Troy A. Carter

“I want the House to pass this bill. Congress already allowed drug makers to use alternatives to animal testing, but the FDA has not updated its rules yet. This bill forces the FDA to write those rules. It will help end unnecessary testing on animals and speed up safer medical research.”

“Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2821, the FDA Modernization Act 3.0, introduced by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter). I am proud to co-lead this bill with him and a bipartisan group of my colleagues: Representatives Barragan, Buchanan, DeLauro, and Harshbarger. Over 3 years ago, the FDA Modernization Act 2.0 was signed into law, allowing the agency to approve human drugs without requiring animal testing through modern, often more effective, alternatives. Despite this progress, the FDA has still not issued updated regulations to clarify where alternatives to animal testing are, in fact, permissible. This legislation takes action to close the gap by requiring the FDA to fully implement the reforms that Congress has already enacted and to help reduce unnecessary animal testing in drug development. By ensuring the full implementation of the FDA Modernization Act 2.0, this legislation will help modernize and transform drug development for the 21st century; accelerate safer, more effective medical breakthroughs; and advance more humane scientific research. This is long overdue. We see the unnecessary slaughtering of animals for research when there are other alternatives that may be, in fact, more humane, more effective, and more cost effective, yet we continue to do the same thing as if. I am proud to be a part of this bill that will go a long way toward protecting lives, advancing technological scientific finds, and creating a better, more humane system. Overall, our bill is a big win for patients, a big win for innovation, and a big win for animal welfare. Mr. Speaker, I encourage all my colleagues to vote ``yes’’ on passing this critical legislation.”

“I want Congress to pass this bill. Right now, if dangerous foreign food, drugs, or vapes are stopped at our border, the sellers can just take them back and try to sneak them in through a different port. This bill lets the FDA destroy dangerous imports at the seller's expense. It will protect people's health and help American businesses, especially Louisiana shrimpers and fishermen who are being hurt by cheap, unsafe foreign seafood.”

“Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2715, the Destruction of Hazardous Imports Act, which I introduced with my Louisiana colleague Representative Clay Higgins. This bill will protect American consumers and create a level playing field for American businesses by authorizing the Food and Drug Administration to order the destruction of imported products found to pose a significant public health concern. Under current law, foreign exporters can ship contaminated or counterfeit products to the U.S. knowing they can withdraw the shipment if FDA flags it. They can then try to enter through a different port where the shipment may not be caught, a practice known as port shopping. This loophole endangers our health and undermines our food and drug safety systems. This bill authorizes the Food and Drug Administration to require an importer to destroy an FDA-regulated product that was refused entry into the U.S. because it poses a significant public health concern with the cost of the destruction at the importer’s expense. This bill also prohibits the unauthorized movement of any article designated for destruction by the FDA. Some imported foods, especially seafood, have been found to be contaminated with carcinogenic drugs, pesticides, and other harmful impurities. Beyond food, there has been a rise in imports of dangerous vape devices and e-liquids containing banned substances and excessive nicotine, as well as counterfeit drugs like GLP-1s. This threat is real and documented. Exporters, especially Chinese exporters, have been caught resubmitting rejected shipments at different ports. This bill closes that loophole and creates a deterrent for bad actors. Congressman Higgins and I have worked hand in hand with our domestic fishing industry on this legislation, including the Southern Shrimp Alliance. American fishermen perform backbreaking work and operate under strict U.S. food safety, labor, and environmental rules that raise their costs significantly. Meanwhile, some foreign producers cut corners and still get multiple chances to dump noncompliant and often dangerous products into the American marketplace. Seafood imports continue to pour into the United States, increasing in volume each year, undercutting domestic fishermen. Last year, the U.S. imported 6.4 billion pounds of foreign seafood, a 10 percent increase from 2019. As imports have increased, American commercial seafood landings have declined. In 2024, the U.S. commercial landings totaled 7.7 billion pounds, the first time landings have been below 8 billion pounds since 1988. Louisiana’s commercial fishing industry has particularly been hit hard by this flood of foreign imports. Since 2021, Louisiana shrimpers have seen the value of their catch drop by more than 50 percent, falling from $131 million in 2021 to just $61 million in 2024. As you can see, this is, in fact, a real threat. Passing this bill will deter bad actors from flooding the market with unsafe products and provide American fishermen with a fair playing field, allowing them to sustainably harvest millions of additional pounds of shrimp and other seafood each year. This is a real issue, and I am proud to be working in a bipartisan way to address an issue that will impact not just Louisiana but our entire country. Mr. Speaker, I urge the passage of this critical legislation.”

“I support this bill to make daylight saving time permanent. Changing the clocks twice a year hurts people's health and disrupts sleep. Having more daylight in the evening will prevent traffic accidents, lower energy bills, and help farmers and outdoor workers.”

“Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 139, the Sunshine Protection Act. Twice a year, Americans lose sleep, disrupt their routines, and pay the price for a practice that has outlived its original purpose. H.R. 139, the Sunshine Protection Act, ends that twice-yearly clock change and makes daylight saving time permanent year round. Research shows that eliminating the biannual switch reduces the spike in heart attacks, strokes, and workplace accidents that follow the spring-forward transition. Ending the clock change also means fewer disruptions to sleep patterns tied to that adjustment period. On the safety side, permanent evening daylight means more daylight during peak commuting and after-school hours, leading to fewer pedestrian and traffic fatalities in the evening. As with many other policies, the impacts are more dramatic for our less affluent neighbors. Hourly workers, shift workers, and families relying on public transit are hit hardest by sudden schedule changes and reduced evening visibility. More evening daylight reduces the need for artificial lighting and heating in the early evening hours, which can help lower household energy use and utility bills. For Louisiana families, many of whom work in agriculture, fishing, and outdoor industries tied to the Gulf Coast, permanent daylight saving time would mean more usable evening daylight for safer work conditions, recreation, and valuable time with their families. The American Farm Bureau Federation supports the Sunshine Protection Act because it would provide consistency and reduce disruptions for farmers and ranchers. A stable, year-round time system makes it easier to plan work, transportation, and market schedules. For agriculture, ending a twice-yearly change means fewer disruptions to the schedule that livestock and labor already depend on. H.R. 139 offers a simple, permanent fix: no more clock changes, more usable evening daylight, and a system that works better for working families, rural communities, and American agriculture.”

“I want the House to pass this bill. It extends a program that lets international travelers skip a second security screening when catching a connecting flight in the United States. This will cut airport delays and help our tourism economy.”

“Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Walkinshaw for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 9388, the One-Stop Pilot Program Extension Act, which I am proud to co-lead with Congressman Gimenez. This bipartisan measure will modernize our aviation system, reduce unnecessary delays, and strengthen our international security partnership that keeps our skies safe. Today, the international passengers connecting to domestic flights must often retrieve their checked bags, clear customs, and undergo yet another screening process through TSA before re-entering the terminal, creating congestion, long connection times, and avoidable operational strain on airports and the airlines. The One-Stop Security program is a current TSA pilot initiative that streamlines this process for travelers arriving from trusted foreign airports that meet strict U.S. security standards, allowing them and their baggage to connect directly to domestic flights without duplicative screening. The One-Stop Pilot Program Extension Act extends authorization for the One-Stop Security program for four more years, giving TSA, Customs and Border Protection, and participating airports time to scale the program, expand international partnerships, and evaluate the infrastructure needed for broader implementation. This extension will not only improve efficiency and reduce costs but also strengthen the competitiveness of our domestic travel and tourism industries. Cities where tourism is a major economic engine--like New Orleans in my district--stand to benefit from smoother, international-to-domestic connections that make the U.S. a more attractive destination and keep visitor spending flowing into local economies and supporting our communities. Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Gimenez for his leadership on this bill, and I urge favorable passage.”

“I want Congress to pass this bill. It requires regular reports on how cities handle their anti-terrorism security when they lose federal grant money. Cities cannot protect themselves from attacks if the federal government suddenly cuts their funding.”

“Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Walkinshaw for yielding. I rise today in support of my bill, H.R. 8874, the Homeland Security Capabilities Preservation Reporting Act of 2026. In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, it became evident that cities across the United States could become targets for terrorist attacks and that they lacked the capacity and resources to independently build the critical capabilities needed to prevent, protect against, and respond to terrorist attacks and other catastrophic events. Beginning in 2003, urban areas across the Nation began receiving dedicated counterterrorism grants from the Department of Homeland Security through the Urban Area Security Initiative, or UASI. For more than two decades, this program has equipped our local first responders with advanced tools, equipment, and training necessary to protect their communities. These investments have built critical capabilities that strengthen preparedness and emergency responses across the region. However, maintaining these capabilities cannot be sustained by locals alone. They require reliable, predictable Federal funding. Unfortunately, unpredictable changes to DHS’ risk formula, which determines which areas receive funding, have often created year-to-year uncertainty, leaving many cities wondering whether their counterterrorism funding will suddenly disappear. Recently, these funding changes have been politically arbitrary. We saw this danger firsthand last year, when under the leadership of former Secretary Kristi Noem, the Department of Homeland Security attempted to abruptly remove historically funded cities--including, in my district, the city of New Orleans--from this program. Former Secretary Noem tried to cut our Federal counterterrorism funding support in the same year our community suffered the horrific attack on Bourbon Street in New Orleans on New Year’s Day, which killed 14 people and injured dozens more. It took a lawsuit to stop them. Here is the bottom line: Expecting locals to independently finance the massive security required for everyday safety--let alone high- profile events like Mardi Gras, the World Cup, or Super Bowl--is unrealistic and unfair. Abruptly turning off these resources is dangerous. Congress previously acknowledged the value of UASI funding to communities by requiring a one-time report in the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act, examining how DHS could help cities transition when they lose grant eligibility. I am grateful to former Congresswoman Val Demings for championing this previous NDAA provision and for her leadership in recognizing the need to support communities if they transition out of the UASI program. However, a one-time report leaves Congress in the dark going forward. We need ongoing data to monitor vulnerable communities after they are removed from the program and identify whether their security capabilities are at risk of degrading. That is why I introduced H.R. 8874, the Homeland Security Capabilities Preservation Reporting Act of 2026. This bipartisan bill closes this oversight gap by requiring FEMA to submit recurring reports every 3 years on how cities manage and maintain their federally funded counterterrorism and security capabilities after they lose UASI funding. This bill will improve public safety across the Nation and ensure our communities are never left defenseless, which is why it is endorsed by the Major Cities Chiefs Association, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National League of Cities, and the National Fusion Center Association, to name a few. I thank Ranking Member Bennie Thompson and Representative Gimenez for their partnership on this bill. I urge all my colleagues to support this vital, commonsense legislation.”