House Moves to Strip Food Warning Labels

[Guest guest]

Associated Press

House Moves to Strip Food Warning Labels

By LIBBY QUAID , 03.08.2006, 07:26 PM

 

The House moved closer Wednesday to stripping many warnings from food

labels, potentially affecting alerts about arsenic in bottled water,

lead in candy and mercury in fish, among others.

 

Pushed by food companies seeking uniform labels across state lines, the

bill would prevent states from adding food warnings that go beyond

federal law. States could petition the Food and Drug Administration to

add extra warnings, under the bill.

 

In California, white signs with " WARNING " in red letters tells grocery

shoppers about high mercury levels in certain fish. Rep. Anna Eshoo,

D-Calif., displayed the placard during debate Wednesday on the House

floor.

 

" If this becomes law, it's going to be buried on a website at the FDA, "

Eshoo said. " This is not about consumers. This is about special

interests. "

 

California is a primary target of the legislation. There, the

voter-passed Proposition 65 requires companies to warn the public of

potentially dangerous toxins in food. California has filed lawsuits

seeking an array of warnings, including the mercury content of canned

tuna and the presence of lead in Mexican candy.

 

Nationwide, as many as 200 state laws or regulations could be affected,

according to the Congressional Budget Office. They include warnings

about allergy-causing sulfites, lead and alcohol in candy and many

others.

 

There is widespread opposition among state officials. Attorneys general

in 39 states are opposed, as are the National Conference of State

Legislature and the associations of state food and drug officials and

state agriculture departments.

 

According to the Congressional Budget Office, about 200 state laws

would be affected. The government would spend at least $100 million to

answer petitions for tougher state rules, CBO said.

 

The bill's supporters argue that consumers deserve the same warnings in

all 50 states. The bill would allow a state to seek a nationwide

warning from FDA.

 

 

The government would spend at least $100 million to answer petitions

for tougher state rules, according to CBO.

 

 

" NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency may

have read this email without warning, warrant, or notice. They may do this

without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse nor

protection save to call for the impeachment of the current President. "