PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 12, 2015
Genetically Engineered Food Right-to-Know Act
This bill amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to prohibit the sale of food that has been genetically engineered or contains genetically engineered ingredients, unless that information is clearly disclosed.
This prohibition does not apply to: (1) food served in restaurants, (2) medical food, (3) packaged food that is less than 0.9% genetically engineered material, and (4) food that qualifies as genetically engineered solely because it is produced using a genetically engineered vaccine or because it includes the use of a genetically engineered processing aid (including yeast) or enzyme.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Labeling or advertising foods containing genetically engineered material as “natural,” or using similar words, is prohibited.
A food recipient is not subject to penalties for misbranding of genetically engineered food or ingredients if the recipient has a guaranty that is signed by the person from whom they received the food (including seeds) and the guaranty states that the food is not genetically engineered or does not contain a genetically engineered ingredient.
Food is deemed to have been produced without the knowing or intentional use of genetic engineering if: (1) the food is certified as organic; or (2) an independent organization determines the food has not been knowingly or intentionally genetically engineered or commingled with genetically engineered food, with that determination being based on testing that is consistent with international standards and not reliant on processed foods with no detectable DNA.
An agricultural producer is not subject to penalties for misbranding of genetically engineered food or ingredients if a violation occurs because food unintentionally becomes contaminated with genetically engineered material and the contamination is not due to the producer’s negligence.
People & committees
Sen. Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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 S.511 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 S.511 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 S.511 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 S.511 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.