Tenure: 119th Congress
Years of Service: 2025–Present
As one of the newest members of Congress, Rep. George Whitesides has had limited time to establish a lengthy legislative record on animal protection issues. Even so, his early actions suggest a lawmaker whose instincts align strongly with many of the priorities of the animal protection movement. In his first term, Whitesides has supported major animal welfare legislation, opposed efforts to roll back protections for wildlife and farm animals, and joined congressional efforts to defend state animal welfare standards from federal preemption.
Whitesides has already demonstrated support for one of the movement’s most enduring priorities through his cosponsorship of the SAFE Act (Safeguard American Food Exports Act). The legislation would permanently prohibit the slaughter of American horses for human consumption and ban the export of horses for slaughter abroad. Horse protection advocates have pursued federal action on this issue for years, and Whitesides’ decision to join the bill early in his congressional tenure signals a willingness to engage on animal welfare matters rather than remain on the sidelines.
He has also weighed in on the debate surrounding federal efforts to override state animal welfare laws. Whitesides signed the Democratic congressional letter opposing the Save Our Bacon Act, legislation that would undermine laws such as California’s Proposition 12 and Massachusetts’ Question 3. By opposing the proposal, he aligned himself with efforts to preserve states’ authority to establish humane standards for the treatment of farm animals and resisted attempts to create a nationwide rollback of those protections.
Whitesides’ voting record has likewise been favorable across the major animal-related issues that have come before the House during the 119th Congress. He voted against H.R. 845, the Pet and Livestock Protection Act, which would remove federal Endangered Species Act protections for gray wolves. He also voted against H.R. 556, the Protecting Access for Hunters and Anglers Act, preserving federal authority to regulate lead ammunition and lead fishing tackle on federal lands and waters. These votes reflected support for maintaining tools used to protect wildlife and address ongoing conservation challenges.
He also voted against the Moore Amendment, which sought to create an exemption from the federal prohibition on commercial greyhound racing. The vote placed him on the side of preserving federal protections that have helped phase out an industry long criticized for its treatment of racing dogs.
On emerging food technologies, Whitesides voted against the Greene Amendment, which sought to prohibit federal support for cultivated meat and related research. By opposing the amendment, he supported continued exploration of technologies that could reduce reliance on conventional animal agriculture while offering consumers additional options in the marketplace.
Whitesides also voted against the Farm, Food, and National Security Act, which included provisions that would have preempted state farm-animal welfare laws. That vote complemented his opposition to the Save Our Bacon Act and demonstrated consistency on one of the most significant animal welfare debates currently facing Congress.
Because Whitesides is serving his first term, there is not yet an extensive record of animal-specific legislation, committee activity, or long-term advocacy from which to draw broader conclusions. What is available, however, points in a positive direction. His support for horse protection legislation, defense of state animal welfare laws, and favorable voting record on wildlife and farm-animal issues indicate a strong foundation for future engagement.
At this stage, Whitesides is best classified as a Strong Leader. His first-term record is encouraging and consistently aligned with animal protection priorities, but additional legislative leadership and sustained engagement over multiple Congresses would be needed to place him among the delegation’s most established champions.
Notable Actions
119th Congress
✅ Cosponsor of the Save America’s Forgotten Equines (SAFE) Act, H.R. 1661, to ban U.S.-based horse slaughter and the export of horses for slaughter for human consumption.
✅ Cosponsor of the Prevent All Soring Tactics (PAST) Act, H.R. 1684, to strengthen enforcement against the cruel practice of soring horses. The bill would ban devices associated with soring, require independent USDA-trained inspectors, increase penalties for violations, and strengthen the Horse Protection Act to better protect Tennessee Walking Horses and other affected breeds from intentional abuse.
✅ Cosponsor of Canyon’s Law, H.R. 4180, bipartisan legislation to ban the use of M–44 “cyanide bombs” on federal public lands. The bill would protect pets, wildlife, and people from these indiscriminate sodium cyanide devices and require their removal from lands managed by federal agencies.
✅ Cosponsor of the Puppy Protection Act, H.R. 2253, bipartisan legislation to strengthen federal standards of care for dogs kept by commercial breeders by improving requirements for housing, veterinary care, exercise, socialization, and humane breeding practices.
✅ Signed congressional letter opposing the SOB Act that would erode states’ rights, undermine family farmers, and expand foreign influence over U.S. food production.
✅ Supported House passage of the FDA Modernization Act 3.0, H.R. 2821, which passed by voice vote under suspension of the rules on July 20, 2026. The bipartisan legislation directs the FDA to update its regulations to fully implement the 2022 law allowing scientifically valid non-animal methods to be used instead of animal testing in drug development.
✅ Voted “Nay” on H.R. 556, the Protecting Access for Hunters and Anglers Act (House Roll Call Vote 93), to prohibit federal land management agencies from restricting the use of toxic lead ammunition and fishing tackle on public lands and waters to protect wildlife from poisoning. The bill passed the House 215–202. A “Nay” vote is the pro-animal vote.
✅ Voted “Nay” on H.R. 845, the Pet and Livestock Protection Act (House Roll Call Vote 360), to remove federal Endangered Species Act protections for gray wolves across much of the United States and restricted judicial review of future wolf management decisions. The bill passed the House 211–204. A “Nay” vote is the pro-animal position.
✅ Voted “Nay” on the Riley Moore Amendment to H.R. 7567 (House Roll Call Vote 149), to weaken the Farm Bill’s Greyhound Protection Act provisions by creating a special exemption allowing commercial greyhound racing to continue in West Virginia indefinitely. The House rejected the amendment 187–237. A “Nay” vote is the pro-animal position.
✅ Voted “Nay” on H.R. 7567, the Farm, Food, and National Security Act (House Roll Call Vote 154), to pass the Farm Bill, which included a provision to overturn state laws in California and Massachusetts restricting in-state sales of fresh pork sourced from farms that do not provide minimum space requirements for the housing of pregnant pigs. The bill passed the House 224–200. A “Nay” vote is the pro-animal position.
✅ Voted “Nay” on the Biggs Amendment to H.R. 3838 (House Roll Call Vote 259), to exempt defense-related activities from the requirements of the Endangered Species Act, eliminating protections for endangered and threatened species and their critical habitat on military lands and during defense operations. The House rejected the amendment 200–228. A “Nay” vote is the pro-animal position.
✅ Voted “Nay” on the Greene Amendment to H.R. 3838 (House Roll Call Vote 254), to prohibit the Department of Defense from using FY2026 funds for the research, development, procurement, or promotion of cell-cultured meat, an emerging alternative to conventional slaughter-based meat production. The House rejected the amendment 194–236, with 1 voting present. A “Nay” vote is the pro-animal position.
✅ Voted “Nay” on the Northeast Lobster Protection Act, H.R. 9436 (House Roll Call Vote 291), which would extend a pause on new federal fishing gear regulations intended to protect critically endangered North Atlantic right whales from 2028 to 2035, delaying potential protections for an additional seven years. A “Nay” is a pro-animal position because it opposes repealing a leading delay in measures intended to prevent right whales from becoming entangled in fishing rope, a leading cause of injury and death.