WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 290

Relating to the production, sale, and use of certain agricultural products containing perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in Johnson County, Texas; creating a criminal offense.

89th Legislature, 2nd Called Session (2025) Introduced by Helen Kerwin and 1 co-sponsor

Johnson County, Texas bill criminalizes production and sale of PFAS-containing agricultural products to reduce exposure to persistent synthetic chemicals linked to health risks.

Filed
#agriculture(i0020) #crimes--miscellaneous(i0200) #fertilizer(s5345) #hazardoussubstances(s0338) #johnsoncounty(g0112) #sewagesludge(s0503) #texasa&magrilifeextensionservice(u0221)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 290

Legislative bill overview

HB 290 proposes to restrict or ban the production, sale, and use of agricultural products containing PFAS (forever chemicals) in Johnson County, Texas, and establishes criminal penalties for violations. PFAS are persistent synthetic chemicals used in various applications including food packaging, pesticides, and fertilizers that accumulate in the environment and human bodies.

Why is this important

PFAS contamination is a growing public health concern, with studies linking exposure to developmental issues, immune suppression, and increased cholesterol levels. Many communities nationwide face PFAS-contaminated water supplies, making local regulatory responses increasingly common. This bill represents a localized approach to controlling PFAS exposure through agricultural products, though effectiveness depends on enforcement mechanisms and definition scope.

Potential points of contention

  • Interstate commerce conflicts: Restricting agricultural products may violate federal commerce clause protections, as farming operations could challenge local bans on interstate trade
  • Definition and scope uncertainty: The bill's effectiveness hinges on how "certain agricultural products" is defined—overly broad language could harm legitimate agricultural practices, while narrow language may miss significant PFAS sources
  • Criminal penalties vs. civil alternatives: Creating criminal offenses for agricultural PFAS use is uncommon nationally and may face questions about proportionality compared to warnings, fines, or phase-out periods used elsewhere

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.