The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
H.R. 4784·119th Congress·Introduced Jul 29, 2025

Don Young American Grown Act

IntroducedGovernment Operations and PoliticsSubstantive
View bill text
Sponsor
Rep. Carbajal, Salud O. [D-CA-24]
Committees
Armed Services Committee (primary)
Last action
Jul 29, 2025

Bottom line

The bill requires certain federal buildings to exclusively display U.S.-grown cut flowers and greens, aiming to support domestic agriculture.

What it actually does

This bill, titled the 'Don Young American Grown Act,' mandates that all cut flowers and cut greens officially displayed in public areas of buildings belonging to the Executive Office of the President, the Department of State, or the Department of Defense must be produced in the United States. It defines 'produced in the United States' as grown in any of the several States, the District of Columbia, a U.S. territory or possession, or an area subject to the jurisdiction of a federally recognized Indian Tribe. The limitation does not apply to personal displays by federal officers or employees and takes effect one year after enactment.

Proponents argue

Supporters argue that this bill strengthens the American floriculture and horticulture industries by creating a guaranteed market for domestic producers within federal government operations. They contend it promotes economic growth, supports American jobs, and ensures that federal displays reflect a commitment to American agriculture and local economies. Furthermore, proponents may highlight the symbolic importance of displaying American-grown products in prominent federal buildings.

Opponents contend

Opponents might argue that this bill could lead to increased costs for federal agencies if imported flowers and greens are cheaper or more readily available, potentially impacting budget efficiency. They may also contend that it could limit aesthetic choices or availability of certain varieties, and that it represents a form of protectionism that could invite retaliatory measures from other countries, potentially harming broader trade relations.

The bill is very short and straightforward, making it highly accessible for a reader to understand its core provisions quickly.

Section 2(a)

Mandate for U.S.-Produced Cut Flowers and Greens

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision establishes a requirement that any cut flowers or cut greens officially displayed in public areas of buildings managed by the Executive Office of the President, the Department of State, or the Department of Defense must have been grown within the United States. This means that for official decorations in these specific federal entities, only domestically sourced floral and green products are permitted.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupU.S. floriculture and horticulture industriesImpactPositiveMechanismIncreased demand and market access for their products within federal procurement.ScalePotentially significant for specific segments, but overall market impact depends on federal purchasing volume.
GroupFederal agencies (Executive Office of the President, Department of State, Department of Defense)ImpactOperational changeMechanismRequirement to adjust procurement practices to source only U.S.-produced items for official displays.ScaleMinor administrative adjustment, potential cost implications.
GroupForeign producers and importers of cut flowers/greensImpactNegativeMechanismLoss of market share for official federal displays in the specified agencies.ScaleLimited to federal procurement, but could be symbolically significant.

Supporters argue

Supporters argue this provision directly supports American farmers and businesses in the floriculture sector, fostering economic resilience and job creation. They believe it aligns federal spending with national interests by prioritizing domestic production.

Critics contend

Critics might argue that this mandate could lead to higher costs for federal agencies if U.S.-produced flowers and greens are more expensive than imported alternatives, potentially diverting funds from other critical agency functions. They may also point to potential limitations in variety or availability.

Tradeoffs

The provision balances the goal of supporting domestic industries against potential increases in federal procurement costs and limitations on product selection. It also raises questions about the extent of government intervention in market choices for decorative purposes.

Section 2(c)

Definition of 'Produced in the United States'

mentioned in summarystraightforward

This section explicitly defines what constitutes 'produced in the United States' for the purposes of the bill. It clarifies that a cut flower or green meets this criterion if it is grown in any of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, any U.S. territory or possession, or any area under the jurisdiction of a federally recognized Indian Tribe. This broad definition ensures that products from various domestic regions are eligible.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
Ask Ledger AI about this