PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 14, 2002
Food Choking Prevention Act of 2002 - Directs the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in collaboration with the Consumer Product Safety Commission to establish an Office of Choking Hazard Evaluation to require warning labels on food products primarily consumed by children that pose a demonstrably high choking risk to them.Grants the Office mandatory recall authority over food products determined to pose a significant and unacceptable choking hazard to the general public.Mandates establishment of a Choking Hazard Evaluation Task Force whose staff shall be designated jointly by such agencies to establish criteria for determining whether a food product poses a significant and unacceptable choking hazard, using age-differentiated criteria for choking hazards.Directs the FDA to: (1) establish a national database of unusual food choking incidents; and (2) provide for an adequate reporting system throughout its field offices, which members of the health care profession and the general public can readily access to report new incidents.
People & committees
Rep. Honda, Michael M. [D-CA-15] · D–CA
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.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
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: Aug 19, 2025. 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.5739 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.5739 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.5739 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.5739 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.