PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 29, 2010
Consumer Right to Know Food Labeling Act of 2010 - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Federal Meat Inspection Act to deem as misbranded a food or meat food product that contains any part of a cloned animal and does not bear a conspicuous label including a notice of that information.
Requires individuals to maintain a verifiable recordkeeping audit trail that will permit verification of compliance with this Act.
Deems as misbranded a food that bears a label indicating that it does not contain cloned product, unless the label is in accordance with applicable regulations that may not: (1) require such a label to include a statement indicating that the fact that a food does not contain such product has no bearing on the safety of the food for human consumption; and (2) prohibit such a label on the basis that, in the case of the type of food involved, there is no version of the food in commercial distribution that does contain such product.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Sets forth civil penalties for violation of this Act. Exempts a person who establishes a guaranty, signed by the person residing in the United States from whom the food was received in good faith, that the food does not contain any cloned product.
Allows a person to commence a civil action against a person who is alleged to have violated this Act or the applicable Secretary where a failure of the Secretary to perform any act or duty that is not discretionary is alleged.
Deems as misbranded a food product that contains genetically-engineered salmon unless the food is so labeled.
People & committees
Rep. DeLauro, Rosa L. [D-CT-3] · D–CT
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 Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Rural Development, Biotechnology, Specialty Crops, and Foreign Agriculture.
Referred to House Agriculture
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, 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 House 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 14, 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.6325 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.6325 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.6325 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.6325 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.