There are many things to dislike about the Republican farm bill in the House of Representatives. It takes food out of the mouths of hungry children, potentially exposing their bodies to more pesticides. It also supports companies that use child labor.

How would the House of Representatives’ farm bill accomplish this?

First, it would put children at greater risk of pesticide exposure by blocking state and local laws and regulations that prohibit the use of harmful chemicals on fields near schools or public parks. States with these protective measures for children would see them dismantled.

Second, by cutting billions in desperately needed funds from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Agriculture Department program that leads America’s fight against hunger and is funded through the farm bill.

Third, when given the opportunity to address child labor in meatpacking plants, House Republicans shirked their responsibility. Instead, they voted to include language in the farm bill to initiate a Government Accountability Office (GAO) investigation into child labor — even though The GAO conducted and published such a study in 2018.

These developments show that the House of Representatives’ farm bill, as proposed, promises nothing but bad news for children in the United States.

Blocking pesticide laws

Thousands of children attend school just feet from areas where pesticides can be sprayed. To protect children, more than 40 states restrict pesticide use near schools because children are particularly susceptible to exposure-related health effects such as cancer, neurotoxicity, and developmental and reproductive harm.

EWG discovered that 4,028 primary school students schools are within 200 feet of a field where pesticides may be applied. Some pesticides can drift miles from the intended crop, research showcreating risks for children in even more schools, not just the thousands of schools the EWG identified.

And that’s not even counting the thousands of high schools, private schools, parks, playgrounds, neighborhoods and farms where children may be exposed to pesticides.

But the House Farm Bill would block any jurisdiction, such as duly elected state and local governments, from passing laws regarding pesticides or requiring additional information on pesticide labels. This would undo the original intent of the historic U.S. pesticide laws, which were intended to serve as a foundation for pesticide regulation, allowing states and localities to pass additional regulations designed to protect their citizens and take into account local circumstances.

State and local government regulations regarding pesticides

Enter your zip code or search for your local elementary school to see if their students are at risk

Lawmakers in California and Texas require school officials to use low-risk pesticides. Alabama and North Carolina ban crop spraying near schools.

Some states, including Arizona, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan and New Hampshire, have also established buffer zones for pesticide spraying around schools.

Other states, including Iowa and Kansas, have also passed laws restricting pesticide use in public parks used by children. And dozens of communities have passed local ordinances restricting pesticide use in these parks.

If pesticide manufacturers like Bayer’s Monsanto and China National Chemical Corporation’s Syngenta get their way, these laws, which are meant to protect children, could be swept aside. By blocking state and local protections that prevent pesticide spraying near schools, the House farm bill would boost pesticide sales and limit legal penalties for workers and families exposed to these chemicals.

Harmful to children’s diet

The bill would also divert billions of dollars intended for millions of hungry children whose families rely on food aid.

It would enhance the USDA’s ability to expand SNAP benefits and divert 30 billion dollars in funding that would be used to feed hungry people. More than one in eight Americans – 41 million – rely on SNAP to put food on the table.

The proposed SNAP cuts couldn’t come at a worse time for program participants. Food inflation remains high, and a boost to SNAP benefits to help offset the COVID-19 pandemic just expired in 2023.

The bill also proposes to outsource SNAP administration was turned over to the private sector, ignoring previous similar efforts by states. This led to years of administrative chaos, bureaucratic hurdles, and loss of benefits for people living in poverty.

Language on child labor

Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), who serves on the House Committee on Agriculture, has introduced an amendment to the farm bill that would require the USDA not to contract with meatpacking plants that engage in “severe, repeated or widespread” illegal child labor.

But Republicans in the House of Representatives rejected this amendment, despite knowing that these violations were happening all over the country.

Today, many children are forced into unsafe, dangerous, and nighttime jobs by some of the largest companies in the country. Since 2018, the Department of Labor has seen a 69 percent increase in children working in illegally employed by companies. Large companies such as Perdue Farms and Tyson Foods are being investigated by the federal government for reports of illegal child labor, but are still allowed to contract with the federal government.

A better agricultural law is possible

These attacks on children must be rejected.

About 140 mayors, legislators and other officials from more than 30 states are standing together to urge Congress to reject legislation that would limit long-standing state and local rules on pesticide safety. They are joined by hundreds of members of Congress And 185 environmental, health and agricultural organisationsincluding EWG.

EWG also has joined with anti-hunger, environmental, nutrition, public health, and labor advocates to protect anti-hunger programs.

Congress should heed these calls and reject any attempt to cut SNAP funding. Lawmakers should also reject bills that would block state and local laws designed to protect communities.