PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 11, 2009
Keeping America's Food Safe Act of 2009 - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require: (1) certification of any food safety laboratory or a sampling service that is analyzing, testing, or collecting samples of imported food; and (2) such laboratories or services to submit to the Secretary of Health and Human Services the results of all tests conducted on behalf of an importer.
Sets forth civil penalties for: (1) an importer that knowingly engages in the falsification of test results submitted to the Secretary; and (2) a laboratory or service that knowingly submits false test results to the Secretary.
Requires the Secretary to establish a certification program to ensure that imported food meets the food safety standards applied to food produced in the United States.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits food from being permitted entry into the United States from a foreign facility in a foreign country unless there are certifications from the facility and country, except if the certification is not needed for the Secretary's evaluation of whether the facility's or country's standards are at least equivalent to standards applicable to food produced in the United States.
Sets forth certification requirements for foreign countries.
Requires the Secretary to develop and maintain websites on: (1) food safety issues; and (2) the development of school curricula regarding food safety issues.
Establishes whistle-blower's protections.
Revises the definition of "responsible party" to include an establishment that analyzes or tests samples of food for consumption in the United to States to ensure its safety. Requires a responsible party to notify the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) within 24 hours about test results that suggest that an article of food is reportable food, irrespective of whether the party subsequently determines that such article isn't reportable food.
Authorizes the Secretary to request and, in the absence of voluntary compliance, to order an establishment to recall food that has been distributed and that presents a risk of illness, injury, or gross consumer deception when necessary to protect the public health.
People & committees
Rep. Roskam, Peter J. [R-IL-6] · R–IL
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 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.999 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.999 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.999 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.999 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.