Title 10: Horticulture, Marketing, and Regulatory Reform

What Title X actually covers

Title X is the horticulture, marketing, and regulatory reform title. It funds programs supporting specialty crops (fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, nursery), organic agriculture, local and regional food systems, hemp production, and pesticide regulation.

This title was one of the most contested on the House floor. It contains both the MAHA-aligned health priorities (Make America Healthy Again) on dietary guidelines and food access, and the pesticide regulation provisions that became a bipartisan flashpoint.

The big specialty crop investments

Specialty Crop Research

• $30 million specifically for specialty crop research
• $20 million for specialty crop automation research

These are doubles or near-doubles of previous funding levels. They reflect the labor crisis in specialty crop production and the need for mechanized harvesting solutions for fruits and vegetables.

Specialty Crop Block Grants

The Specialty Crop Block Grant Program (SCBGP) is reauthorized and expanded. Block grants go directly to state departments of agriculture, which then sub-grant to specialty crop industries within their state. This is one of the most flexible federal funding streams for specialty crop sectors.

Foreign Market Access for specialty crops

Funding for the Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops (TASC) program is doubled to $18 million annually. TASC helps U.S. specialty crop industries address sanitary and phytosanitary barriers to exports.

Organic agriculture

Title X increases organic agriculture cost-share funding for conservation practices. The previous limit was $140,000 over FY2019–FY2026. The new limit is $200,000 over FY2027–FY2031.

The Organic Agriculture Research and Extension Initiative is reauthorized. The National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program is reauthorized. Several organic enforcement and oversight provisions are added in response to fraud concerns in the organic supply chain.

Hemp

Hemp got significant attention. The bill includes provisions reducing regulatory burdens for industrial hemp producers:

• Streamlined background check requirements
• Modified THC testing protocols
• Hemp-specific crop insurance provisions

What the bill does not include: any language to delay or alter the federal recriminalization of hemp THC products scheduled for later in 2026 under the previous farm bill extension. That’s a major loss for the hemp industry, which had hoped for a Title X fix.

Pesticide regulation, the fight on the floor

The original House Agriculture Committee version of Title X included a provision that would have federally preempted state and local pesticide labeling requirements. State and local governments would have been prohibited from requiring labeling or packaging different from EPA-approved labeling.

This provision was the single most controversial item in the entire farm bill. It was supported by:

• Major agricultural commodity groups
• Pesticide manufacturers
• Conventional farmers concerned about a patchwork of state rules

It was opposed by:

• The Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement
• Public health advocates
• Trial lawyers
• State attorneys general
• A faction of MAGA-aligned Republicans

The MAHA opposition was the political surprise. We previously reported that a floor amendment “stripped” this preemption by a 280–142 vote. That characterization was not supported by the primary record and has been corrected: the House Clerk’s 280–142 vote (Roll Call 148, Luna Part B Amendment No. 28) struck Section 12006, concerning the free movement of livestock-derived products in interstate commerce, not pesticide labeling. We have not located a Clerk roll call confirming a floor amendment that removed the pesticide-preemption language.

If the introduced language were retained, it would establish federal uniform pesticide labeling (states could not require labeling beyond what EPA approves) and clarify that further state permitting would not be required for the use, application, or discharge of a registered pesticide consistent with its labeling. To see how the House-passed text actually treats pesticide labeling and manufacturer liability, read the bill text and the Rules Committee print directly rather than relying on a single floor-vote summary.

Pesticide registration review timelines

Title X also extends the deadline to October 2031 for initial registration reviews of pesticides registered prior to October 2016 that haven’t yet undergone review. This is a meaningful extension for EPA’s review backlog.

Programs covered under Title X

• Specialty Crop Block Grants
• Organic Agriculture 2026
• Hemp Production Rules
• Pesticide Rules 2026

Who Title X matters for

• Specialty crop growers: research and automation funding doubles
• Organic producers: higher conservation cost-share, enhanced enforcement against fraud
• Hemp producers: regulatory burden reduced, but no THC product fix
• Conventional farmers using pesticides: outcome depends on the final text; we do not assert that any tort-liability shield was added or removed on the floor
• State attorneys general: would retain ability to sue pesticide manufacturers under state tort law unless the final bill provides otherwise

What’s next

The Senate is likely to rework Title X. The pesticide-preemption question remains contested, and how the final bill treats it is unresolved. Expect Senate amendments to:

• Add hemp THC product fixes
• Expand organic enforcement
• Possibly restore some pesticide preemption language with different framing

---