Lawmakers, USDA seek to combat New World screwworm along the southern border
Just a few hundred miles from our southern border, a flesh-eating parasite has been detected in Mexico, putting America's farmers and ranchers on watch. The New World screwworm is a parasitic fly that lays its eggs in the open wounds of livestock, primarily cattle and sheep, deer and other wildlife, and on rare occasions, humans and pets. Once hatched, the fly's larvae feed on tissue, leading to severe infection and often death. If this parasite were ever to reach the United States, our agricultural economy and supply chain would be in serious trouble.
That is not a hypothetical scenario. Flare-ups have occurred within our borders in the past, costing American producers hundreds of millions of dollars. Mrs. D., a Central Texas rancher, remembers all too well the devastation of the last major screwworm outbreak in the United States that took place during the 1960s. 'Every day from dawn to dusk, my husband would ride horseback to find animals affected by the screwworm. We worked tirelessly to ensure our livestock survived. We had to make sure our calves were born in the winter to stand a chance against the fly that caused the screwworm because the flies are not as prevalent in the cold weather.'
Although screwworms were eradicated from the U.S. in the 1960s using a sterilized fly technique, all the signs are there for a repeat scenario. As of March of this year, 369 confirmed cases had been reported in Mexico, creeping north from its confinement zone in Central America and towards the United States.
As the representative of the largest congressional district in Texas, I have heard repeatedly from my constituents that a reemergence of New World screwworm is their biggest concern. Texas tops the charts for beef production in the nation, and some of my district's counties have more sheep and goats than live human beings.
There is no doubt that a screwworm outbreak would be absolutely devastating to communities like mine. I am not alone in these concerns.
In March, 43 of my colleagues joined me in bipartisan outreach to the Agriculture Department to offer congressional support on screwworm eradication efforts. I also introduced the STOP Screwworms Act along with 31 of my House colleagues and Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.), Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), and Martin Heinrich (D-N.M). This important legislation would establish a sterile fly production facility in the U.S. — a critical step in our fight to shore up our domestic infrastructure against this deadly parasite.
Fortunately, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins has been incredibly proactive on this issue. This week, I joined Rollins to announce the launch of an $8.5 million sterile New World screwworm fly dispersal facility in South Texas and a five-pronged plan to enhance the Agriculture Department's ability to detect, control and eliminate this pest. Per the Agriculture Department, the facility in South Texas is expected to be ready within six months.
President Trump and Rollins have made protecting America's agriculture industry a priority. Together, we will fight to codify executive branch wins into long-term legislative solutions.
Tony Gonzales represents Texas's 23rd District in the U.S. House of Representatives. He serves as the chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Conference and represents the largest congressional district in Texas, spanning over 800 miles of the southern border.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
10 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
My theory for why Trump's agents target Dodger Stadium and Winchell's Donut House
Well, we could just cancel baseball. And, to be safe, every doughnut shop in Los Angeles should be closed pending investigation. Some Dodgers fans might be undocumented, which could explain why federal agents were camped near Dodger Stadium on Thursday but denied entry. Or there could be another reason. Roughly a quarter of the players in Major League Baseball are from outside the country. Those foreigners have visas, as I understand it, but these days, the Trump administration has made clear that temporary protected legal status is no guarantee against ejection. Not from a game, but from the country. Has anybody checked Shohei Ohtani's papers lately? Or those of Teoscar Hernández, Kim Hye-seong or Yoshinobu Yamamoto? And what about the doughnuts? It's no secret in Los Angeles that a lot of doughnut shops are run by immigrants. So it can't be a coincidence that, on Wednesday, agents arrested several men at a bus stop near a Winchell's Donut House in Pasadena. State Rep. Judy Chu (D-Monterey Park) posted comments and video on social media. 'As you can see, these ICE agents are pointing guns at innocent individuals, no warrants, no explanations, just fear and intimidation,' Chu wrote, adding that agents 'masked and armed like a militia' constitute an 'absolutely vile' abuse of power. This country is under threat like never before. Immigrants playing baseball, making doughnuts, hustling construction jobs at day laborer sites, changing the diapers of seniors with physical and cognitive disabilities. But for all of that, it can be a little difficult at times to follow the Trump administration's thinking. One day we were told the plan is to make 3,000 arrests a day. Then Trump quickly reversed course, saying raids on farms, hotels and restaurants would be curtailed because he learned in a shocking revelation from employers that 'our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace.' Then, almost immediately, the administration is back to going after everyone. I have a hunch as to why that is. First of all, it's worth noting that consistency has long been an issue for the president, so much so that he should be wearing flip-flops at all times. To the Oval Office, to the golf course, to bed. Everywhere. And yet, although we're used to him saying one thing and doing another, I think something else is at play here. Trump has kept some campaign promises but struck out on key vows, and he's not a guy who handles defeat well. Grocery prices were supposed to drop on Day One and a new age of American prosperity was about to begin. How's that going, folks? He was going to end the war in Ukraine before he even took office, and then put an end to the war in the Middle East. Hmmmmmmmm. He was going to usher in a new era of budget accountability with his buddy Elon Musk leading the way. Well, that was a quick and ugly divorce, and Trump's 'big beautiful' budget bill adds $3 trillion to the national debt. We know Trump loves to watch television, so we can only assume that after he threw himself a birthday party with a military parade on Saturday, he had to have caught news clips of millions of Americans marching at 'No Kings Day' rallies across the country, including in red states. Ouch. I'm wondering if Trump saw the same sign I saw at the El Segundo demonstration, which was about a certain wife who hasn't spent much time in the White House: 'If Melania doesn't have to live with him America shouldn't have to either.' Weak men, under duress, flex their muscles. Trump can deport, and so he will. It could ruin the economy, but that won't stop him. Catch a Dodgers game while you can, and stock up on doughnuts.
31 minutes ago
Some US restaurants and servers oppose Republicans' 'no tax on tips' budget proposal
Some segments of the U.S. restaurant industry don't support President Donald Trump's proposal to eliminate federal taxes on tips, saying it would help too few people and obscure bigger issues in the way tipped workers are paid. The Independent Restaurant Coalition, which represents nearly 100,000 restaurant and bars, has appealed to Congress to reconsider the proposal, which is part of the president's spending bill. Even some workers who rely on tips say they oppose making them tax-deductible. 'I think there's a huge hole in this concept of 'no tax on tips' because a lot of restaurant workers aren't receiving tips in the first place,' said Elyanna Calle, a bartender in Austin, Texas, and president of the Restaurant Workers United union. 'It's not helping most kitchen workers, and oftentimes those are the people who are being paid the least.' For now, making tips tax-free appears to have broad support among lawmakers. Both Trump and his Democratic rival in last year's U.S. presidential election, former Vice President Kamala Harris, campaigned on the concept. The House included it in a tax cuts package approved last month. The bill would eliminate federal income taxes on tips for people working in jobs that have traditionally received them as long as they make less than $160,000 in 2025. The Senate Finance Committee passed a modified version on Monday. Senators capped deductions at $25,000 and want to phase them out for individuals whose income exceeds $150,000. Eligibility would be based on earnings as of Dec. 31, 2024. Both the House and Senate committee measures would apply through the 2028 tax year. The Finance Committee specified that 'cash tips' qualify but said the term applied to tips paid in cash, charged to credit cards or received from other employees under a tip-sharing arrangement. Wary of wading into politics, many restaurant chains contacted by The Associated Press about tax-free tips didn't respond or referred questions to the National Restaurant Association, including Waffle House, The Cheesecake Factory, First Watch and the parent companies of Olive Garden, Applebee's and Chili's. The National Restaurant Association, a trade organization that represents nearly 500,000 U.S. restaurants and bars, applauded the House's passage of Trump's spending bill and said it wants to see tax-free tips. The association estimates the measure would benefit more than 2 million servers and bartenders. But the U.S. restaurant industry has more than 12 million workers, including dishwashers and chefs, according to government data. The Independent Restaurant Coalition says the 'no tax on tips' proposal leaves out too many of those workers. The coalition wants Congress to eliminate taxes on service charges, which are being used to compensate employees at an increasing number of restaurants. Around 15% of U.S. restaurants add some form of service charge to customers' bills, according to the National Restaurant Association. George Skandalos, a pizza restaurant owner in Moscow, Idaho, was tired of seeing servers count out hundreds of dollars of tips at the end of the night while people in the kitchen scrubbed the floor on their hands and knees. So he started experimenting with different compensation models. Skandalos tried pooling servers' tips and distributing them but ran into rules preventing that. He tried raising his menu prices and explaining that a percentage of each order was going to employee compensation, but customers didn't understand and kept tipping. Skandalos now has a gratuity-free policy at his restaurant, Maialina. He charges a 20% service fee that is distributed to all employees and helps pay for benefits like paid vacation and parental leave. The vast majority of customers appreciate the effort, he said. Skandalos said 'no tax on tips' doesn't acknowledge restaurants like his that are trying to distribute pay more equally. He would like to see service charges exempted from taxes. 'This bill is a very good start in terms of trying to leave more money in people's pocketbooks, but now let's finish what we started and make it a great thing for the restaurant industry overall,' he said. But Ted Pappageorge, the secretary-treasurer of the Culinary Workers Union Local 226 in Las Vegas, said restaurants should just pay their kitchen workers more to compensate for servers earning tips. ''No tax on tips' is an opportunity for Republicans and Democrats to deliver something to working class folks,' he said. Pappageorge wants Congress to take up a separate bill introduced by Nevada Democrat Steven Horsford that would eliminate taxes on tips but also require restaurants to pay workers at least the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. In 43 states, restaurants are currently allowed to pay tipped workers as little as $2.13 per hour. Yolanda Garcia, a barista at Resorts World in Las Vegas and a member of the Culinary Workers Union, also supports Horsford's bill. Garcia said she makes $33,000 a year, including up to $600 per month in tips. Tips are never guaranteed, she said, but if they were tax-free, it would help make up for that uncertainty. 'It would help me get more groceries. Right now, the price of everything has gone up,' Garcia said. Calle, the Austin bartender and union leader, said she also benefits from tips, but they're inconsistent. She suspects tipping would decline if the tax-free provision passes, because customers will resent it. For Calle, the underlying problem that must be solved is low base pay.
31 minutes ago
North Carolina lawmakers finalize bill that would scrap 2030 carbon reduction goal
RALEIGH, N.C. -- North Carolina legislators finalized a bill Thursday that would eliminate an interim greenhouse gas reduction mandate set in a landmark 2021 law, while still directing regulators to aim to cancel out power plant carbon emissions in the state within the next 25 years. With some bipartisan support, the state Senate voted to accept the House version that would repeal the 2021 law's requirement that electric regulators take 'all reasonable steps to achieve' reducing carbon dioxide output 70% from 2005 levels by 2030. The law's directive to take similar steps to meet a carbon neutrality standard by 2050 would remain in place. The bill's Republican supporters pushing the new measure say getting rid of the interim goal benefits ratepayers asked to pay for future electric-production construction and is more efficient for Duke Energy, the state's dominant electric utility. The bill now goes to Democratic Gov. Josh Stein, who can veto the measure, sign it or let it become law without his signature. Stein previously expressed concerns about the Senate version of the measure, worried that it could hurt electricity users and threaten the state's clean-energy economy. His office didn't immediately provide comment after Thursday's vote. With over a dozen House and Senate Democrats voting for the final version, the chances that any Stein veto could be overridden are higher. Republicans in charge of the General Assembly are only one House seat shy of a veto-proof majority. The bill also contains language that would help Duke Energy seek higher electric rates to cover financing costs to build nuclear or gas-powered plants incrementally, rather than wait until the project's end. The 2021 greenhouse gas law marked a rare agreement on environmental issues by then-Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper and Republican lawmakers. At least 17 other states — most controlled by Democrats — have laws setting similar net-zero power plant emissions or 100% renewable energy targets, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council. North Carolina and Virginia are the only ones from the Southeast. The legislation came about as President Donald Trump's administration has proposed rolling back federal environmental and climate change policies, which critics say could boost pollution and threaten human health. Republicans are promoting them as ways to reduce the cost of living and boost the economy. The state Utilities Commission, which regulates rates and services for public utilities, already has pushed back the 2030 deadline — as the 2021 law allows — by at least four years. The panel acknowledged last year it was 'no longer reasonable or executable' for Duke Energy to meet the reduction standard by 2030. Bill supporters say to meet the goal would require expensive types of alternate energy immediately. If the interim standard can be bypassed, GOP bill authors say, Duke Energy can assemble less expensive power sources now and moderate electricity rate increases necessary to reach the 2050 standard. 'Our residents shouldn't be saddled with higher power bills to satisfy arbitrary targets,' Republican Senate leader Phil Berger said in a news release after the vote. Citing an analysis performed by a state agency that represents consumers before the commission, GOP lawmakers say removing the interim goal would reduce by at least $13 billion what Duke Energy would have to spend — and pass on to customers — in the next 25 years. Bill opponents question the savings figure given uncertainty in plant fuel prices, energy demand and construction costs. They say the interim goal still holds an aspirational purpose and was something that Duke Energy had agreed in 2021 to meet. Provisions in the measure related to recouping plant construction expenses over time would reduce accumulated borrowing interest. Environmental groups argue the financing option would benefit Duke Energy's bottom line on expensive projects even if they're never completed, and the bill broadly would prevent cleaner energy sources from coming online sooner. They also contend another bill section would shift costs to residential customers. 'This bill is bad for all North Carolinians, whether they're Duke Energy customers or simply people who want to breathe clean air,' North Carolina Sierra Club director Chris Herndon said after the vote while urging Stein to veto the measure. Bill support came from the North Carolina Chamber and a manufacturers' group, in addition to Duke Energy. 'We appreciate bipartisan efforts by policymakers to keep costs as low as possible for customers and enable the always-on energy resources our communities need,' the company said this week.
