House mulls bill on food label removal - Boston.com

The bill would stop states from adding warnings that are different from federal rules. States currently add hundreds of extra warnings, indicating the presence of arsenic in water, mercury in fish, alcohol in candy, pesticides in vegetables and more.

So what justification does the repugnican congress have for removing warnings about the dangers of mercury to pregnant women, or the lead content of your kid's candy?

"Consumers across the country deserve a single set of science-based food warning requirements, not the confusing patchwork that we have today," said Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.

But wait, I thought this was the party of state's rights.....

"Food safety has been largely a matter of state law and oversight for well more than a century," the attorneys general wrote.
State and local officials perform about 80 percent of all food safety enforcement in the United States, they said.

I'd wager those state guidelines exist because the federal ones are too vague to begin with, and each state has different priorities for their food: obviously Montana and Washington don't need the same warning labels for salmon. The fish are going to be produced/processed in totally different manners and carry different health-associated risks. And since each state does 80% of the food testing, I am perfectly fine with differing standards because those standards are likely to be more stringent.

The GOP is in the pocket of corporations. They talk out one side of their mouth and vote from the other. So pass the tuna while I still know what's in it. Family values, my ass.