Pingree, Chellie RSS Articles

Pingree Blasts Republican Agriculture Funding Bill that Fails Farmers, Families, and Rural America

Wed, 29 Apr 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), a longtime organic farmer and member of the House Agriculture Committee, spoke out against Republicans’ Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies FY2027 funding bill. During the House Appropriations Committee markup of the bill today, Pingree criticized the funding bill for cutting nutrition assistance, farmer support, conservation programs, local food initiatives, and USDA staffing at a time when families are struggling to afford healthy food and farmers are facing rising costs, extreme weather, and tariff chaos.

“Republicans can say they care about farmers and the health of Americans. But the choices they make in this bill tell a very different story. Our farmers deserve better. Our rural communities deserve better. Families trying to put healthy food on the table deserve better,” Pingree said.

Pingree argued that Republicans’ claims to support farmers and the “Make America Healthy Again” movement are contradicted by a bill that cuts WIC fruit and vegetable benefits, weakens local food systems, and includes poison pill riders that undermine fair competition and public health.

“How do we expect to make America healthy if we are cutting the very benefit that helps pregnant women, new moms, babies, and young children access healthy fruits and vegetables?” Pingree said. “[…] This is at a time when nearly half of children in this country do not eat a vegetable every day. So, I just do not understand how anyone can say we are making America healthy while cutting the benefit that helps children eat healthy food.”

For 2027, House Republicans agriculture funding bill provides $6.3 billion in discretionary funding, a 4 percent cut below 2026. The legislation:

Increases costs for farmers and rural communities by steeply cutting critical investments, including water and waste grants to help the poorest communities get safer water services, and slashing the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) loans in half.
Hurts farmers by cutting the number of federal and local employees who help them access government resources they are promised.
Threatens access to food for hardworking and vulnerable Americans, failing to ensure that every eligible recipient can access their benefits, by not providing the full fruit and vegetable benefit to USDA's Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).
Slashes Food for Peace, which provides American farmers with additional revenue and helps feed hungry children around the globe, while USDA proceeds to start implementing the program after the administration gutted USAID.

Pingree’s full opening remarks as prepared for delivery:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have serious concerns about the funding bill before us today.

As appropriators, we have a very important responsibility. That is especially true for this bill, because we are talking about our farmers. About the food people eat. About whether our communities the basic support they need to survive.

Unfortunately, this bill takes us in the wrong direction. Take WIC, for example. We spend a lot of time in this committee talking about healthy food, nutrition, and getting more fruits and vegetables into people’s diets. And this is supposedly the administration of “MAHA” — Make America Healthy Again.

But how do we expect to make America healthy if we are cutting the very benefit that helps pregnant women, new moms, babies, and young children access healthy fruits and vegetables?

This bill cuts the WIC fruit and vegetable benefit by 10 percent for fiscal year 2027. And the Chairman has been very clear that this is just a starting point, with the eventual goal of going back to “pre-pandemic levels.”

Well, let’s talk about what that means. For women, that means going from $52 a month for fruits and vegetables down to $13. For children, it means going from $26 a month down to $10.

That is not a small adjustment. That is a dramatic cut.

In Maine, about 15,000 people participate in WIC. In a state of only 1.3 million people, that matters. And the fruit and vegetable benefit is one of the most used and most redeemed parts of the program.

One WIC participant in Maine said that, because of the current benefit, she was able to buy a bag of cherries for her child for the first time. Before that, when the benefit was lower, bananas were all they could afford. Her child had never had cherries before because they were too expensive.

That is what this cut means. It means fewer choices. It means fewer healthy foods. It means a parent standing in the grocery store deciding what they have to put back.

And again, this is at a time when nearly half of children in this country do not eat a vegetable every day.

So I just do not understand how anyone can say we are making America healthy while cutting the benefit that helps children eat healthy food.

The same contradiction shows up when we talk about farmers and conservation.

We hear a lot about regenerative agriculture. We hear a lot about soil health. But this bill cuts the very programs that help farmers do that work.

It eliminates funding for the USDA Climate Hubs. It cuts Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education by $8 million. It cuts conservation technical assistance by $61 million. And it cuts the Office of Urban Agriculture, which supports food loss and waste reduction projects and local food systems, by $3 million.

Now, I know what we are going to hear today. We are going to hear that this is some climate agenda—that some of these programs are unnecessary or political.

To that, I would just say this: talk to farmers.

Talk to the farmers in my state who are dealing with extreme weather. Talk to the farmers who are trying to improve their soil, manage flooding, deal with drought, use cover crops, and make their land more resilient.

That is not “woke.” That is what farming in 2026 looks like as they grapple with the impacts of climate change and rising costs. We are derelict in our duty if we are not helping them meet the challenges that are right in front of them.

At the same time, farmers in Maine are already struggling with the chaos of this Administration’s tariffs.

I heard from a farmer in Brunswick who was trying to purchase a machine from Holland and had to calculate the daily price of steel just to figure out whether he could afford it. Eventually, he gave up.

I heard from another farmer in Unity who is trying to buy equipment to weed potatoes. His tariff bill is 20 percent of the cost of the equipment, plus 50 percent of the price of the aluminum and steel in that equipment. The dealer does not even know what to charge because no one knows what the price will be when the equipment arrives.

That is the reality farmers are living with right now.

And what does this bill do? It cuts Farm Service Agency staffing, Rural Development staffing, and conservation technical assistance, which supports NRCS staff.

We can put all kinds of programs into a bill, but if there is no one in the county office to answer the phone, return an email, process a loan, or help a farmer access conservation funding, then those programs cannot—and, as we’ve seen over the past year of staff cuts—do not work.

I am also deeply disappointed that this bill does nothing to restore the Local Food Purchase Assistance program or the Local Food for Schools program.

We learned a lot during the pandemic. We learned that our supply chains were fragile, that buying locally matters, and that schools, food banks, farmers, and families all benefit when we connect local food to local need.

These programs did exactly that.

In Maine, Farms for Food Equity used LFPA funding to purchase more than 61,000 pounds of nutritious food from 15 local farms in Southern Maine. That food went to pantries and other food assistance programs.

Daybreak Growers Alliance, a women-owned food distribution company in Unity, used LFPA funding to purchase from more than 35 Maine farms and distribute more than $500,000 in Maine-grown products to neighbors in need.

Cultivating Community in Portland supported fresh, culturally familiar food for limited-resource neighbors.

Liberation Farms supported 30 immigrant and refugee farmers and helped provide thousands of pounds of culturally familiar crops to immigrant and refugee families in Androscoggin and Cumberland counties.

These programs helped farmers make ends meet, helped families eat, and kept dollars in local communities. That is exactly the kind of thing this bill should support. Instead, this bill walks away from them.

And finally, I have serious concerns about the poison pill riders in this bill, including provisions that end support for more competition in our poultry systems through the Packers and Stockyards Act and block sodium reduction targets from going into place.

Again, Republicans can say they care about farmers and the health of Americans. But the choices they make in this bill tell a very different story.

Our farmers deserve better. Our rural communities deserve better. Families trying to put healthy food on the table deserve better.

Thank you, and I yield back.

###

Maine Delegation Demands Answers from USPS for Failing to Pay Rockland Contractor More Than $349,000, Jeopardizing Mail Service for Maine Island Communities

Fri, 24 Apr 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Maine’s Congressional Delegation is calling on the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) to immediately resolve its payment issue with a Maine contractor that serves island communities. In a letter to Postmaster General David Steiner, U.S. Senators Angus King and Susan Collins and U.S. Representatives Chellie Pingree and Jared Golden condemned USPS for failing to pay the Rockland-based Penobscot Island Air (PIA) more than $349,000 for mail-delivery service and demanded answers about why USPS has, according to PIA, repeatedly failed to make timely payments for several years. After PIA announced it would not make its scheduled deliveries on Tuesday in protest, USPS agreed Wednesday to immediately pay 25% of the outstanding balance, and PIA promptly resumed service. But questions and concerns still remain.

“For decades, Penobscot Island Air has helped the USPS deliver essential mail to Maine’s island residents. We urge you to immediately resolve the outstanding back payments and provide clarification on how these payment lapses occurred, as well as how delays can be prevented in the future,” the delegation wrote. “From Matinicus to Vinalhaven, island communities in Maine rely on the USPS to pay bills, receive life-saving medications, and stay connected with friends and family. Penobscot Island Air is an indispensable bridge between the mainland and islands that helps the Postal Service fulfill its promise of reaching every American, even in the most rural communities.”

USPS’s failure to pay PIA is the latest example of recent disruptions to mail delivery in Maine. Over the past several months, delegation offices have received hundreds of complaints from constituents about delayed and inconsistent deliveries—particularly in rural communities.

Together, these issues underscore the importance of ensuring that USPS has the necessary resources and staff to fulfill its mission of providing all Americans with reliable, affordable, and universal mail service—and that its agreements with contractors like PIA are fully honored.

The letter is available here and is copied below.

+++

Dear Postmaster General Steiner:

We write to seek clarification regarding reports of Penobscot Island Air’s (PIA) payment issues with the United States Postal Service (USPS). For decades, Penobscot Island Air has helped the USPS deliver essential mail to Maine’s island residents. We urge you to immediately resolve the outstanding back payments and provide an explanation of how these payment lapses occurred, as well as how delays can be prevented in the future.

From Matinicus to Vinalhaven, island communities in Maine rely on the USPS to pay bills, receive life-saving medications, and stay connected with friends and family. Penobscot Island Air is an indispensable bridge between the mainland and islands that helps the Postal Service fulfill its promise of reaching every American, even in the most rural communities.

On April 21, Penobscot Island Air alerted island residents that they would be halting mail deliveries for the day due to the back payments they are owed by the USPS. According to PIA, these back payments amount to over $349,000. While PIA had received partial payments for the balance, the last payment they received was on March 13. They had also made numerous attempts to resolve these payment issues through direct outreach to the USPS. The amount owed, the ongoing delay in payment, and the failure to resolve these issues in a timely fashion are alarming and unacceptable.

Mail deliveries for the USPS account for almost a fifth of PIA’s annual revenue. We are concerned that PIA’s operations will continue to be disrupted without reliable processing of this critical stream of income. The USPS cannot afford to jeopardize a dedicated, decades-long partnership, and Maine island residents cannot afford any discontinuation in service, even for a few days.

Penobscot Island Air is one of many contractors in the state that deliver mail to island communities by air and sea. This incident raises concerns over whether the USPS is faithfully fulfilling the terms of all these contracts.

While it is promising to hear that the USPS has reached a partial payment agreement to pay Penobscot Island Air about 25% of its outstanding balance, we need greater assurance from the USPS that Maine island contractors will receive fair and prompt compensation for the services they provide. We respectfully request detailed answers to the following questions and ask that USPS continue to work urgently with Penobscot Island Air to resolve these back payments immediately and ensure that future payment processing is timely and consistent.

What is the current balance of back payments USPS owes to Penobscot Island Air?
Can you provide a timeline of the USPS payments to PIA over the past three years, including when payments were due and when they were paid?
Can you provide an explanation for these delays in payment to PIA?
What specific steps will the USPS take to prevent lapses in payment from occurring in the future and to ensure that payment is processed in a timely and consistent manner?
Can you provide a list of all the USPS contractors in Maine who deliver mail to island communities?
Do any other island contractors have balances owed to them by the USPS?

Thank you for your attention to this time-sensitive issue. We look forward to your prompt response.

Sincerely,

###

Pingree, Massie Team Up to Strip Big Chemical Immunity from Farm Bill

Wed, 22 Apr 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) and Congressman Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) are teaming up to introduce an amendment to the Farm Bill that fights back against immunity for chemical companies and protects the health of Americans. Republicans’ Farm Bill, which is expected to be taken up by the House next week, includes provisions that would shield chemical manufacturers like Bayer from lawsuits and would preempt state and local warning label laws or usage regulations for potentially harmful products. The Pingree-Massie Protect Our Health Amendment would remove this harmful language from the Farm Bill. Cosponsors of the amendment include Representatives Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), Eli Crane (R-Ariz.), and Eugene Vindman (D-Va.).

“Big Chemical has spent years trying to buy exactly this kind of protection from Congress: immunity from lawsuits, weaker safeguards, and a federal override of state and local pesticide protections. This Farm Bill would hand it to them on a silver platter,” Pingree said. “If a company’s product makes people sick, that company should be held accountable. If states and local communities want to put stronger protections in place, they should have every right to do so. I’m grateful to Congressman Massie for joining me in this fight. This is beyond politics and party lines. Congress should be protecting families, farmers, and children, not doing favors for Bayer and other chemical giants.”

“Americans need to know: our government is under siege by lobbyists for German company Bayer,” said Massie. “Bayer has spent over $9 million lobbying for exemption from liability for harm its chemicals, like glyphosate, might cause. To Make America Healthy Again, Congress should remove the language containing the pesticide liability shield from the Farm Bill.”

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. 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 will hear 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 are both slated to speak at the "People vs. Poison" rally outside the Supreme Court.

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.

###

WATCH: Ranking Member Pingree Blasts Burgum for Sabotaging Renewable Energy as Gas Prices Soar

Mon, 20 Apr 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Today, during the House Appropriations Interior and Environment Subcommittee hearing for the Fiscal Year 2027 budget request with Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, Ranking Member Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) condemned the Trump Administration’s aggressive campaign against renewable energy as gas prices soar. In her opening remarks, Pingree outlined the Administration’s clear pattern of propping up Big Oil and sabotaging renewable energy projects, while also failing to uphold the Department’s mission to protect and manage our natural resources, to uphold our trust and treaty obligations, and to follow the science.

Click here to watch Pingree’s full opening remarks; tune into the hearing live here.

“All of these dirty deals are to benefit industry. And it’s at the expense of the American people. Americans are now paying an average of $4.04 for a gallon of gas. According to Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, gas prices could peak at $4.36 a gallon, costing the average household $740 more for gas this year,” Pingree said. “So it makes no sense to me why this administration would be actively sabotaging renewable energy, which we know is the cheaper and more affordable energy option for families. Honestly, it just makes me very angry. This administration’s policies are causing an affordability crisis and there seems to be a lack of focus on what the Department’s mission actually is.”

The fiscal year 2027 budget requests $15 billion for the Department of the Interior:

Renewable Energy: cuts $45 million from the Bureau of Land Management and Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and eliminates renewable energy funding which includes onshore and offshore wind energy.
Bureau of Land Management: cuts $480 million and slashes funding for Wildlife and Aquatic Habitat Management by $139 million, which includes funding for sage grouse and threatened and endangered species.
US Fish and Wildlife (FWS): cuts $526 million, decreasing the National Wildlife Refuge System by 20 percent, eliminates grant programs managed by States, Tribes, and other nations, and moves NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service into FWS ($125 million transfer).
National Park Service: cuts $1.06 billion
- Operation of the National Park System: cuts $760 million or 26 percent. The skinny budget suggests they may change the funding formula to defund or drastically cut support for smaller or less visited park units.
- National Recreation and Preservation: cuts $86 million or 93 percent
- Historic Preservation Fund: cuts $170 million, or a 94 percent cut, and eliminates everything except funding for Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs).
- Construction: cuts $40 million, or a 45 percent cut.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS): cuts $526 million, a 37 percent reduction that eliminates ecosystems, and dramatically cuts funding for core science and natural hazards.
Bureau of Indian Affairs: cuts $378 million, including the elimination of the Indian Guaranteed Loan program and the Indian Land Consolidation program, and a 34 percent reduction in funds that support self-governance and directly fund tribal operations.
Bureau of Indian Education: cuts $436 million, a 32 percent reduction; some eliminations include funding for Tribal Colleges and Universities, Replacement School Construction, and Early Child and Family Development.

Wildland Fire: Transfers all U.S. Forest Service Wildland Fire Management functions to DOI.

+++

Pingree’s remarks as prepared for delivery:

Secretary Burgum, I appreciate you being here today. Unfortunately, after a year of observing this Administration and its impact on our country, I have some deep concerns.

The Department of the Interior is supposed to protect and manage our natural resources, to uphold our trust and treaty obligations, and to follow the science.

Instead, from my observation, this administration is bending the Department’s mission to serve the interests of oil and gas companies.

This administration’s policies are allowing unfettered consumption of natural resources.

We have seen that clearly in the Gulf of Mexico, where last month, the administration convened the so-called “god squad” and approved an extraordinary exemption from the Endangered Species Act protections for offshore drilling.

That decision was alarming on its own.

It was even more disturbing because it came from an administration that seems determined to weaken every safeguard that stands in the way of industry profits.

Speaking of critical safeguards—16 years ago to this day, the Deepwater Horizon explosion killed 11 workers and devastated the Gulf with the largest and most destructive oil spill in America’s history.

In wake of that disaster, investigations found that employees had inappropriately close ties to the oil and gas companies and the agency was then broken up because the oversight model had failed so badly.

Yet this budget proposes reviving that disgraced structure—potentially returning us to the days of corruption and a model that jeopardized worker safety and the environment.

The administration has also taken dramatic steps to block renewable energy development—eliminating competition for the oil and gas industry and reducing the amount of energy produced at a time when our country’s overall energy needs are growing.

Shortly after taking the office, the White House moved quickly to halt offshore wind development and took steps to “rein in” solar and wind projects. Why? Why kneecap industries that create jobs, expand our energy supply, and help address the climate crisis? Because this administration’s energy policy is based on political grievance, ideological hostility, and, of course, propping up Big Oil and Gas. Plus, we know Trump has a strange vendetta against windmills.

When the courts vacated the President’s wind moratorium and stopped the President from blocking five current leases, the administration took the unprecedented step of spending nearly $1 billion in taxpayer dollars to coerce a private company into abandoning offshore wind projects. And now we know the administration’s public justification for that deal does not hold up. Newly disclosed settlement terms show the company was not required to make any new investment in American oil and gas production at all. Instead, it could simply claim credit for spending it was already planning to make, including on fossil fuel projects that had already moved forward.

To make this dirty deal even more stunning, this waste of the taxpayers’ money is being used to reward a company for abandoning clean energy, while helping prop up more oil and gas development at the very moment families are getting hammered by high energy costs. Americans are struggling with high utility bills and higher gas prices, yet this administration chose to spend nearly a billion dollars not to build affordable energy, but to kill it.

All of these dirty deals are to benefit industry. And it’s at the expense of the American people.

Americans are now paying an average of $4.04 for a gallon of gas.

According to Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, gas prices could peak at $4.36 a gallon, costing the average household $740 more for gas this year.

So it makes no sense to me why this administration would be actively sabotaging renewable energy, which we know is the cheaper and more affordable energy option for families. Honestly, it just makes me very angry.

This administration’s policies are causing an affordability crisis and there seems to be a lack of focus on what the Department’s mission actually is.

It seems to me that the White House has you distracted with duties unrelated to being Secretary of the Interior.

For example, what does bringing back a case of gold from Venezuela have to do with DOI’s mission?

Meanwhile, our national parks are falling apart. Staff are stretched thin and the budget proposes to further gut them with a 32% cut.

Science should be at the core of all of the Department’s management decisions, but this budget eviscerates the US Geological Survey, a vital research agency—cutting its budget by 66%.

And, the budget abandons our trust and treaty obligations to Native Americans, slashing the Bureau of Indian Affairs by 27% and Indian Education by 32%.

It has been appalling to watch this administration decimate the staff at the Department and it certainly looks as if it is trying to deliver the final blow with this budget.

This Department is on a dangerous course, and this budget would only make the damage worse.

As Ranking Member of this subcommittee, I will do everything in my power to oppose these reckless cuts and fight the administration’s destructive policies.

I hope you will put politics aside, listen to the serious concerns being raised here today, and take immediate steps to pull this Department back onto a safer and more responsible course.

Thank you again for being here this afternoon.

I yield back.

###

Pingree Calls on ICE to Release Mainer Indefinitely Detained in Texas Detention Center

Thu, 16 Apr 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) is calling on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to immediately release Olivia Andre, a 19-year-old student who has been detained in the Dilley Immigration Processing Center in Texas since November. In a letter to ICE Acting Director Todd Lyons, Pingree questioned the legal basis for Andre’s continued detention, as no explanation has been given to Andre or her legal counsel.

“ICE has failed to provide any clear, written explanation for why she alone continues to be detained. This lack of transparency, especially to Ms. Andre and her legal counsel, is unacceptable and indefensible,” Pingree said.

Andre and her family are asylum seekers from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and have been living in Portland, where Andre was a first-year nursing student. The rest of her family—mother Carine Balenda Mbizi; brother Joel Andre, 16; and sister Estafania Andre, 14—were released from the Dilley Processing Center last month.

Pingree’s letter comes amid reports of deplorable conditions at ICE detention centers, particularly at the Dilley facility, where detainees have reported severe lack of medical care, inadequate access to food, water, personal hygiene, and basic care. Andre has reportedly lost over 20 pounds since being detained. Her mental health has suffered as a result of detention and unnecessary family separation, writing in a letter to Pingree that she feels “lost, alone, and many times feel like I no longer have the strength to keep going.”

This inhumane treatment is causing real long-term trauma for detainees—especially young people and children, who are particularly vulnerable to long-term psychological and developmental harms.

“ICE’s failure to provide counsel with the basic grounds of her ongoing detention reflects a serious breakdown in process and raises profound due process concerns,” Pingree continued. “When the government deprives someone of their liberty, it should at the bare minimum be able to clearly state why. Here, ICE has failed to do that.”

“ICE is not free to detain individuals without explanation,” Pingree said. “Every additional day that passes without a clear explanation only deepens my belief that this detention lacks any lawful or articulable basis.”

The full letter is available here and is copied below.

+++

Dear Acting Director Lyons and Field Office Director Vergara,

I write to request a clear and immediate explanation of the legal basis for Olivia Andre’s continued detention and to call on your agency to promptly release her from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody.

Ms. Andre remains in ICE custody despite her mother and two siblings, who were detained with her, being released. ICE has failed to provide any clear, written explanation for why she alone continues to be detained. This lack of transparency, especially to Ms. Andre and her legal counsel, is unacceptable and indefensible.

Even more troubling, Ms. Andre’s attorneys have repeatedly requested this information in conjunction with requests for her release and have not received any response. ICE’s failure to provide counsel with the basic grounds of her ongoing detention reflects a serious breakdown in process and raises profound due process concerns. When the government deprives someone of their liberty, it should at the bare minimum be able to clearly state why. Here, ICE has failed to do that.

To my knowledge, ICE has not made, or at the very least has not communicated, any individualized custody determination in Ms. Andre’s case. If such a determination does exist, ICE must explain the specific statutory or regulatory authority it is relying on, identify the individualized factors it claims justify her continued detention, and explain why that information has been withheld from her legal representatives despite repeated requests.

If no such determination exists, and I have difficulty imagining there is, then ICE must explain on what basis Ms. Andre remains in custody at all, particularly when a federal court has issued a stay of removal in her case.

Holding a 19-year-old student in indefinite detention when she cannot be removed from the country and doing so without clearly articulating or communicating a lawful justification, raises serious concerns about arbitrary detention and is a failure of accountability.

ICE is not free to detain individuals without explanation. Every additional day that passes without a clear explanation only deepens my belief that this detention lacks any lawful or articulable basis. I expect a prompt response.

Sincerely,

###

Three Maine Students Accepted to US Service Academies, Pingree Announces

Wed, 15 Apr 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Today, Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) announced three students she nominated have been accepted to U.S. Service Academies. Reed Proscia of Freeport High School and Alberto Cutone of Kennebunk High School will both attend the United States Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md., and Kaitlyn Dostie of Camden Hills Regional High School will attend the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy in Kings Point, N.Y.

“Earning acceptance to a U.S. Service Academy is an extraordinary accomplishment and a testament to a student’s hard work, leadership, and commitment to service,” said Pingree. “Reed, Alberto, and Kaitlyn have each distinguished themselves through their academic achievements, strength of character, and dedication to serving something larger than themselves. I’m incredibly proud to have nominated them and thrilled to see them accepted to the Naval Academy and Merchant Marine Academy. I know they will represent Maine well, and I wish them every success as they begin this next chapter.”

“My desire to serve as a commissioned officer in the United States Navy is rooted in my passion for leading people around me, whether it be my teammates as captain, my class as a student officer, or the future generation as their sports coach,” Reed wrote in her nomination request. “Everything I have worked towards on the field and in the classroom aligns with the Naval Academy's commitment to developing physically and intellectually fit leaders of the country. I am confident my athletic and academic mindset have prepared me for the rigor of the Academy. I aim to lead with integrity, serving alongside others with the same mindset, and positively contribute to the Navy's mission.”

“I'm drawn to the Naval Academy because it's more than just college. It is a place that pushes you to be your best and values high standards. The chance to learn alongside people committed to service, academic excellence, and moral integrity is exactly the environment I want. I'm driven to grow and succeed, never resting on past achievements, and I believe the Naval Academy is where I can do that,” Alberto wrote in his request for a nomination to the United States Naval Academy. “Serving my country is a responsibility I hold with deep respect, and I'm eager to give everything I have to that mission. I don't know exactly what my future role in the Navy will be, but the idea of leading, growing, and serving with likeminded people deeply motivates me.”

“The United States Merchant Marine Academy represents everything I value: service, challenge, discipline, and purpose. From my earliest maritime experiences to my academic preparation and extracurricular involvement, each step has strengthened my commitment to serving a greater mission and pursuing a life at sea,” Kaitlyn said in her nomination request. “The motto of USMMA, ‘Acta Non Verba’ or ‘Deeds Not Words’, captures exactly how I strive to live. It is not enough to say I am committed; I must prove it through action, and USMMA will allow me to do so in service to my country. I am ready to embrace the Academy’s demands, both in and out of the classroom, and to grow into the kind of leader USMMA is known for producing.”

To be considered for an appointment to a service academy, applicants must be nominated by an authorized nominating source, which includes Members of Congress.

###

Why a progressive and a MAHA activist are joining forces against Big Chemical

Wed, 08 Apr 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Op-Ed published in The Hill

You would not expect the two of us to be writing an op-ed together.

One of us is a progressive U.S. congresswoman and longtime organic farmer from Maine — someone who has spent decades fighting for organic and regenerative agriculture, access to healthy food, and accountability for corporate polluters.

The other is a leader in the “Make America Healthy Again” or “MAHA” movement, a grassroots movement advocating for access to nutritious food and reducing reliance on synthetic inputs in agriculture. Moms who care about the safety of the food their kids are eating.

MAHA advocates — everyday Americans who are concerned by the health effects of ultra-processed foods — are often associated with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and voters who backed President Trump.

And yet here we are, united by three simple beliefs: that everyone should be able to eat food that is free of toxic chemicals; that people should have proper warning about possible health-risks associated with chemical use; and that giant corporations should not get special immunity when their products pose real health risks.

Behind the headlines about glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, are real human beings: a school groundskeeper who developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after years of spraying Roundup; a homeowner diagnosed with the same cancer after using it around his property for decades; a California couple, both diagnosed after years of exposure; a child in France born with a severe congenital disorder; a mother who lost her infant daughter soon after birth.

These are not statistics. They are people whose lives were upended while one of the most powerful chemical companies in the world insisted everything was fine.

Bayer has now paid roughly $10 billion to settle lawsuits related to Roundup. The company recently announced a proposed additional settlement of up to $7.25 billion to address current and future cases. You do not set aside that kind of money because there is nothing to worry about. You do it because the scientific, legal, and moral pressure has become impossible to ignore.

Yet powerful interests are working overtime to make sure those families never get their day in court.

Our fight is about to reach two major flashpoints.

First, the House is moving toward a floor vote on a farm bill that includes pesticide language with sweeping consequences. Rep. Pingree offered an amendment in committee to strip that language from the bill during the recent House Agriculture Committee markup. Nearly every Democrat voted yes. Not a single Republican joined them. But the fight is far from over.

The provisions in question would strengthen federal pesticide preemption by removing states’ ability to regulate pesticide usage, strip states and communities of their ability to warn consumers of health risks and establish a liability shield to protect chemical manufacturers from being held accountable when their products make people sick.

Maine is one of seven states with local pesticide ordinances and warning requirements designed to protect people and water. This industry-written language — rubber stamped by Republicans on the House Agriculture Committee — would gut those protections.

Second, on April 27, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear Monsanto v. Durnell, a case that could determine whether people harmed by pesticide exposure can continue to bring state-law failure-to-warn claims against chemical manufacturers. We will be outside the court that morning, alongside advocates and MAHA supporters from across the political spectrum, for the “People vs. Poison” rally.

This is not an abstract legal dispute. It is about whether ordinary people get their day in court when corporations fail to warn them about risks.

The chemical industry wants Americans to believe this is all overblown. But EPA safety reviews for pesticides take place every 15 years. The last risk assessment for glyphosate was decades ago, in 1993. That is not a serious approach to protecting public health in 2026, when the science on toxic exposures keeps evolving and the toll on families keeps growing.

There is a deeper political lesson here too. For years, both parties have underestimated how much Americans care about toxins in their food, water and environment. The MAHA movement did not invent those concerns, but it has amplified them.

That is why the White House’s full-throated support of Bayer and its move to back glyphosate production through an executive order caused such fury among the movement’s own base. Kennedy’s supporters saw it as a betrayal. The backlash proved that this is not a fringe concern — it is a live fault line in American politics, and voters across the spectrum are paying attention.

The MAHA movement and Democrats do not agree on everything. But what we share is a refusal to let corporate interests write the rules and then hide behind agencies that move too slowly or rely too heavily on industry-submitted data.

Farmers and families are the ones paying the price for that broken system. Not Big Chemical.

Congress should reject any farm bill language that strips away state and local protections or hands chemical companies a liability shield. The Supreme Court should not close the courthouse doors to people seeking justice. And the public should join us on April 27 at the People vs. Poison rally to show that this fight is bigger than any one bill or any one case.

You do not have to agree on everything to agree on this: Our families deserve honest warnings, our communities deserve the right to protect themselves, and Big Chemical should not be above the law.

Chellie Pingree represents Maine’s 1st District in the House of Representatives and serves on the House Agriculture Committee. Kelly Ryerson, known online as “Glyphosate Girl,” is an advocate for nontoxic food systems and a leader in the Make America Healthy Again movement.

Pingree Statement on Firing of Pam Bondi

Thu, 02 Apr 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) released the following statement on President Trump firing Attorney General Pam Bondi:

Pam Bondi will go down as the worst, most incompetent, and most corrupt Attorney General in American history. Her firing was long overdue—and richly deserved.

From the day she arrived at the Department of Justice, Bondi’s primary objectives were painfully clear: to go after the President’s enemies and to protect Donald Trump at all costs. From directing prosecutors to bring baseless charges against Democratic politicians and refusing to release the full Epstein files in accordance with the law, to her embarrassing, unprofessional behavior during high-profile public hearings (including lying under oath), Bondi demonstrated time and again that she lacked the judgment, temperament, and decision-making required of the nation’s top law enforcement official.

And these are just the top-line failures. That so many of these pursuits required redirecting critical resources from far more pressing matters—combatting organized crime, prosecuting corruption, protecting the American people from all manner of threats—has objectively made our country less safe, and done incredible damage to the DOJ's reputation.

For Donald Trump, loyalty has always been a one-way street. Bondi’s firing only reaffirms what we've known for years: that no amount of blind fealty or blatant corruption on his behalf will spare you from his erratic impulses. I have little doubt that many others will learn that same lesson before his time in office is up.

Whoever is chosen as the next AG, they have a serious and solemn responsibility to ensure the DOJ returns to its core mission of serving the American people—and not capitulating to the paranoia and petty grievances of a man whose sole aim is to protect and enrich himself.

It should be noted that the House Oversight Committee was set to depose Bondi on April 14 over the DOJ's investigation into Jeffrey Epstein and her shambolic handling of the Epstein files. Getting fired doesn’t get her off the hook. Bondi is still legally obligated to appear before the Committee and testify under oath. I, for one, am very much looking forward to that testimony.

###

Pingree, Murphy, King Introduce Bipartisan, Bicameral Legislation to Protect Small Farmers from Financial Risk

Thu, 12 Mar 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Today, Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) introduced the Agricultural Management Assistance Act to reauthorize and improve the Partnership for Risk Management Education and the Agricultural Management Assistance (AMA) programs, which help farmers manage financial risk through diversification, marketing, or conservation practices. The AMA program is only available to 16 states that have historically low rates of participation in the Federal Crop Insurance Program, including Maine. U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), and Angus King (I-Maine) introduced companion legislation in the Senate.

The Agriculture Management Assistance Act would boost funding for the AMA to $30 million, increase funding limits for farmers to $200,000 over five years, and expand the eligible uses for these funds to include: soil health improvements, composting, supporting perennial crop production, and food safety certification in addition to existing authorized uses such as water management structure and soil erosion control.

“Farmers in Maine and across the country are facing unprecedented uncertainty—from extreme weather and rising costs to volatile markets. Programs like Agricultural Management Assistance give farms the tools they need to manage risk, invest in soil health and conservation, and keep their operations viable for the long term,” said Pingree. "I’m proud to partner with Senators Murphy and King to strengthen this program and ensure farmers in states like Maine have the support they need to adapt and thrive.”

“Connecticut’s small farmers are really important to the diversity of our state’s food supply, but they face unique challenges, especially as climate change worsens,” said Murphy. “Our bill provides small farmers with the support they need to navigate financial risks and invests in making their farms more resilient and efficient in the long term.”

“Maine’s farmers are the backbone of our rural communities, and they deserve the same safeguards and assistance that we provide other industries across the country,” said King. “The Agricultural Management Assistance Act will help ensure that Maine farms have the tools they need to manage financial risks, handle nature’s evolving challenges, and continue to produce the food that supports our local economies and families.”

Full text of the bill is available HERE.

###

The 19th: This Democrat built a farm-to-politics career. Now she’s working with MAHA moms.

Mon, 09 Mar 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Published in The 19th

Long before entering politics, Rep. Chellie Pingree was a self-described hippie, a back-to-the-lander and an organic farmer.

In the 1970s, after attending college in Maine, she saw an opportunity to live a more sustainable life there. She decided to stay, and moved to an island off the coast where she and her husband started a small farm and sold their produce at a local market.

Pingree’s passion for farming influenced her legislative work at the state and federal level. Representing Maine’s 1st District in Congress since 2009, the 70-year-old Democrat has focused on bolstering organic food production, creating better access to healthy foods for kids and fighting pesticides.

If her priorities sound familiar, it may be because much of her life’s work on these issues aligns neatly with certain facets of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement, which is led by current Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. but gained momentum through the support of moms on social media.

But while the Democratic lawmaker is far from a supporter of Kennedy, she saw early into the second Trump administration the potential of working with MAHA activists. “It’s kind of a no-brainer in many ways,” she said. “We have a lot in common.” And as MAHA moms, in particular, are conflicted about some of Kennedy and President Donald’s Trump’s recent decisions, it’s an even better opportunity to find common ground.

Most sustainable agriculture-related issues are populist and bipartisan at their core, she said, adding: “I really don’t think that these are necessarily left or right. I think the questions around toxins in our food and food is medicine, and the opposition to Big Ag and big chemical companies is very universal. This just really broadens the coalition of people.”

Pingree had also seen how Kennedy’s message resonated with farmers in her district. When he visited her state as a presidential hopeful, “A lot of people went to hear him, and it was partly because of his interest in alternative medicine and healthy food,” she said.

So, after Trump’s return to office, she started reaching out to members of the movement: people like Kelly Ryerson, better known by her social media handle, The Glyphosate Girl, and Zen Honeycutt, founder of Moms Across America, a grassroots group focused on healthy foods. Both are big supporters of Kennedy’s role at HHS and the MAHA agenda he’s pushed there.

But over the past few months, they’ve also expressed disappointment about Kennedy’s shifting stance on pesticide use. While he has championed some of the issues that animate MAHA, including his decisions around vaccine recommendations and his fight against food dyes and ultra-processed foods, Kennedy has distanced himself from his position on glyphosate — the same herbicide he fought against as an environmental lawyer.

In late February, when Trump issued an executive order to expand domestic production of glyphosate, which is found in the week killer Roundup, and that potentially shield pesticides companies from lawsuits, Kennedy announced his support, stating the “order puts America first where it matters most — our defense readiness and our food supply.”

Though most MAHA activists still view Kennedy favorably, the executive order has exposed a widening rift for some in the movement. “Unfortunately, Trump’s action to issue this executive order on glyphosate broke a lot of that trust,” Honeycutt said. “It may be permanently broken.”

But where MAHA and the current administration don’t see eye to eye they’ve found an ally in Pingree. In late December, she worked with MAHA to strip a pesticides rider in a spending bill that would have shielded companies like Bayer, which produces Roundup, from health-related lawsuits and stopped states and localities from being able to regulate pesticides.

Ryerson said Pingree has been a key partner over the past few months and applauds the work she did to remove the language from the spending bill.

“We’re finding our friends, and it’s like, can we get even more? I don’t care even which side they’re from,” she said. “Can we get even more on board to just prioritizing this issue?”

And Honeycutt said that on one of her recent visits to Capitol Hill, she was impressed that Pingree met with them in person. Every other lawmaker sent a staff member to hear her concerns.

“We loved learning that she is an organic farmer in Maine, and has been for quite some time, and is a huge supporter of organic farming,” she said. “So we had a lot of things in common to talk about.”

For Pingree the alliance has been mutually beneficial.

“Frequently, I would be kind of a lone voice in fighting to take that out, but we were able to remove that language from the bill just before it passed at the end of the year,” she said. “And a lot of that was due to the help of the MAHA moms.”

Recently, the Democratic lawmaker introduced an amendment to strip similar language from this year’s farm bill, which the House Agriculture Committee advanced out of committee last week. While her efforts ultimately failed, she plans to take up other opportunities to continue the fight when it goes to a floor vote in the House. And a few weeks ago, she and Republican Rep. Thomas Massie introduced the bipartisan No Immunity for Glyphosate Act, which aims to undo Trump’s executive order.

All of this work has been bolstered by MAHA advocates who have a powerful platform to keep pressure on GOP leaders. She says they’ve helped raise the profile of wonky issues like pesticide regulations and the dangers of PFAS chemicals, better known as forever chemicals. They are able to reach everyday moms who might not know much about environmental policy but care about the foods their kids are eating.

The veteran lawmaker has watched the movement amplify the reach of its message on TikTok and Instagram. “They are reaching many more people than maybe your average organic farming blog or environmental group.”

As a result, Pingree said she’s also started to post on social media more, sharing reels on Instagram, for example, to gain visibility among potential supporters.

For environmental groups, the MAHA movement has also helped make some of these issues relevant to Republicans who need to keep their constituents happy ahead of midterms, said J.W. Glass, an Environmental Protection Agency policy analyst at the nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity.

“Now that the dialogue is wider and bipartisan there is lots of pressure on the Republicans,” he said. “There is more of a world where Republicans are sweating across the aisle. There is a lot more attention on them.”

For environmental organizations, it’s also a welcome change to see bipartisan support for some of these issues. “It’s safe to say that MAHA shares a lot of the same views as the mainstream environmental movement,” he said.

Moving forward, Pingree hopes to raise the profile of the work she said Democrats have been doing all along and sees the potential of forming a bipartisan MAHA caucus.

“I think my feeling has always been, if you could win on some of these important issues, then you build a coalition to win. You don’t make everything a litmus test on whether or not you’ll have a conversation.”