data helps identify cumulative exposure risks across multiple products.
Smaller manufacturers and new companies can compete more effectively when they have access to the same public data as large corporations. Transparency levels the playing field.
Shoppers and farmers can make informed decisions about which pesticide products to use based on complete safety and ingredient information.
Companies may argue that revealing exact formulas and data gives competitors unfair advantages. Balancing transparency with trade secrets could be complicated and contested.
Creating and maintaining a centralized data system requires significant government resources. Pesticide manufacturers may face compliance costs, which could increase product prices for farmers.
Too much public data without clear guidance could confuse consumers and farmers rather than help them. Misinterpreting complex safety information could lead to poor decisions.
If some pesticide categories are excluded or if the bill lacks enforcement power, transparency goals may not be fully achieved.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.