A congressional legislative effort to stop states from enacting their own food additives prohibitions has been stopped in its tracks before a bill could even be introduced.

Senator Roger Marshall (R-KS), who is drafting a food reform bill currently named the Better Food Disclosure Act, originally intended for his act to include a provision that preempts state food laws by centralizing power at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The bill is said to align with the interests of the newly formed Americans for Ingredient Transparency (AFIT), a conservative lobby group backed by “Big Food,” according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI).

This preemption goes against the “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) movement’s objective to end the use of certain ingredients in foods, which has been adopted by concerned consumers and the Trump Administration alike. The lawmakers behind recent state-level food laws have cited MAHA as inspiration.

AFIT, which Sen. Marshall has been consulting in his development of the Better Food Disclosure Act, strives to “correct the maze of state-by-state-laws” that restrict or prohibit the use of colorants, additives, and ingredients in foods.

However, in an interview with the New York Times (and also reported by Food Fix), Sen. Marshall confirmed that he removed the preemptive provision from his draft Better Food Disclosure Act, citing pushback from “MAHA moms” (i.e., concerned citizens and mothers who advocate MAHA principles).

In another example of pushback against this kind of preemption, in October, shortly after the formation of AFIT was announced, more than 80 diverse stakeholder groups signed a letter to Congress, urging U.S. Senators and Representatives to oppose efforts that would limit the power of states to set their own laws regarding food and food contact chemicals. 

Although Sen. Marshall told the New York Times that he did meet with AFIT and other industry groups, he also said these meetings did not influence his bill.

The New York Times also reported that Sen. Marshall’s bill will also “address at least one” of U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s (RFK Jr.’s) MAHA priorities, namely, increasing “transparency for new ingredients added to food.” This is likely in reference to Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) process reform, which Sec. Kennedy has directed FDA to explore (and for which there is a proposed rule in the works), and is also a policy area of focus for AFIT.

CSPI predicts that legislation influenced by AFIT, such as Sen. Marshall’s bill, will “attempt to influence federal regulation to meet the needs of its [food industry] members, a goal that will certainly result in weak federal standards governing GRAS; likely, a system that does not fully close the GRAS loophole by requiring premarket approval for new food chemical uses.”

Examples of organizations and companies backing AFIT include, but are not limited to, Consumer Brands Association, Conagra Brands, General Mills, Kraft Heinz, Nestlé U.S.A., PepsiCo, and Tyson Foods. The aforementioned have also made explicit commitments to phase out artificial food dyes from all or some of their products, in response to MAHA pressures from Sec. Kennedy, FDA, and consumers, and in light of the emerging patchwork of state additives laws.