H.R. 10680House bill · 119th CongressIn committee

To direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a grant program to facilitate food access in community health centers, and for other purposes.

Sponsored byGeorge LatimerD-NY-16Introduced Oct 1, 2026Full text on congress.gov ↗

Latest action (Oct 1, 2026) — on Agriculture.

What it does

not written yet

The Congressional Research Service writes the plain-English summary for every bill, usually a few weeks after it's introduced. This one doesn't have one yet. It will appear here when it does.

In the meantime the most reliable description is the bill's own official title, which is the heading above — written by its sponsor, and the only account of the bill that exists at this stage. The full text is on congress.gov ↗

We don't write our own summaries. Everything else on this site links back to a record you can check, and a description of a bill that came from us rather than from the bill would be the one thing here that didn't — on the page that asks you to take a position on it.

Discussion

8 comments

Sign in to join the discussion and put your vote on the record.

Sort
9
r_castellanoDemoMN-6voted Nay5d ago
Against, and not because the goal is wrong. It stacks a new process on top of two that already don't talk to each other. That's a drafting question rather than a political one.
8
river_precinctDemoSC-2voted Yea4d ago
Genuine question rather than a gotcha: what does success look like in five years? If we can't say, what are we actually voting on? That's a drafting question rather than a political one.
8
river_surveyorDemoTX-16voted Yea4d ago
This looks like it codifies practice that already exists informally. Worth doing — informal practice evaporates when an administration changes. The committee report would settle it either way.
8
nadia_librarianDemoNY-15voted Nay5d ago
The pilot-programme framing is the part I'd watch. Pilots have a way of becoming permanent at the next reauthorisation. I'd want the cost estimate before I'd defend either position.
7
abel_commuterDemoNY-1voted Yea4d ago
The drafting is loose in places where loose drafting is expensive. Conference could fix it; conference could also make it worse. Happy to be told I've read it wrong.
7
leona.nakamuraDemoIL-12voted Nay5d ago
Against, and not because the goal is wrong. It stacks a new process on top of two that already don't talk to each other. Whether that matters depends entirely on the implementation date.
2
r_castellanoDemoMN-6voted Nay5d ago
The sunset point is the strongest thing in this thread and nobody's answered it.
2
TheLongViewDemoNY-6voted Nay4d ago
I'd support this and still say the effective date is optimistic. Everything downstream of it assumes agencies move faster than they do. Happy to be told I've read it wrong.
Your position on H.R. 10680No positions yet