Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. (text: CR S2095)
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 1, 2025
Safeguarding American Food and Export Trade Yields Act of 2025 or the SAFETY Act of 2025
This bill directs the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to secure foreign markets for goods using common names.
In general, the bill defines common name as a name that (1) is ordinarily or customarily used for an agricultural commodity or food product, (2) is typically placed on the packaging and product label of the agricultural commodity or food product, and (3) the use of which is consistent with standards of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The bill includes a list of names that will be considered common names for (1) food products (e.g., basmati, bratwurst, and parmesan); (2) wine, including grape varietal terms, grape variety designations, and non-varietal descriptors such as chateau and vintage; and (3) beer (e.g., bitter, pale ale, and hefeweizen).
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Read full official summaryShow less
Specifically, USDA must coordinate efforts with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to secure the right of U.S. agricultural producers, processors, and exporters to use common names for agricultural commodities or food products in foreign markets. Through the negotiation of bilateral, plurilateral, or multilateral agreements, memoranda of understanding, or exchanges of letters, USDA and the USTR must assure the current and future use of each common name in connection with U.S. agricultural commodities or food products.
USDA and the USTR must jointly brief Congress on these efforts on a semi-annual basis.
Source last updated: Jun 25, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.1230 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.1230 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.1230 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.1230 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.