PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 3, 2009
Safe And Fair Enforcement and Recall for Meat, Poultry, and Food Act of 2009 or the SAFER Meat, Poultry, and Food Act of 2009 - Amends the Federal Meat Inspection Act and the Poultry Products Inspection Act to require a person (other than a household consumer) who has reason to believe that a meat or poultry article handled by such person is adulterated or misbranded to notify the Secretary of Agriculture of the identity and location of the article. Directs the Secretary, upon finding that the article is adulterated or misbranded and there is a reasonable probability that human consumption would present a threat to public health, to: (1) provide all appropriate persons an opportunity to cease distribution of the article, make appropriate notifications, and recall the article; and (2) require an immediate cessation of distribution if voluntary action is not taken.
Authorizes the Secretary to: (1) refuse to provide, or to withdraw, inspections of an establishment for willful or repeated violations of the respective Act; (2) deny or suspend inspection in the public interest to protect the health or welfare of consumers or to ensure the effective performance of an official duty under the respective Act; and (3) assess civil penalties for violations.
Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require a person (other than a household consumer or other individual who is an intended consumer) who has reason to believe that an article of food introduced into interstate commerce is adulterated or misbranded in a manner that, if consumed, may result in illness or injury to notify the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Directs the Secretary, upon finding that to be the case, to: (1) provide all appropriate persons an opportunity to cease distribution of such article, make appropriate notifications, and recall the article; and (2) require an immediate cessation of distribution if voluntary action is not taken. Allows the Secretary to assess penalties for prohibited acts.
People & committees
Rep. DeGette, Diana [D-CO-1] · D–CO
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 Health.
Referred to House Energy and Commerce
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and 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 House Agriculture
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.815 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.815 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.815 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.815 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.