Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CARBAJAL.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CARBAJAL. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to encourage every Member of this Chamber to support my dairy business innovation initiative amendment.
The dairy business innovation initiatives support dairy businesses in the development, production, marketing, and distribution of dairy products. They provide technical assistance to dairy businesses directly or through industry experts and research institutions.
USDA initially awarded three equal grants through a competitive selection process to the University of Tennessee; the Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets; and the University of Wisconsin.
A fourth initiative was later awarded by USDA in 2021 to the Pacific Coast Coalition-Dairy Business Innovation Initiative, DBII, at Fresno State University, which serves California, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, and 135 grantees from 34 congressional districts.
Even with the addition of the fourth initiative, congressional appropriations have consistently directed the majority of funds to be equally distributed between the three original initiatives outside of the Pacific Coast Coalition's region.
That is even when accounting for California being ranked number one in milk production, number one in butter, number one in milk powder, number one in ice cream, and number two in cheese, with over 140 manufacturing facilities.
Despite the Pacific Coast Coalition's region of six States producing 29 percent of all milk in the U.S. and 45 percent of total exports, they still do not get an equal amount of funding.
My amendment simply would update the statute to recognize that there are four regionally located initiatives and ensure that each of these initiatives is accounted for when funding is administered--just achieving parity.
This could also allow for a more equitable distribution of funding between the four initiatives, which has historically not been the case since the inception of the Pacific Coast Coalition.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CARBAJAL. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for speaking on the merits of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CARBAJAL. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to amendment No. 36.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CARBAJAL. Mr. Chair, greyhound racing is cruel and inhumane, resulting in hundreds of injuries and deaths of otherwise healthy dogs. It is already prohibited in 44 States and exists in only one, West Virginia.
Despite existing only in West Virginia, Federal legislation to end greyhound racing is necessary because greyhound races are still transmitted to bettors across the United States. Bets placed on these simulcast races prop up this cruel but dying industry both in the United States and abroad.
The bipartisan Greyhound Protection Act--did I say bipartisan?--has been a legislative concept since 2020, building off of the work of former Representative Tony Cardenas and now-United Nations Ambassador Mike Waltz.
I have been the lead sponsor of this bipartisan legislation for the past 4 years, alongside my colleagues Randy Fine, Zach Nunn, and Don Davis.
During these 6 years, the Greyhound Protection Act has earned dozens of Democratic and Republican cosponsors. It is endorsed by over 250 animal protection groups, local humane societies, and community leaders.
In March, the bipartisan Greyhound Protection Act passed the House Agriculture Committee by voice vote during the farm bill's committee markup.
Since that time, the final greyhound protection language in the bill has been modified to ensure it applies to greyhounds and nothing else. That change to protect sportsmen and hunting dogs was something Representative Nunn and I recognized and expressed our willingness to the Agriculture Committee on amending this language. It represents a diligently crafted compromise between animal protection groups and hunters, exactly the type of bipartisanship we come to expect from the farm bill.
If this amendment were to pass, it would effectively gut the Greyhound Protection Act and give a free pass for greyhound racing to continue to operate in one State in the United States.
My door has been opened for years to discuss this language, and I know the Agriculture Committee's doors were open all this time, as well. While I understand the concerns surrounding the impact on a very small group of individuals, no pension solvency should hinge on a single, volatile revenue stream, particularly one tied to an inhumane industry in long-term decline.
I have served in local government myself, and I know that States routinely adjust revenue frameworks when phasing out activities deemed inconsistent with public values or policy priorities. West Virginia already has an alternative gaming revenue, including lottery and casino operations that can be recalibrated, if needed.
This amendment runs counter to public sentiment and ensures more greyhounds will not continue to live lives of confinement in stacked metal cages and be subjected to predictable and preventable risk of injury and death on the track.
It has taken decades of work by greyhound rescuers to reach this point, as well as the work done by myself, my colleagues, and committee staff over the last number of years. I ask my colleagues to please oppose this amendment and end the cycle of government-mandated cruelty.
Mr. MOORE of West Virginia. Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to the time remaining.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CARBAJAL. Mr. Chair, I support unions, but this is about cruelty to animals, and we are trying to justify one good over a lot of evil. It is important that we not use this issue and call it just jobs for a very small amount of individuals, in one State in our Nation, when it comes to really protecting humane approaches to how we deal with greyhounds and animals.
Mr. MOORE of West Virginia. Mr. Chair, this amendment is in support of the unions, those union members. If you vote against this, you are against the unions. That is a fact. You are trying to take their pensions away from them. That is what you are doing. Ask the Fraternal Order of Police. Ask the firefighters union. Go ask them about that, and they will give you an answer.
That is exactly what is going on here. I am standing up for those members, standing up for the individuals who are supported by this track. Maybe someday the State of West Virginia will vote to get rid of it, but that is up to the State of West Virginia.
As we have just heard from the gentleman, over 40 States have voted to end dog racing, and that is their right to do that, but this obsession with the State of West Virginia, with less than 2 million people, and what we are doing inside of our borders, I don't really get.
Just to be clear, this amendment is in support of the police. It is in support of the firefighters. You are taking away their pensions if you don't support the amendment. I think it is a pretty fair compromise, as the chairman said.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CARBAJAL. Mr. Chair, in this country, we have done a lot of inhumane things, whether it is to animals or people. We oftentimes try to justify it in one way or another, but it is hard to justify jobs over being humane. It is a matter of values, and that is really what it is about.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CARBAJAL. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source