Johnson Introduces Bill to Ensure Clear Meat Processing and Labeling

Johnson, Soto Introduce Bill to Ensure Clear Meat Processing and Labeling

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Representatives Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) and Darren Soto (D-FL) today introduced the Food Safety Modernization for Innovative Technologies Act, a bill which would formalize a regulatory framework for food derived from cell-cultured technology.

Earlier this year, the Trump Administration established an agreement between the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to ensure food and labeling safety. The bill leverages the lab and food safety oversight expertise of the FDA and USDA. As cell-cultured meat technologies progress, this bill will ensure thorough agency oversight to protect consumers and the integrity of product claims.

“South Dakota ranchers already produce a safe, quality product – anything lab grown should have to meet the same standards for consumers,” said Johnson. “As cell-cultured foods make way to the supermarket, Americans deserve to know exactly what it is they are feeding their families.”

“As consumers continue to seek alternative meat products, like cell-based meat, it’s more imperative than ever that we create regulations for food substitutes,” said Soto. “We want to ensure Americans are getting the safe product they sign up for when they’re checking out at the grocery store. I’m proud to introduce this bill with Congressman Johnson and excited to have the support of Florida’s cattle ranchers!”

Under this legislation, FDA would oversee the lab process of multiplying animal collected cells to make tissue and USDA would oversee processing, packaging, and labeling. Through a coordinated agency process, the Secretary of Agriculture would have the authority to require prior approval of labels or labeling claims before introduction into the consumer market. The bill also provides protections for misbranded products, including “imitation” products that could confuse consumers.


7 thoughts on “Johnson Introduces Bill to Ensure Clear Meat Processing and Labeling”

  1. Now if some of these folks in Congress would get to labeling the Origin of our Produce and Meat that would be nice. I want to buy American made food products. I still dont get why that would be controversial issue but, it’s been denied numerous times

    1. Dusty Johnson gets too much money from the 4 major meat packers and the NCBA (WHICH THE PACKERS SIT ON THE BOARD OF), to vote in favor of labeling meat by which country it comes from. Apparently he is in favor of deceiving consumers from knowing where their food comes from.

      1. Ok stupid question, bare with me. Wouldn’t it benefit the meat packers if beef were labeled properly allowing them to charge more for American vs Foreign. I guess I don’t know much about this industry to comment further.

        1. Because they stamp a “Product of the USA” label on all meat, foreign and local, and mark it all at a high price. Consumers are being deceived.

  2. Country-of-origin labeling (COOL) provides consumers with information they care about. In July 2001, 86% of consumers rated U.S. beef superior to imported beef and more than 92% favored COOL requirements in grocery stores. Over a decade later, that favorable percentage remains just as high – a May 2013 public opinion poll showed more than 90 percent of consumers support COOL.

    Processors continue to label packages with “Product of the U.S.A.” – despite this being a clear violation of the Federal Trade Commission’s “all or virtually all” clause as it relates to “Made in the USA” claims.

    Existing, voluntary labeling practices, however, coupled with the source of cattle from which beef is derived from packing facilities in the U.S., create the high probability of consumer confusion as to whether a product labeled as from the US is actually born, raised and slaughtered in the US.

    1. Guess I am glad I purchase all my beef from a couple of local farmers I know. This is really sad that this is not a regulation and I wonder if this could be implemented at a State Level via Initiative Measure by citizens.

  3. It’s been tried at the state level and the FDA squashes it every time because the FDA has the final say in all food things.

Comments are closed.