- Potential benefitIncreases public awareness, potentially boosting farmers market attendance and vendor sales.
- Potential benefitEncourages acceptance and use of SNAP/EBT at markets, improving food access for low-income residents.
- Local governmentsHighlights sustainable farming practices, possibly encouraging consumer demand for locally produced sustainable food.
Supporting the designation of the week of August 2 through August 8, 2026, as "National Farmers Market Week".
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
This resolution is a non-binding statement by the House of Representatives that supports designating August 2–8, 2026 as National Farmers Market Week and recognizes the role of farmers markets. It does not create legal rights, change federal law, or require government action. It is a symbolic expression meant to raise awareness and acknowledge the importance of farmers markets.
This simple House resolution supports designating August 2–8, 2026, as "National Farmers Market Week." It cites farmers markets' economic role, growth, public education value, links to sustainable farming, and benefits for low-income people using Federal nutrition benefits.
The resolution recognizes farmers markets' community and economic contributions but does not create new programs or funding.
Symbolic, narrow, no fiscal effects and broad appeal; high chance of House adoption, though it does not create binding law.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-formed symbolic resolution: it clearly identifies the week to be designated and supplies supporting statements about farmers markets. It does not create legal obligations or require implementation mechanisms, which is consistent with this type of measure.
Progressives emphasize need for funding and concrete food-access measures
Who stands to gain, and who may push back.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
- Federal agenciesResolution is symbolic and creates no federal funding, program, or regulatory changes.
- Potential burdenTakes Congressional floor time without prescribing concrete policy or resources.
- Potential burdenBenefits could concentrate in larger or already established markets, disadvantaging small vendors.
Why the argument around this bill splits.
Progressives emphasize need for funding and concrete food-access measures
Likely broadly supportive as a recognition of food access, local economies, and sustainable farming.
Views the resolution positively but may note it is symbolic and insufficient without concrete policy or funding.
Generally favorable as a low-cost, bipartisan recognition of farmers markets and small businesses.
Sees it as appropriate symbolic support but wants clear follow-up or measurable outcomes from agencies.
Likely supportive because it recognizes small farmers, local markets, and consumer choice.
May be cautious about federal role and avoid endorsing new spending or regulatory expansions.
The path through Congress.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Symbolic, narrow, no fiscal effects and broad appeal; high chance of House adoption, though it does not create binding law.
- Legislative calendar and whether brought up under suspension
- Possible minor objections to specific findings or phrasing
Recent votes on the bill.
No vote history yet
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Go deeper than the headline read.
Progressives emphasize need for funding and concrete food-access measures
Symbolic, narrow, no fiscal effects and broad appeal; high chance of House adoption, though it does not create binding law.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-formed symbolic resolution: it clearly identifies the week to be designated and supplies supporting statements about farmers markets. It does not create leg…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.