Latest action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
Bill aims to remove toxic chemicals from food and ensure safer food supply for Americans.
The problem
Some foods may contain harmful chemicals and toxins that could damage human health. Current food safety rules may not adequately protect consumers from these dangerous substances.
The proposal
The bill would establish stricter rules to eliminate toxic chemicals from foods. It would require testing and safety standards to keep dangerous substances out of the food supply.
The impact
Food producers, consumers, and the FDA would be affected. Consumers would get safer food. Companies may need to change production methods or ingredients.
Removing toxic chemicals from food could prevent illnesses and health problems in children and adults. This protects vulnerable groups like pregnant women and young children who are most at risk from contaminated food.
The bill would update food safety rules to address modern threats. Clearer standards help all food producers know what is safe and required.
People could trust their food is safe to eat without worrying about hidden harmful chemicals. This gives families confidence in the food they buy for their loved ones.
Food companies would face clear requirements and testing to prove their products are safe. This encourages responsible manufacturing practices.
Testing food and removing chemicals costs money. These expenses could be passed to shoppers through higher prices at stores.
Small food companies may struggle to afford new testing and compliance costs. Large corporations can handle these expenses more easily, giving them an advantage.
The bill currently has no official summary, so it's unclear what exact chemicals would be banned or what specific tests are required. This uncertainty makes it hard to predict real impacts.
The FDA and food industry would need time and resources to implement new rules. There could be delays in enforcement or confusion about requirements.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.