PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 16, 1999
Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA), and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) to deem a food misbranded if it contains or was produced with a genetically engineered material unless its labeling contains statements meeting specified requirements. Excludes, in all three Acts, food: (1) served in restaurants; or (2) prepared primarily in a retail establishment, ready for human consumption, but not offered for sale for immediate consumption in the establishment. Excludes, for the FDCA, a medical food as defined in the Orphan Drug Act.Subjects violators to civil monetary penalties. Exempts from the penalties: (1) any person (recipient) who establishes a guaranty or undertaking signed by the person (residing in the United States) from whom the recipient in good faith received the food to the effect that the food does not contain or was not produced with a genetically engineered material; and (2) for the FDCA, an agricultural producer of a food that does not contain and was not produced with a genetically engineered material if the food becomes contaminated with a genetically engineered material (including by mingling the two), so long as the contamination was neither intentional nor negligent.
People & committees
Rep. Kucinich, Dennis J. [D-OH-10] · D–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Risk Management, Research and Specialty Crops.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Livestock and Horticulture.
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 3, 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.3377 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.3377 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.3377 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.3377 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.