Into failure for pesticide industry, Democrats managed to remove the racer from Congress appropriations bill it would help protect pesticide manufacturers from lawsuits and could interfere with government efforts to warn about the risks of pesticides.
Chelly Pingree, a Democratic representative from Maine and ranking member of the House Appropriations subcommittee on Interior, Environment and Related Agencies, said Monday that the controversial measure promoted by agrichemical giant Bayer and its industry allies has been removed from the 2026 funding bill.
The move is final because Senate Republican leaders have agreed not to revisit the issue, Pingree said.
“I simply drew a line in the sand and said this cannot remain in the bill,” Pingree told the Guardian. “Bayer lobbied hard for the situation. It was quite an uphill battle.”
The now removed language was part of broader legislative efforts Critics say the measure is aimed at limiting litigation against pesticide industry leader Bayer, which sells the widely used herbicide Roundup.
An industry alliance Founded by Bayer, it has pushed for both state and federal laws that would make it more difficult for consumers to sue over the risks posed by pesticides to human health, and has so far successfully lobbied for the passage of such laws in Georgia and North Dakota.
Specific proposed language added to the appropriations bill would block the use of federal funds to “issue or adopt any guidance or any policy, take any regulatory action, or approve any labeling or change such labeling,” which is inconsistent with the conclusion of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) human health assessment.
Critics said the language would prevent states and local governments from issuing warnings about pesticide risks, even in the face of new scientific evidence of health risks, if such warnings were inconsistent with outdated EPA assessments. Critics say the EPA itself won't be able to update the warnings without completing a new assessment.
And because of the restrictions on warnings, critics of the rule say, it would be difficult, if not impossible, for consumers to sue pesticide makers for failing to warn them about health risks if EPA assessments do not support such warnings.
“This provision would give pesticide manufacturers exactly what they lobbied for: a federal preemption that prevents state and local governments from limiting the use of harmful, cancer-causing chemicals, adding health warnings, or holding companies accountable in court when people are harmed,” Pingree said in a statement. “This would mean that only the federal government has a say, even though we know federal reviews can take years and are often subject to intense industry pressure.”
Pingree tried but failed to abolish this language. July Appropriations Committee meeting.
Bayer, a key supporter of the legislative effort, has been trying for years to end thousands of lawsuits filed by people who say they got cancer from using Roundup and other glyphosate-based weed control products sold by Bayer. The company inherited litigation when it bought Monsanto in 2018 and has paid out billions of dollars in settlements and jury awards, but still faces several thousand ongoing lawsuits. Bayer says its glyphosate-based herbicides do not cause cancer and are safe when used as directed.
When asked for comment Monday, Bayer said no company should have “blanket immunity” and disputed that language in the appropriations bill would prevent anyone from suing pesticide makers. The company said it supports state and federal legislation “because the future of American agriculture depends on strong, science-based regulation of important crop protection products determined safe for use by the Environmental Protection Agency.”
Company additionally states on its website that without “legislative certainty,” lawsuits over glyphosate-based Roundup and other weed control products could impact research, product development and other “critical investments.”
Pingree said her efforts were helped by members of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement, who have spent the last several months meeting with members of Congress and their staffs on the issue. She said her team has reached out to Mach's leadership in recent days to put pressure on Republican lawmakers.
“This is the first time that there has been a significant enough advocacy group working on the Republican side,” she said.
Last week, Zen Honeycutt, Maha leader and founder of Moms Across America, posted “call to action” calling on members to demand that elected officials “Stop the Pesticide Immunity Shield.”
“A lot of people helped make this happen,” Honeycutt said. “Many health advocates are passionate about their demands to hold chemical companies accountable for safety… We are pleased that our elected officials have listened to the voices of so many Americans and are restoring trust in the American political system.”
Pingree said the problem has not been resolved. Bayer has “made this a top priority” and expects continued efforts to include industry-friendly language in legislation, including the new Farm Bill.
“I don’t think it’s over,” she said.
This story was published in collaboration with New leaderJournalism project of the Environmental Working Group
