MIL USHOR-2b Engine

Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Ilhan Omar (DFL-MN)

WASHINGTON – Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) introduced five amendments to the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026. This bill fails to address the rapidly growing affordability crisis facing American workers, families, and farmers. This bill retains Republicans’ $187 billion cut to SNAP in last year’s reconciliation bill, leaving over 40 million Americans without the support they need to put food on the table. 

Congresswoman Omar’s amendments aim to combat hunger here in the United States and abroad, ensure workers’ safety in meat processing facilities, and invest in sustainable farming practices.

“The Farm Bill that Republicans have put in front of us today completely misses the mark in addressing the needs of working people,” said Rep. Omar. “I introduced five amendments to reform our agriculture and nutrition policies to guarantee that no child goes hungry at school, prioritize workers’ safety in food processing industries, and ensure we’re doing all we can to end hunger here at home and end the global food crisis. It is shameful that Republicans completely abandoned vulnerable children and families in this bill. I will always put working families over big corporations looking to profit at the expense of the American people. I could not in good conscience vote for this bill.” 

The amendments introduced by Rep. Omar include:

• Omar #297 – Prohibits school lunch shaming.
• Omar #306 – Establishes a universal school meals program.
• Omar #340 – Categorizes controlled-environment agriculture, including vertical farming, as a high-priority research area.
• Omar #355 –  Blocks two proposed rules that would raise line speed limits in poultry processing facilities and remove line speed limits in pork processing facilities entirely, and prohibits substantially similar rules in the future.
• Omar #366 – Doubles the funding for Food for Peace.

The full text of the amendments is available here.

###

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Rick Allen (R-GA-12)

Today, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 7567, the bipartisan Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, which builds on the historic agriculture investments made in H.R. 1, often known as the Working Families Tax Cuts. After voting in support of the bill, Congressman Rick W. Allen (GA-12) issued the following statement:

“Rural America needs a new Farm Bill now, not tomorrow. With today’s passage of the Farm, Food, and National Security Act, House Republicans have once again reaffirmed our commitment to American agriculture and delivered for hardworking growers and producers. 

“Having grown up on a Hereford cattle farm and traveled throughout the 12th District, I know the uncertainty Georgia’s farmers can face—which has been exacerbated in recent years by high input costs, shrinking margins, devastating natural disasters, and market uncertainty. The best way to reinvigorate our farm economy and bring certainty back to farm country is to send a modern Farm Bill that addresses today’s challenges to President Trump’s desk. This bill is the answer.

“With agriculture being the number one industry in the 12th District and across our state, I was proud to support this Farm Bill that not only delivers sound agriculture policy but also provides our farmers with the tools and resources they need.”

More specifically, H.R. 7567:

• Expands access to credit and risk management tools for producers facing some of the toughest times in the farm economy since the 1980s crisis.
• Doubles down on integrity and transparency measures in the nutrition title while prioritizing health, without increasing federal spending.
• Prioritizes domestic production of healthy fruits and vegetables.
• Streamlines working lands conservation programs and prioritizes responsible management of federal forests.
• Attacks the agriculture trade deficit by increasing funding for export promotion programs.
• Modernizes rural development and energy programs, prioritizes cutting-edge research, expands access to meat processing, and codifies key initiatives related to national security and foreign ownership of farmland.
• Protects interstate commerce for livestock producers and provides regulatory certainty for farmers who need access to critical crop protection tools.

NOTE: Following Hurricane Helene’s destruction, Congressman Allen co-introduced the Farmers’ AID Relief Act, which updates the Hurricane Insurance Protection – Wind Index (HIP-WI) to better reflect real-world storm paths and protect farmers affected by damage. This legislation is included as a marker bill in Sec. 11016 of Title XI of the Farm, Food, and National Security Act. Additionally, H.R. 7567 is supported by more than 500 stakeholder organizations, including the Georgia Farm Bureau, Georgia Agribusiness Council, Georgia Association of Conservation Districts, Georgia Corn Growers Association, Georgia Cotton Commission, and others.

Read the full bill text HERE.
Read a section-by-section HERE.

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Thomas Massie (4th District of Kentucky)

For Immediate Release
Contact: massie.press@mail.house.gov
Contact #: 202-225-3465

Washington, D.C.- Representative Thomas Massie announces a pilot program for HR 4700, the Processing Revival and Intrastate Meat Exemption Act (PRIME Act), is included in the Farm Bill (HR 7567) passed in the House of Representatives today. The House approved the Farm Bill on a vote of 224-200, with Rep. Massie voting in favor of the legislation. The PRIME Act is Rep. Massie’s signature legislation.

“I am excited to announce that a pilot program for the PRIME Act is included in this year’s Farm Bill,” said Rep. Thomas Massie. “This means consumers can soon expect increased access to locally raised and processed beef, pork, and lamb sold directly from farmers, and farmers will no longer be burdened by the hefty and costly U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) constraints that force them to drive hundreds of miles with their animals to the few and sparse USDA facilities, as currently required.”

“A healthy America begins with what we eat,” Rep. Massie continued. “I am committed to making better food accessible for all families and advancing policies that empower consumers, support local farmers, and strengthen our nation’s food system.”

The PRIME Act pilot program is included as Section 12114 of the Farm Bill. Under its provisions, upon application from a custom-exempt slaughter facility, a state may operate a pilot program allowing the facility to sell slaughtered meat and meat food products directly to consumers within the state in which the facility is located. 

The pilot program includes a labeling regime requiring that all products are clearly labeled to indicate the name and address of the processing facility, the name and address of the animal’s owner from which the meat products are derived, the location where the animals were raised, the date of slaughter and the period of time over which the owner raised the animals, notice that the meat was not subject to federal inspection, and an advertisement that the product shall not be resold.

Custom-exempt slaughter facilities participating in the pilot program are required to comply with the Humane Methods Slaughter Act of 1958, all applicable state and local laws, section 23(d) of the Federal Meat Inspection Act, and federal regulations about sanitation standards, recordkeeping, and the handling of specified risk materials.

Facilities participating in the program remain subject to periodic on-site inspections by the USDA to ensure compliance with the pilot program’s requirements, as well as to regular inspections conducted by either local authorities responsible for restaurant inspections or the state Department of Agriculture.

Legislative text for the PRIME Act pilot program is available at this link. 

Additional Background:

Rep. Massie’s PRIME Act is designed to make it easier for small farms and ranches to serve consumers. Under the PRIME Act, local inspectors––rather than USDA inspectors––could inspect meat production facilities, and regulations governing meat distribution could be adjusted to allow more convenient access for consumers. The PRIME Act would give individual states the freedom to permit intrastate distribution of locally grown and slaughtered meat to consumers, restaurants, hotels, boarding houses, and grocery stores.

The PRIME Act is bipartisan legislation. Reps. Massie (R-KY) and Pingree (D-ME) introduced the legislation on July 23, 2025. Companion legislation, S.2409, has been introduced in the United States Senate by Senators Angus King (I-ME) and Rand Paul (R-KY).

Legislative text for HR 4700, the PRIME Act, is available at this link. A current list of cosponsors is available at this link. 

Rep. Massie raises cattle on his off-the-grid farm in northeast Kentucky.

Rep. Pingree raises grass-fed beef and chickens on her island farm in North Haven, Maine.

###

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (1st District of Maine)

Speaking on the House floor last night, Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) condemned the Republican Farm Bill that fails farmers and puts chemical company profits over the health of Americans. Pingree spoke in support of an amendment to remove dangerous, industry-written language that would pre-empt state rights to regulate pesticide usage or labeling and provide a liability shield for pesticide manufacturers. Representative Anna Paulina Luna’s (R-Fla.) amendment language is identical to the bipartisan amendment Pingree and Representative Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) introduced. 

“Our amendment to strike the pesticide liability shield sections from the Farm Bill has drawn broad bipartisan support, both within this chamber and across America,” Pingree said. “The harmful language that Republicans on the House Agriculture Committee included in the Farm Bill is a handout to Big Chemical and preempts states’ rights to regulate pesticide usage or labeling and provides a liability shield for pesticide manufacturers.”

Click here to watch Pingree’s full remarks

Transcript:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to the ranking member for yielding me the time.

I am sorry to say that this is a terrible Farm Bill. As a result of this bill, more people will go hungry. More farmers will lose assistance to conservation programs that are already oversubscribed. And more farmers who are struggling to make ends meet will find it more and more difficult to hang onto their farms.

I have a lot of concerns about this bill, but I’d like to use the limited time I have to show strong support for Representative Luna’s pesticide amendment. I am proud to say that her amendment, which was made in order, mirrors the language of the bipartisan amendment I sponsored with Representative Massie, and I want to thank Representative Luna for also working on this important issue.

Our amendment to strike the pesticide liability shield sections from the Farm Bill has drawn broad bipartisan support, both within this chamber and across America.

The harmful language that Republicans on the House Agriculture Committee included in the Farm Bill is a handout to Big Chemical and preempts states’ rights to regulate pesticide usage or labeling and provides a liability shield for pesticide manufacturers.

Put simply, this language puts chemical company profits over the health of Americans.

 More than 200,000 Roundup-related health claims have been made against Bayer. Behind the numbers are real people—husbands, wives, farmers, even pets—with heartbreaking stories. People suffering from non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other devastating cancers, racking up outrageous medical bills.

And what’s worse, chemical manufacturers have spent time and money developing additional uses for these same chemicals beyond killing weeds. We see glyphosate now used to dry crops before harvest, and that means it makes its way into more and more of our food system. That means the bread we’re eating, the hummus, the pasta, is more likely to contain this toxic and dangerous chemical. So more and more people are ingesting it without even realizing it.

 If this language is not removed, we will have handed companies like Bayer exactly what they have spent millions of dollars and lobbying power on: legal immunity.

 Earlier this year, I successfully sought to strip similar language from the FY 2026 Interior Appropriations funding bill. Unfortunately, the work we did in that committee did not deter Bayer, who, armed with 53 lobbyists and millions of dollars, immediately got to work to get their get-out-of-jail-free card elsewhere, in this Farm Bill and at the Supreme Court.

Democrats, Republicans, and citizens across this country agree: Keep this language out of the Farm Bill.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I thank you, and I yield back.

Background:

Pingree, a longtime farmer and member of the House Agriculture Committee, attempted to strip this language from the Farm Bill during the committee markup in February. Pingree and Massie introduced the bipartisan Pingree-Massie Protect Our Health Amendment to remove this language from the final Farm Bill.

In January, Pingree successfully removed a similar provision from the FY2026 Interior and Environment Appropriations bill. 

Earlier this year, President Trump signed an Executive Order to increase domestic production of glyphosate—a widely used weedkiller that has been linked to multiple health issues, including non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Pingree and Massie also introduced the No Immunity for Glyphosate Act, which would undo Trump’s Executive Order. 

On Monday, April 27, the U.S. Supreme Court heard an appeal by the manufacturer of Roundup, supported by the Trump Administration, over lawsuits that allege it failed to warn consumers about the product’s dangers. Pingree and Massie both spoke at the “People vs. Poison” rally outside the Supreme Court [photos available here].

Pesticides in the United States are regulated under a combination of federal, state, and local laws. Debates over state and local authority to regulate pesticide use have been litigated for decades, particularly in cases involving widely used chemicals such as Roundup and paraquat, which have been linked to serious health harms. Many states, cities, and counties have adopted measures to restrict pesticide spraying near schools, homes, and public spaces, citing the heightened vulnerability of children to toxic exposure and risks to brain development, reproduction, and long-term health.

Seven states—Maine, Alaska, Hawaii, Maryland, Utah, Nevada, and Vermont—do not preempt local governments from regulating pesticide use within their jurisdictions. In Maine alone, there are more than 30 state and local regulations related to pesticide use and warning requirements that would be undermined or preempted under this Republican pesticide provision in the Farm Bill.

###

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (1st District of Maine)

Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), a longtime organic farmer and member of the House Agriculture Committee, released the following statement after the House passed Republicans’ Farm Bill:

At a time when farmers are struggling in the face of rising costs and the President’s reckless tariffs, food insecurity is on the rise, and families are paying more for food than they ever have before, this Farm Bill fails to meet the moment. From failing to address desperately needed food assistance and cutting conservation funding, to providing massive subsidies to big agribusinesses and not including any resources for farmers in Maine and across the country impacted by PFAS contamination, the Republicans’ Farm Bill champions corporate interests over the well-being of small and mid-sized farmers, consumers, and rural communities. Once again, they’ve failed the American people. 

While I’m relieved that we were able to remove language that would have shielded giant chemical companies like Bayer from liability for harms caused by toxic pesticides, this bill does little to address the very real pain that millions of people across the country are feeling right now. Republicans talk a big game about being the champions of rural America. About helping hardworking families. About how they’re trying to ‘Make America Healthy Again.’ But when it comes time to walk that walk, they go where their corporate donors tell them to go—every time. This Farm Bill is no different. 

How do we expect Americans to eat healthier food when we refuse to support the very farmers who are working so hard to bring those options to market? Why are we giving more subsidies to giant corporations when family farms are struggling to get by? Why are we treating conservation, climate-smart solutions, nutrition, and public health as optional, instead of essential? It’s truly baffling to me.

We have the resources, technologies, and people power to create the most productive and sustainable agriculture sector anywhere in the world. Instead of tapping into that boundless potential, this bill merely keeps the status quo: unconditional support for Big Ag; swill for everyone else—including the hundreds of thousands of farmers who feed this country every day. For these and many other reasons, I could not support this Farm Bill. I remain hopeful that the Senate will put forth a more workable version of this traditionally bipartisan, must-pass legislation that meets the moment for our farmers, families, and rural America. 

The Farm Bill:

Protects Republicans’ SNAP Cuts: Republicans cut $187 billion from SNAP in reconciliation resulting in benefits being taken away or reduced for more than 40 million Americans, including 16 million children, 8 million seniors, 1.2 million veterans and 4 million people with disabilities. Those cuts are protected by this farm bill. In addition, Republicans are openly talking about coming back for more SNAP cuts in new rounds of reconciliation bills.  

Ignores States’ Ability to Set Their Own Food Production Standards: The bill would overturn state laws that dictate how animal products sold in their state must be raised. Many of these standards were approved by voters at the ballot box and upheld by the conservative Supreme Court in a 2023 ruling. These production standards have created premium markets for hog farmers across the country. To codify this language would be to overrule the voters and eliminate valuable markets for farmers. 

Cuts Conservation Funding: At a time when farmers are struggling to make ends meet, the bill cuts $1 billion from the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), a nationwide program that farmers rely on to help cover the costs of farming practices that protect water quality, soil health, and natural habitats. EQIP is one of the most oversubscribed conservation programs USDA offers, but the bill treats the program as a piggy bank for Republican priorities. At a time when farmers desperately need relief from rising costs, Republicans took money out of their pockets.  

Includes No Money for Specialty Crops: After being largely left out of the Trump administration’s Farmer Bridge Assistance program, specialty crop growers who are asking for an additional $5 billion in economic relief received no additional direct support in this bill. They also received no mandatory money for specialty crop research or to assist with labor challenges, and no new investments were made in Specialty Crop Block Grants or GusNIP. The bill fails to adequately champion and support our specialty crop growers during this challenging time.  

Has No Additional Farm Assistance: Despite farmers facing nearly $54 billion in losses and calls from leading farm groups for additional direct financial support, this farm bill fails to provide any aid to the family farmers who need it most. Farm country is being crushed under the weight of the war in Iran, ill-conceived tariffs and backward economic priorities driving input costs up and commodity prices down. The Republicans’ farm bill doesn’t address these systemic issues, failing farm country.

###

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Glenn Grothman (R-Glenbeulah 6th District Wisconsin)

Congressman Glenn Grothman’s (R-WI) Federal Fraud Prevention Workforce Training Act, legislation to strengthen oversight and combat fraud across federal programs, advanced through the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, marking a key step toward protecting taxpayer dollars.

“We should remember this day because fraud continues to be a problem, but we are working to implement stronger oversight at every level. This bill is a common sense and bipartisan effort to strengthen oversight and protect taxpayer dollars. We are ensuring employees have the tools and resources they need to identify fraud. The bill requires Treasury to establish a government wide anti-fraud training program so staff can see the danger before it makes the newspaper,” said Rep. Grothman.     

“Billions of taxpayer dollars are lost every year to increasingly sophisticated fraud schemes. Unfortunately, federal agencies working to safeguard these funds are often outmatched by the increasing sophistication of fraudsters and criminals. The Federal Fraud Prevention Workforce Training Act recognizes this growing challenge and helps fortify the financial defenses of our federal programs against bad actors. It requires a government-wide anti-fraud training program for agency officials, like grant managers and auditors, so they are adequately trained on best practices for preventing and addressing fraud in agency programs. I thank my colleague, Mr. Grothman for introducing this important legislation,” said Chairman Comer.

-30- 

U.S. Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-Glenbeulah) proudly serves the people of Wisconsin’s 6th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz (FL-23)

“As we celebrate the 21st year of Jewish American Heritage Month, I’m proud to lead this effort to detail all the remarkable contributions that generations of Jewish Americans made to shape our nation’s history, culture and society,” said Wasserman Schultz. “This celebration is also one of the most effective ways to combat rising antisemitism, as Jews and non-Jews alike come to learn about all the amazing Jewish men and women who played critical roles to advance the American experiment over the past 250 years, including those who defended our nation in the military. I’m so grateful to have strong, bipartisan support in this effort.”

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Jason Crow (CO-06)

WASHINGTON — Congressman Jason Crow (D-CO), a former paratrooper and Army Ranger, pressed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth about conflicts of interest swirling around a top advisor Hegseth described as a “long term friend” and “great patriot” during his appearance before the House Armed Services Committee.

While serving at the Pentagon, Special Advisor to the Secretary of Defense Tim Parlatore maintains a private law practice that represents clients who may have business before the U.S. Government and benefit from having an attorney with close personal ties to the Secretary. When asked about Parlatore’s conflicts of interest, Hegseth refused to answer whether Parlatore represents and profits off clients from foreign governments or whether he represents and profits off U.S. military officers who are under consideration for promotions by Hegseth.

Secretary Hegseth commissioned Parlatore into the Navy Reserve in March 2025, bypassing vetting and oversight by the White House Presidential Personnel Office and the U.S. Senate. Hegseth’s decision to keep Parlatore at the Pentagon despite conflicts of interest is indicative of his failed leadership for servicemembers and the American people.

CONGRESSMAN CROW: He [Parlatore] maintains a private law practice, does he represent foreign governments or foreign persons in that private law practice? 

SECRETARY HEGSETH: Uhh, I don’t know. 

CONGRESSMAN CROW: You don’t know? Somebody who is sitting in your meetings, a special advisor, you don’t know?

Parlatore previously worked as Hegseth’s personal attorney when he faced sexual assault allegations, has represented soldiers accused of war crimes and former members of the mob, and hired and commended lawyers who worked for Jeffrey Epstein. Despite his unknown ties to foreign entities, Parlatore was also on an unsecured Signal thread where Secretary Hegseth shared classified information about strikes in Yemen with his wife, brother, and other close associates last year.

Parlatore, who was also once a member of President Trump’s legal team, has been accused by the President’s team of lying and was reportedly described by the President as “unstable.” The White House removed him and Secretary Hegseth from overseeing investigations into former DoD aides because of their inability to remain objective.

A transcript of the exchange is provided below and can be viewed here.

CONGRESSMAN JASON CROW: Mr. Secretary, I want to go in a little bit of a different direction. Timothy Parlatore served as your private attorney, correct?

SECRETARY PETE HEGSETH: Correct.

CROW: And Mr. Parlatore also served as private attorney for President Trump’s campaign, correct?

HEGSETH: I’m not privy to every professional position that he’s held.

CROW: I’ll help you out, he did. And you appointed Mr. Parlatore as your senior advisor, correct?

HEGSETH: He does reserve duty on behalf of the Navy, does great work.

CROW: His title is senior advisor, you gave him that title, correct? 

HEGSETH: And I would count him as very much an advisor of mine.

CROW: Yep, he travels with you, correct?

[Crosstalk]

HEGSETH: Tim Parlatore’s been a long term friend. He’s a great patriot…

CROW: He travels with you. 

HEGSETH:…and has traveled with me. He serves the country… 

CROW: That’s not what I asked. He travels with you, doesn’t he?

HEGSETH:…he’s an excellent military lawyer. 

CROW: He travels with you, doesn’t he, correct? There’s public Instagram that shows this, just say yes.

HEGSETH: Yes, of course.

CROW: Okay. He sits in meetings with you and advises you, doesn’t he?

HEGSETH: Uhh, he sits in some meetings on occasion.

CROW: Well, he maintains a desk and an office in the Pentagon, does he not?

HEGSETH: I’d have to check.

CROW: You don’t know?

HEGSETH: It’s a big Pentagon.

CROW: You directly commissioned Mr. Parlatore in the Naval Reserve as a Navy Commander in March 2025, did you not?

HEGSETH: I was very proud to do so.

CROW: And when you did, because he’s a Navy Reserve Officer, he didn’t have to go through the PPO process, the White House Presidential Personnel Office, right? He wasn’t vetted by White House PPO.

HEGSETH: Uniformed service members don’t get vetted by….

CROW: The answer is yes, he didn’t have to be vetted by White House PPO. He didn’t go through the Senate confirmation process either did he? 

The answer is no.

[Crosstalk]

HEGSETH: I don’t know what you’re getting to, but Tim is a fantastic…

CROW: I’ll tell you what I’m getting to…

HEGSETH: …he does great work.

CROW: …the answer is no, right?

HEGSETH: He does great work.

CROW: Okay. He didn’t maintain a security clearance when you appointed him as special advisor, is that right?

HEGSETH: I’d have to check.

CROW: You don’t know?

HEGSETH: I mean, anybody that has access to sensitive material is going to have the appropriate clearance.

CROW: Okay, so when you appointed him as special advisor, he had a security clearance?

[Crosstalk]

HEGSETH: I don’t, you’re trying to piece together a timeframe…

CROW: No, I’m asking a simple question… 

HEGSETH:…that I can’t give you exact dates for.

CROW: …one of your special, most sensitive advisors, did he have a security clearance?

HEGSETH: No, you’re playing a gotcha game like you do on TV…

CROW: I’m asking questions.

HEGSETH…everywhere else you’re trying to thread together details…

CROW: Clearly you’re concerned…

HEGSETH:…that aren’t connected about something else.

CROW:…clearly you’re concerned about my line of questioning, aren’t you, Mr. Secretary, because you know where it’s going, don’t you? I think you do.

So does Mr. Parlatore represent foreign governments? He has a private law practice, does he not?

HEGSETH: From what I understand of his law practice, he does a lot of great work for servicemembers in the military and others.

CROW: He maintains a private law practice. Does he represent foreign governments or foreign persons in that private law practice?

HEGSETH: Uhh, I don’t know. 

CROW: You don’t know? Somebody who is sitting in your meetings, a special advisor, you don’t know?

Does he represent any senior officers who are currently under consideration for promotion by you or your office?

HEGSETH: The only person that makes determinations about senior officers is me.

CROW: Answer the question. Does he represent senior officers who are under consideration for promotion by you?

[Crosstalk]

HEGSETH: No, I’m the one that makes decisions about choosing…

CROW: Does he represent them, Mr. Secretary?

HEGSETH:…and finding senior officers.

CROW: Does he represent them?

HEGSETH: He doesn’t represent anyone. He’s a legal advisor and always has been.

CROW: But he has clients, does he not?

HEGSETH: He’s a legal advisor to me on reserve duty, and he always has been and he does a fantastic job.

[Crosstalk]

CROW: Is it true that Mr. Parlatore was removed… 

HEGSETH: You’re playing a losing hand whatever your…

CROW:…I reclaim my time. Is it true that Mr. Parlatore was removed from an investigation by the White House last year?

HEGSETH: I don’t know what you’re referring to, but not that I’m aware of.

CROW: You’re not aware of it. Well is it true that you were also removed from that same investigation? 

The answer is yes.

HEGSETH: Uhh, no, not that I’m aware of.

CROW: You’re not aware of it, that’s interesting. Well, is it true that Mr. Parlatore disparaged President Trump?

HEGSETH: Uhh, I don’t know what you’re referring to but no.

CROW: Is it true that Mr. Parlatore was accused by President Trump and his lawyers of lying?

HEGSETH: What you’re accused of is a cute line of questioning that’s going nowhere.

CROW: Well it’s going somewhere, which is why you’re not answering the question. Was it true that he was accused of lying by the President’s legal team?

[Crosstalk]

HEGSETH: I’m not familiar, you’d have to give me the context of the article…

CROW: Well it’s right here, you want to look at the statement from President Trump’s legal team.. 

HEGSETH:…anyone can blow up a quote and claim it says something, and that’s what you’re doing in a little stunt 

CROW: Secretary Hegseth, what I’m really concerned about is you purport to have unfaltering loyalty to President Trump, and yet you are continuously…

HEGSETH: Oh, you care a lot about President Trump, don’t you?

CROW: …I reclaim my time. You’re going behind his back and appointing people…

HEGSETH: This is a cute waste of your five minutes…

CROW: …I reclaim my time.

HEGSETH:…a huge cute waste of your five minutes that led nowhere.

CROW: I reclaim my time. You are repeatedly going behind President Trump’s back, appointing people who he has accused of lying, who the White House has accused of lying, and you are not being honest with President Trump. 

###

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Ted Lieu (33 District of California)

WASHINGTON – Today, California Aerospace Caucus Co-Chairs Ted Lieu (D-Los Angeles County) and Ken Calvert (R-CA) introduced a resolution to establish the first Friday in May as National Space Day. The National Space Day Resolution recognizes the significant positive impact of the aerospace community on the United States’ scientific and economic development.

“The United States is a country defined by curiosity and exploration,” said Congressman Lieu. “My congressional district is the launchpad for some of our nation’s foremost aerospace innovators, including Space Systems Command at the Los Angeles Air Force Base. From the Apollo missions to today, the United States has led the world in space exploration. The aerospace community rockets past the boundaries of what once seemed impossible. Their stellar work furthers our country’s leadership in scientific and technological advancement, as well as our national security. I am pleased to introduce this resolution to recognize our aerospace community and recommit to investing in the innovation that makes their work soar.”

“Space Day is a tremendous opportunity to highlight America’s exploration and scientific discovery. California continues to lead the way and make out of this world contributions that lift up America’s space industry,” said Congressman Calvert.

Read the full text of the resolution here.

### 

Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mike Kelly (R-PA)

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) voted in favor of a series of six bipartisan bills modernizing the John H. Chafee Foster Care Program for Successful Transition to Adulthood.

The markup follows a roundtable featuring First Lady Melania Trump earlier this month, during which she advocated for these pro-family policies as part of her Fostering the Future Initiative.

“Strong families create strong communities. We must ensure families and children are set up for success, so no one has to endure hardships and trauma when all they are seeking is a loving home,” Rep. Kelly said. “Children are 25 percent of our population, but they are 100 percent of our future.”

The bills are:

BACKGROUND

Each year, nearly 16,000 foster youth age out of the foster care program. Young adults who age out of foster care at age 18 experience high rates of homelessness and are less likely to graduate from high school, gain employment, or enroll in post-secondary education compared to their peers. 

The Government Accountability Office published a report last year that found states have been returning Chafee funds since at least 2007. Each year, 30 or so states return about $6 to $11 million, despite evidence of unmet need.

Learn more about Rep. Kelly’s work supporting foster care initiatives here and here.