PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Moore, Tim [R-NC-14] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Oct 5, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10580 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10580 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10580 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10580 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-09-24 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed LABEL Act would change how labels tell consumers where covered fish comes from and whether it is wild or farm-raised. That information would have to appear together, be conspicuous and meet a minimum relative font size. For fish sold in consumer packages, the label would have to appear on the front.
This Act may be cited as the Let Americans Buy with Explicit Labeling Act or the LABEL Act.
In the case of a covered commodity that is farm-raised fish or wild fish—
in a conspicuous location, so as to render the information likely to be read and understood by a consumer under normal conditions of purchase, in a font size that is not smaller than the font size describing the farm-raised fish or wild fish on the package, display, holding unit, or bin
(B) the designation of country of origin and the designation of wild fish or farm-raised fish shall be combined, and not made separately; and (C) the labeling shall be located on the front of the package if the fish is in a consumer package.
The bill would add fish-labeling requirements to the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946. Information required by the existing law would have to use an already specified labeling method and appear where consumers are likely to read and understand it during normal purchases. Its font could be no smaller than the font describing the fish on the package, display, holding unit or bin.
Section 282(c) of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1638a(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
(A) the information required by subsection (a) shall be provided to consumers by a means described in paragraph (1) in a conspicuous location, so as to render the information likely to be read and understood by a consumer under normal conditions of purchase, in a font size that is not smaller than the font size describing the farm-raised fish or wild fish on the package, display, holding unit, or bin;
The country-of-origin designation and the designation identifying fish as wild or farm-raised would have to be combined, rather than displayed separately.
(B) the designation of country of origin and the designation of wild fish or farm-raised fish shall be combined, and not made separately;
When fish is in a consumer package, the labeling would have to be on the front of that package.
(C) the labeling shall be located on the front of the package if the fish is in a consumer package.
Section 2 and its amendments would take effect one year after enactment.
This section and the amendments made by this section shall take effect on the date that is 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act.
The supplied October 5, 2026 source snapshot records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Agriculture on September 24, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-05T15:45:26Z. 2026-09-24: Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture. 2026-09-24: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-24. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish what appears in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; accompanying earmark materials are not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 5, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI