Ask the House to Oppose the Food Safety Accountability Act of 2011!

The Senate just passed S.216, which is a tweaked version of last year’s Food Safety Accountability Act. We understand that there is some pressure to get a similar bill introduced in the House.

In this new bill, the ten-year jail term is reserved for violators of specific sections of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C) who knowingly and intentionally defraud or mislead and do so with conscious or reckless disregard of a risk of death or serious bodily injury. And the jail term applies only to food violations; while the Senate Judiciary staff confirmed that it would exclude dietary supplements, the language in the bill does not explicitly say so, and the FDA (based on their past behavior) may not interpret it that way.

We also have concerns about the definition of the words “adulterated” and “misbranded,” which are so broad as to include citing current scientific studies about a food’s health-giving properties, or minor paperwork violations.

A House version of the The Food Safety Accountability Act of 2011 must address the vagueness in the language and carve out certain exemptions in the definition of misbranding and adulteration—or better yet, define them anew instead of referring to the extremely broad Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.

Please ask your representative to oppose any House bill that contains the same language.

(Please personalize your message if you have the time!)

Recipients

Your Representative

Contact

*Required fields

* Title:

* First Name:

* Last Name:

* Your Email:

* Address 1:

Address 2:

* City:

* State / Province:

* ZIP / Postal Code:

* Phone Number:

Yes, I would like to receive periodic updates and communications from Alliance for Natural Health USA.

Remember me. What's this?

Message

Please Oppose or Rewrite the Food Safety Accountability Act of 2011!

Dear [Decision Maker],

* Personalize your message

When I learned that Senator Leahy's bill, S.216, had passed in the Senate, I wanted to contact you immediately, before a similar bill was introduced in the House.

While I was pleased that the language was an improvement over last year's bill, I am concerned that while the ten-year jail term specified in the bill now applies only to food violations and not supplements, the FDA (based on their past behavior) may not interpret the bill the same way. Explicit language to clarify the situation would be helpful.

I'm also concerned that the bill still refers back to the FD&C Act for its definitions of the terms "adulterated" and "misbranded." For example, in section 403 of the Act, "misbranding" can mean that the producer makes a completely true statement about the health properties of a food or food product but without FDA permission.

I would much prefer it if the House never introduced its version of the bill! But if one is introduced, it must address the Senate bill's vagueness in terminology and carve out certain exemptions in the definition of misbranding and adulteration -- or better yet, define them anew instead of referring to the extremely broad and vague FD&C Act.

If such a bill is introduced, and its current language is not changed, such a law could hurt a lot of innocent people, and I would ask you to strongly oppose it.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[City, State ZIP]

Protecting Natural Health