Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ <A HREF="">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
--- Begin Message ---
-Caveat Lector- House mulls bill on food label removal
www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substanceânot soap-boxingâplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'âwith its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsâis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.WASHINGTON --Worried about arsenic in your bottled water, mercury in your fish or pesticides in your vegetables? These are among hundreds of different warnings required by states -- warnings that could disappear under a measure moving toward House approval.
"This bill would strip state governments of the ability to protect their residents through state laws and regulations relating to the safety of food and food packaging," the attorneys general wrote.
The obvious target, they said, is California's Proposition 65, a law passed by voters requiring companies to warn the public of potentially dangerous toxins in food. The law has prompted California to file lawsuits seeking an array of warnings, including the mercury content in canned tuna and the presence of lead in Mexican candy.
Lawmakers debated the bill Thursday and plan to vote on it next week. The measure is expected to clear the House but stall in the Senate, where no senator has introduced similar legislation.
The food industry wants consistent warnings across state lines to reduce the cost of making many different labels. The industry has attracted broad support in the House, where a majority is co-sponsoring the bill.
"Consumers across the country deserve a single set of science-based food warning requirements, not the confusing patchwork that we have today," said Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.
Supporters argued there is national uniformity in plenty of food laws, such as those governing meat and poultry safety, nutrition labels and health claims.
And they pointed out the bill would let states petition the federal government if they want to add extra warnings.
State officials are not reassured. Among the foes are the associations of state food and drug officials, state agriculture departments and the National Conference of State Legislatures.
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.
"This legislation is a dangerous giveaway to special interests and ignores the enormous benefits of strong state consumer protection laws," said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ <A HREF="">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
--- End Message ---
