PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Nutrition and Horticulture .
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 16, 2012
Carcinogen-Free Label Act of 2012 - Directs the head of each federal agency that regulates a covered product to establish a program to permit the labeling of such a product that does not contain any carcinogens as "Carcinogen-Free." Defines a "covered product" to mean any product offered for sale that is: (1) regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Agriculture (USDA), or the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC); and (2) intended for individual or residential use.
Requires such agency heads to coordinate to develop an easily recognizable label: (1) to be affixed to a covered product to signify that it has been approved for "Carcinogen-Free" labeling, and (2) to include a notice stating that "This product does not contain known or likely carcinogens that increase your risk of cancer."
Prohibits the introduction or offering for introduction into interstate commerce of a covered product affixed with a "Carcinogen-Free" label if: (1) the head of each federal agency that regulates the product has not approved an application for the labeling of the product as "Carcinogen-Free," or (2) the product contains any substance that is not listed in such application.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Sets forth requirements regarding: (1) application approval and confidentiality; (2) random testing of covered products, random audits of facilities in which such products are manufactured, and measures to ensure compliance with agency guidance; (3) application fees; and (4) penalties for violations.
Requires such agency heads to: (1) issue guidance to prevent the introduction of carcinogens into such product during its manufacture, storage, and transportation; and (2) post on the agency's public website a list of all covered products regulated by that agency that have been approved for labeling as "Carcinogen-Free."
People & committees
Rep. Deutch, Theodore E. [D-FL-19] · D–FL
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 Nutrition and Horticulture .
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade.
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 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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1788)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.6601 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.6601 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.6601 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.6601 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.