Bill shielding chemical companies from civil lawsuits shelved for 2025
The controversial bill by Sen. John Stevens (R-Huntingdon) and Rep. Rusty Grills (R-Newbern) would prohibit people from filing civil suits against chemical companies if they are diagnosed with cancer caused by their products.
PREVIOUS: Bill that could protect pesticide companies from lawsuits over labels progresses in House, Senate committees
The products in question are primarily used by farmers to boost crop yields. Supporters of the measure argued the products come with warning labels already approved by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Chemical giant Bayer-Monsanto has advocated for the measure in several states, including Tennessee. The state Senate approved the measure on a mostly party-line vote on April 3, though two Republicans opted to vote 'present' rather than for or against the measure.
Representatives debated the bill in the House Judiciary Committee before ultimately punting the measure to the Second Calendar of 2026.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Texas Redistricting Map Clears Legislature, Heads To Abbott
The Texas House approved a new congressional map that could give Republicans five additional U.S. House seats, shifting the balance from 25 Republicans and 12 Democrats to 30 Republicans and 7 Democrats. The vote followed the end of a two-week Democratic walkout that had stalled the redistricting process during a special legislative session. As previously reported by The Dallas Express, Democrats have used quorum-breaking walkouts in past sessions to block legislation, including during high-profile battles over voting and redistricting. The tactic carries significant political stakes. It temporarily halts lawmaking but often sets the stage for partisan standoffs when lawmakers eventually return. Democrats argued the plan diminishes minority voting strength and pledged to challenge it in court. 'The underlying goal of this plan is straight forward: improve Republican political performance,' State Rep. Todd Hunter, who authored the map, said during floor debate. Republican leaders at both state and national levels pushed for quick action. President Donald Trump urged lawmakers to act, posting a message that read 'ASAP!' Gov. Greg Abbott also called on legislators to advance the proposal during the special session. Democrats returned to Austin after their failed walkout strategy. Their return restored the quorum needed for the House to conduct business. That move cleared the way for Republicans to move forward with the redistricting plan, which passed along a strict 88-52 party line after nearly eight hours of debate and a procedural standoff. House Democratic Caucus Chair Chris Turner said his party will fight the plan in court. 'In a democracy, people choose their representatives. This bill flips that on its head and lets politicians in Washington, D.C., choose their voters,' Turner said. The plan concentrates Democratic voters in urban districts while expanding Republican representation in previously competitive areas, according to critics. Under the new map, no Republican incumbents would see their districts become more competitive. Hunter defended the effort by citing court precedent. He noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed politicians to redraw districts for nakedly partisan purposes. With both chambers now approving the map, it heads to Gov. Greg Abbott, who is expected to sign it into law. If enacted, Texas's congressional delegation could shift from 25 Republicans and 12 Democrats to a projected 30 Republicans and 7 Democrats.
The Hill
12 minutes ago
- The Hill
The Millennium Challenge Corporation advances US interests — don't kill it
The future is unclear for a key, 20-year-old U.S. government initiative advancing American interests around the world and blunting Chinese and Russian influence. The Millennium Challenge Corporation changed the way development assistance was done. It has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty since its launch by President George W. Bush in 2004. It was a year after he created the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, which has saved more than 26 million people over the past two decades, especially on the African continent. Both are perfect examples of American soft power at its best. But whereas the AIDS relief program has largely been spared recent budget cutting after some hiccups, the Millennium Challenge Corporation's future is less clear. Its board meets this week to decide whether to terminate more than half of its portfolio of compacts and smaller threshold programs in various stages of development or implementation. These programs are in Africa and Asia, strategically important regions of the world in which China and Russia would be happy to take our place. The board should consider the impact of possible cuts to our country's reputation as a reliable partner and whether such a reduction would actually benefit U.S. economic, national security and diplomatic interests. Although all government programs should be regularly reviewed for efficiency and effectiveness, it seems shortsighted to drastically reduce the footprint of an agency that has been successfully implementing its mandate to the benefit of U.S. interests. Congress has historically supported the Millennium Challenge Corporation as a model for development and a safeguard for our national security, and its funding level in the House fiscal 2026 appropriations bill demonstrates that support. The Millennium Challenge Corporation aims to reduce poverty through economic growth and exemplifies how the generosity of the American people can really make a difference overseas in ways that advance U.S. national interests while driving development. The program has expanded access to electricity in Benin and Georgia so that children can study after dark and hospitals can properly store vaccines. It has created the infrastructure to deliver clean water to homes and businesses in Cape Verde and Mongolia. And it has built or improved roads, airports, ports and bridges in many countries so that people can get to school or work — and efficiently deliver their goods to markets. In Africa, the program has educated more than 255,500 students, contributed more than 26 million megawatt-hours of electricity, guaranteed over 305,000 households and businesses have legal rights and protections over their land, and improved production for over 70,600 farmers. The Millennium Challenge Corporation has funded 82 agreements in 49 countries since 2004, benefiting nearly 400 million people. Twenty-five of these countries are in Africa, and these investments have benefited an estimated 154 million Africans. And it has done all this in financially sound ways. Moreover, this kind of assistance opens doors for the United States, including for American companies seeking to do business in and with these countries. The Millennium Challenge Corporation took a groundbreaking approach to foreign assistance, requiring that countries qualify based on rigorous third-party indicators measuring democratic governance, investment in health and education, and economic freedom. Countries that don't meet these criteria aren't eligible for compacts, which are binding agreements developed in partnership with qualifying countries with rigorous monitoring. As with the Bush-era AIDS program, the Millennium Challenge Corporation's focus on Africa is well placed. By 2050, more than 25 percent of the world's population will live there. By 2030, more than 40 percent of the world's young people will be African. Already, more than half of the world's 20 fastest-growing economies are in Africa, along with 65 percent of the world's arable land and about 30 percent of the world's mineral reserves. The Millennium Challenge Corporation engenders tremendous goodwill among the populations of recipient countries and helps counter efforts by Russia and China to insert themselves at the expense of U.S. interests. Whether through cultural engagement programs and educational opportunities, infrastructure investments or military interference, Beijing and Moscow seek to expand their influence in the region while at the same time spreading anti-Western propaganda and taking advantage of disenfranchised or struggling populations to export their authoritarian brand of governance. This is a risk for the African population, global security and American interests. Without this program, the picture would look much worse. It empowers its partners, championing country ownership of its development projects rather than holding them hostage to burdensome loan terms, like China does. It creates jobs, rather than taking them from the local population. Ut requires transparency and accountability for every dollar spent, as opposed to the shady, corrupt deals China and Russia seek. There must be accountability both from partner countries and the Millennium Challenge Corporation. The compact countries must maintain their performance on the indicators and implement the compact transparently. Meanwhile, they Millennium Challenge Corporation measures economic rates of return on its investments and rigorously evaluates every program for effectiveness and results. The Millennium Challenge Corporation demands democratic governance, investment in people, and policies supporting economic freedom from its partners so they can escape poverty and build strong economies, rather than undercutting democracy and saddling its partners with debt. At the same time, it creates opportunities for private investment and develops trade and economic partners. A drastic reduction in its work could leave unfinished projects that China would sweep in and complete — and claim credit for. The Millennium Challenge Corporation uses foreign assistance dollars responsibly to lift people out of poverty while strengthening U.S. diplomatic ties and economic partnerships — all while fostering a positive view of America among both citizens and governments. Its board should keep this in mind this week. Monica Vegas Kladakis is senior advisor for Outreach and Strategic Partnerships at the George W. Bush Institute and previously served as managing director for Threshold Programs at MCC. David J. Kramer is executive director the George W. Bush Institute.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Remote participation now firmly embedded in WA Legislature
The Senate chambers at the Washington state Capitol. (Legislative Support Services) Washington state lawmakers long resisted routinely taking testimony from those not seated in a committee hearing room. But when forced by the pandemic to operate remotely for two sessions, their minds changed and it is reshaping public involvement in the legislative process. Thousands signed up to testify remotely this past legislative session. They took part from their homes, their offices and their cars. Thousands more, sometimes tens of thousands, who did not want to speak still went online to register support or opposition to pending legislation. Organizations pressing to pass or defeat bills sometimes cited the numbers to bolster their arguments. When crowds did pack hearings on controversial bills, lawmakers wanted to know how many had taken a stand via the online option, as another barometer of public opinion. 'It's encouraging to see more people engaging — testifying in committee, sharing comments on legislation, and emailing lawmakers,' said House Speaker Laurie Jinkins, D-Tacoma. 'We've worked to expand these options so that people across the state, including those far from Olympia, can participate.' House committees held 326 meetings with public hearings this past session. For those, 11,768 people signed up to testify in person or remotely and 8,963, or 76%, did get to say their piece, according to tallies provided by legislative staff. Another 585,378 people signed in with a viewpoint but did not wish to testify. In the Senate, there were 302 committee sessions with hearings and 10,037 people sought to speak. There were 615,023 people who weighed in without testifying in the course of the 105-day session, three times as many as the shorter 2024 session. 'It's a good thing. It means more public engagement. Now they have a way to express their opinion on a deeply unpopular bill,' said Senate Minority Leader John Braun, R-Centralia. 'That's good for democracy. Braun points to what transpired with Democrat-sponsored legislation to repeal a voter-approved limit on property tax growth. Republicans fought the bill in both chambers, rallying residents to state their opposition at public hearings. On March 31, when the Senate version reached the Senate Ways and Means Committee, 308 people signed in to speak, with 288 opposed. Of the 45,174 not wishing to testify, 42,865 signed in as opposed, based on sign-in logs posted online. A similar scenario unfolded April 3 in the House Finance Committee for a hearing on the original House bill to hike the cap on the annual property tax growth factor. This time, 16,027 people who did not testify signed in opposed, versus 2,183 in support. Eventually, the controversial provision was stripped from this bill. 'Providing the option of remote testimony helps open the door to the state capital and allows more voices to be heard before laws are passed affecting the daily lives of citizens and businesses,' said Jason Mercier, who lobbied hard for allowing remote testimony a decade ago while working at the Washington Policy Center. Mercier recalled testifying remotely for the first time in May 2013 at a hearing chaired by Republican Mike Padden, the former Spokane state senator who embraced the idea early on as a way for his constituents to participate without having to travel to Olympia. Six years later, the Senate committed to making remote testimony a permanent option and the House leaned into doing it on a trial basis with several of its panels. This allowed Washington's Legislature to hit the ground running during the pandemic, said Mercier, now vice president and director of research for Mountain States Policy Center in Idaho. COVID-19 arrived in early 2020, worsening after that year's short legislative session. Lawmakers worked entirely from home in 2021 and only a handful could be on the floor at any one time in 2022. Since returning in-person, they've made it routine to participate from outside Olympia. 'It took time and effort, but Washington state is now the model for other states across the country for remote testimony,' Mercier said.
