Tim Sheehy (R-MT)
American Food for American Schools Act of 2026
A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
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 American Food for American Schools Act of 2026 seeks to amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act to prioritize domestic food products. It changes the requirement from purchasing domestic goods to the maximum extent practicable to a direct mandate to purchase domestic goods. Under this bill, school food authorities must request a waiver from the Secretary before purchasing foreign commodities or products. These waivers are limited to 5 percent of the total annual commercial food costs for specific meal components. The act also requires notification to parents regarding foreign products and establishes a public list of waivers. Additionally, it mandates specific contract provisions for suppliers to ensure compliance with these domestic purchasing requirements.
Yes· 3 of 13
- Scored +5
Would farmers be better off under this?
The bill directly benefits domestic farmers by creating a mandated market for their products in the school food system.
- Scored +4
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill mandates public lists of waivers and supplier noncompliance, increasing transparency in school food procurement.
- Scored +3
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
The focus on domestic production provides economic support to rural agricultural communities.
The opposite
- Scored -3
Does this make trade with other countries easier?
The bill prioritizes domestic goods, which could disrupt existing international trade relationships and import flows.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Transparency for Parents: A school food authority that purchases foreign commodities or products must notify parents or guardians of students at least once each school year (Section 2(a)(b)(iv)).
-
Public Accountability for Food Authorities: The Secretary of Agriculture is required to maintain a publicly available list on the Department of Agriculture website detailing school food authorities that received waivers, including the specific food products involved (Section 2(a)(b)(v)).
-
Public Accountability for Suppliers: The Secretary must make a list of every instance of supplier noncompliance publicly available on the Department of Agriculture website (Section 3(b)(E)).
-
Accountability for Suppliers: Suppliers that fail to comply with contract provisions regarding domestic purchasing are required to pay the Secretary an amount equal to the Federal funds used to purchase those foreign goods (Section 3(b)(B)(i)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Limitations on Product Availability: A school food authority may only use a waiver to purchase foreign commodities if those products are not produced or processed domestically in sufficient quantities or are not reasonably available domestically in sufficient quality (Section 2(a)(b)(ii)).
-
Restrictions on Food Procurement: The use of waivers for foreign products is capped at 5 percent of the total annual commercial food costs of a school food authority within each meal component (Section 2(a)(b)(iii)).
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 farmers be better off under this? — The bill directly benefits domestic farmers by creating a mandated market for their products in the school food system. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The focus on domestic production provides economic support to rural agricultural communities. Would business owners be better off under this? — Domestic food suppliers and processors benefit from the increased demand mandate. Would children be better off under this? — The bill provides greater transparency to parents regarding the nutritional sources used in school meals. Would students be better off under this? — Students benefit from increased transparency regarding the origin of their food.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill increases transparency by requiring notification to parents regarding foreign food products. Is this likely to create jobs? — By mandating domestic food purchases, the bill supports demand for American agricultural jobs. Is this likely to grow the economy? — The bill incentivizes domestic agricultural production which may stimulate specific sectors of the economy. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Domestic producers benefit from the increased mandate to purchase American goods.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill mandates public lists of waivers and supplier noncompliance, increasing transparency in school food procurement. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill increases the Secretary of Agriculture's role in oversight through the waiver and reporting process.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — The bill supports domestic agricultural producers, many of whom are located in rural areas.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this make trade with other countries easier? — The bill prioritizes domestic goods, which could disrupt existing international trade relationships and import flows.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into public schools? — The bill may indirectly support school programs through increased accountability and transparency in food procurement.
- 7/30/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
3 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Adam SchiffDemocrat · California