Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL)
Americans vs. Poisonous Pesticides Act
A Republican bill with 4 Democratic cosponsors · See all 5 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The "Americans vs. Poisonous Pesticides Act" amends the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. It prevents the preemption of State law claims that align with misbranding standards. The bill ensures that federal registration and label approval cannot be used as a defense against State law claims. It also allows pesticide registrants to update labels without prior approval if they find information regarding potential effects on human health or the environment. These changes apply to pending and future civil actions.
Yes· 3 of 9
- Scored +7
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
Explicitly prevents federal preemption of state law claims regarding pesticide misbranding.
- Scored +6
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
Increases the ability of consumers to hold pesticide companies accountable through state law claims.
- Scored +5
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
Facilitates quicker updates to pesticide labels regarding environmental effects and permits state-level environmental litigation.
The opposite
- Scored -5
Would business owners be better off under this?
Increases legal liability for pesticide registrants and removes the federal registration defense in state courts.
- Scored -4
Does this give the federal government more power?
Reduces federal preemption, effectively shifting power from federal registration standards to state law claims.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Preservation of State Law Claims: Section 2(a) ensures that State law claims consistent with misbranding standards are not preempted, allowing people to pursue such claims.
-
Removal of Federal Defense: Section 2(b)(1) states that federal registration and label approval shall not be used as a defense to any State law claim, making it easier for individuals to hold companies accountable.
-
Faster Label Updates: Section 2(b)(6)(A) allows registrants to amend labels to address potential effects on human health or the environment without waiting for prior approval from the Administrator.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Administrator Disapproval: Section 2(b)(6)(B) allows the Administrator to disapprove or take action against label amendments made by registrants, which could potentially block updated health or environmental information from reaching the public.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would children be better off under this? — Potentially protects children by ensuring quicker labels updates on health risks and allowing state legal recourse. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Rural residents are more likely to be impacted by pesticide use and benefit from stronger health and environmental protections. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Marginalized communities often live closer to agricultural zones and benefit from improved health warnings and liability. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Many Hispanic workers in agriculture are disproportionately affected by pesticide toxicity and benefit from increased accountability. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Migrant agricultural workers gain better legal protections against misbranded poisonous pesticides. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income populations often face higher pesticide exposure and benefit from increased corporate accountability. Would business owners be better off under this? — Increases legal liability for pesticide registrants and removes the federal registration defense in state courts.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Increases the ability of consumers to hold pesticide companies accountable through state law claims.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — Facilitates quicker updates to pesticide labels regarding environmental effects and permits state-level environmental litigation.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Explicitly prevents federal preemption of state law claims regarding pesticide misbranding. Does this give the federal government more power? — Reduces federal preemption, effectively shifting power from federal registration standards to state law claims.
- 10/22/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/10/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/21/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
Rosa DeLauroDemocrat · Connecticut
Zoe LofgrenDemocrat · California
Thomas MassieRepublican · Kentucky
Chellie PingreeDemocrat · Maine
Suhas SubramanyamDemocrat · Virginia