Home Food A look back at trends in state legislatures this year

A look back at trends in state legislatures this year

by trpliquidation
0 comment
A look back at trends in state legislatures this year

– OPINION –

I was excited last week when Doug Farquhar, director of government affairs for the National Environmental Health Association, presented the final report on state legislative actions for 2024.

I would like to take this opportunity to point out a number of things from that report.

Doug kindly provided Food Safety News with these reports as he held a similar position at the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL).

I’m probably more surprised than most that technology allows these reports to be created. Of course, I’m “old school” and remember often having to drive from Seattle to Olympia in heavy traffic on Friday afternoons simply to pick up a copy of an amendment or something similar.

So I like any technology that keeps me off the road.

The actions the fifty states take are just as important as the food safety decisions made in Washington DC. That’s especially true because 2,700 state and local health departments form the basis for foodborne illness surveillance in the county. And supervision is pretty crucial right now, I think we can all agree on that.

The 2024 parliamentary season started in January and 250 bills related to food safety were introduced. According to the Farquhar Report, 41 were passed and became law. Another 11 are awaiting the governor’s signature, and four have been vetoed.

One non-trend stood out. California has passed bills that would limit certain food additives in 2023 and 2024. This year’s bill bans food colorings in school lunches.

However, this California trendsetter doesn’t seem to be going anywhere. The NCSL adopted a resolution expressing confidence in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to make such decisions.

There is a trend regarding Food Freedom and Cottage Foods, and there is no doubt about it. It’s really been going on since the Wyoming Food Freedom Act was signed into law a decade ago. Generally, such laws allow certain foods to be exempt from inspections and licensing.

This year, the governor of Wyoming vetoed the PRIME Act (S 103), which would have allowed the sale of homemade meat products.

But twelve of the fifty food freedom bills have been passed in Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, New Hampshire, New York, Oklahoma, Utah, Vermont and Virginia. The bills passed include:

• Alaska H 251 exempts certain foods and beverages prepared in an uninspected kitchen from state labeling, licensing, packaging, licensing and inspection requirements. The law also allows the acquisition of meat using an ownership share.

• The Arizona Legislature passed two cottage food bills: H 2042 and H 2079. H 2042 requires cottage food products to be packaged at home with a label containing the preparer’s registration number and a list of ingredients. H 2079 prohibits a county from requiring a food handler to be certified or undergo training for individuals who volunteer to handle food less than three times per year, under the supervision of a certified food handler.

• Hawaii H 2144 expands the possibilities of home-cooked foods by allowing direct sales of such foods to consumers over the telephone or the Internet.

• Illinois S 2617 states that a cottage food business may not sell certain food products or processed foods that contain certain hazardous items. The Director of Agriculture may be exempt from inspecting the slaughter of animals at certain processors if they are labeled and not sold to consumers

• Iowa H 2257 exempts certain establishments that slaughter and prepare poultry products from inspections.

• New Hampshire H 1565 removed processed, acidified foods from the definition of potentially hazardous foods.

• New York S 1979 requires the state to study the economic impact of creating kitchen incubators. This bill has passed the Legislature but requires the Governor’s signature to go into effect.

• Oklahoma passed H 2975, which would require the registration numbers of homemade food manufacturers for labeling purposes.

• Utah’s S 73 restricts state regulation of local foods and limits authority to set rules.

• Vermont H 603 established exemptions for inspections of the slaughter of poultry sold at the producer’s premises. The law also rescinded the requirement that uninspected poultry only be sold whole on the farm, at a farmers market or to a dine-in restaurant.

• Virginia H 759 requires a specified pH value for pickles and acidified vegetable products when sold to consumers for consumption and not for resale.

In other words, many states are willing to take a risk. It will be interesting to see how long the food freedom trend lasts.

(Click here to sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News.)

You may also like

logo

Stay informed with our comprehensive general news site, covering breaking news, politics, entertainment, technology, and more. Get timely updates, in-depth analysis, and insightful articles to keep you engaged and knowledgeable about the world’s latest events.

Subscribe

Subscribe my Newsletter for new blog posts, tips & new photos. Let's stay updated!

© 2024 – All Right Reserved.