Statement from the National Consumers League on AI moratorium deal 

Media Contact: Lisa McDonald, Vice President of Communications, 202-207-2829 

Washington, DC — The National Consumers League (NCL) today voiced strong opposition to the reported amendment to the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” imposing a five-year moratorium on state and local regulation of artificial intelligence systems. The deal, if enacted, would amount to a sweeping federal preemption of popular and long-standing consumer protection laws, ranging from robocall restrictions to children’s online safety, privacy rights, and protections from discriminatory AI applications. 

“This amendment is a gift to Big Tech at the expense of everyday consumers,” said John Breyault, Vice President of Public Policy, Telecommunications, and Fraud at NCL. “By preempting vital state laws—many of which have protected consumers from robocalls, deceptive marketing, and data misuse for decades—Congress would be tying the hands of state lawmakers and attorneys general just as AI technologies are becoming more embedded in our daily lives. It won’t just block new consumer protections—it will gut existing ones.” 

Despite language that purports to preserve “generally applicable” laws, the moratorium’s vague exemptions could preempt nearly any regulation applicable to automated decision-making systems—including those widely used in telemarketing, online platforms, and political advertising. 

NCL urges lawmakers to reject this overbroad provision and stand with consumers, not tech monopolies. 

### 

About the National Consumers League (NCL)      

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.   

NCL calls on Congress to improve traffic safety 

Media Contact: Lisa McDonald, Vice President of Communications, 202-207-2829 

Washington, DC — In advance of a subcommittee hearing on motor vehicle safety, the National Consumers League (NCL) sent a letter to the House Energy and Commerce Committee urging lawmakers to take decisive action to curb the unacceptable number of deaths and injuries that occur due to traffic crashes.  

“The death and destruction on our nation’s roads does not have to be the price we pay for commuting to work, dropping the kids off at school, or picking up groceries,” the letter states.  “By harnessing revolutionary safety technologies, educating the motoring public, and improving the design, construction, and performance of motor vehicles, we can make our roadways safer.” 

In the letter, NCL provides several policy proposals to improve traffic safety. 

A copy of the letter can be found HERE 

### 

About the National Consumers League (NCL)      

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.    

Guest Blog: Modernizing Government or Undermining Worker Protections? A Closer Look at the Secretary of Labor’s Agenda

By Alyssa Bredefeld, NCL Child Labor Intern

The U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce held a hearing on Wednesday, June 6th, where Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer was questioned. The hearing focused on what Committee Chairman Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) described as the “Trump administration’s plans for a smaller and more effective government for taxpayers”—a statement that reflects the administration’s “slash and burn” ideology, set in place by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). This department rapidly dismantled vital policy and aid programs in the name of streamlining. Unsurprisingly, the hearing was riddled with empty promises and evasive answers that signaled a lack of commitment to stopping child labor and the exploitation of American workers. The Secretary’s responses foreshadowed diminished protections for American workers and an increase in the number of children working in unsafe conditions.

One of the most urgent concerns was the proposed budget cuts to the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division, which investigates labor violations and enforces labor laws. Representative Lucy McBath (D-Ga.) highlighted the current severe staffing shortages, noting that the division went from went from 1,000 staff in 1948 to 611 by the end of the Biden administration—despite our workforce being much larger. She added that “investigators in a dozen states told The New York Times that their understaffed offices could barely respond to the number of complaints, much less open their own independent investigations.” With the Trump administration shuttering many state Wage and Hour offices and pressuring federal employees to retire or accept buy outs, that number of 611 inspectors could continue to drop quickly and significantly.

Chavez-DeRemer’s response to questioning did little to alleviate concerns. “If you say that more money will always solve the problem, I would probably have to disagree,” stated Chavez-DeRemer, returning to the message of “modernizing and streamlining” the government promoted by DOGE. Chavez-DeRemer refused to answer whether the number of investigations into child labor would decrease, stating only, “I will do everything in my effort to protect against child labor.”

While her promise to protect against child labor may sound reassuring, it means little without policy and action. As Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) put it, “the math isn’t mathing.” Without adequate staffing, investigations can’t proceed, allowing wage theft, misclassification, and dangerous conditions to continue unchecked. According to UNICEF, the United States saw an 88% increase in child labor violations between 2018 and 2023. Addressing these numbers before they worsen is critical to protecting the future of the American workforce. The Secretary of Labor’s inability to answer basic questions about investigative staffing signals an unwillingness to put children first and ensure protection for the most vulnerable. This hearing made it abundantly clear that Chavez-DeRemer’s loyalty lies with the Trump administration, not with American workers or children.

Click to access UNICEF_USA_ChildLaborReport.pdf

Alyssa Bredefeld is a senior at the University of Connecticut studying Human Rights and Allied Health Sciences.

NCL strongly opposes 10-year ban on tech regulations 

Media Contact: Lisa McDonald, Vice President of Communications, 202-207-2829  

Washington, DC — The “One Big Beautiful Bill” budget reconciliation legislation includes language that would largely ban states from regulating tech companies for 10 years if the states accept federal money for building out high-speed internet infrastructure. Specifically, the language prevents states from enforcing laws that protect the public from artificial intelligence and “automated decision systems.” The legislation’s definition of “automated decision systems” is so broad it could impact several existing state laws, including safeguards for digital privacy and anti-discrimination.  

“Congress shouldn’t force states to choose between building out high-speed internet or protecting their citizens from digital harms,” said NCL Vice President John Breyault. “Several states have enacted critical, non-partisan policies on issues like protecting the public from deceptive deepfakes. Throwing out these protections will not benefit a single constituent.” 

The National Consumers League opposes the inclusion of a ban on tech regulations within Congress’s budget reconciliation bill. The League strongly urges members of Congress to remove the provision. 

### 

About the National Consumers League (NCL)      

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.   

Want Lower Drug Prices? Transparency is The Answer. 

By Sally Greenberg, NCL CEO 

Pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) have become the uniquely American actors of behind-the-scenes drama in the healthcare system. They are the classic middleman in that they wield enormous power and get between patients and their prescribed medications. They control how much we pay for the medications and decide whether we can get access to the treatments our doctors prescribe.   

Through vertical integration, PBMs have become so intertwined with other players in the healthcare system, including health insurers, chain and mail order pharmacies, group purchasing organizations, and provider groups, it has been difficult for regulators and lawmakers to untangle their oversized – and frankly, anti-consumer – role in the healthcare infrastructure. 

This has been verified by outside researchers and investigations time and time again – a bipartisan Senate Finance report noted that PBMs – not drug makers – were driving up the cost of insulin with their demands for higher and higher rebates on an old and very effective drug for diabetes.  

And recently, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) reported that the top three PBMs reaped $7.3 billion in profits from marking up drug prices—a clear indication that these middlemen are not negotiating lower prices for consumers but profiting handsomely at their expense. 

As Congress enters the final stretch of negotiating the budget reconciliation bill, we urge our elected officials to include meaningful and broadly supported reforms to pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs).

While PBM reform provisions were included in the House version of the bill, we are disappointed that the Senate version lacks these critical measures. We strongly urge our Senators to incorporate these reforms, which have bipartisan backing in Congress, the support of the White House, and widespread approval from the American public.

The National Consumers League has expressed concern about health policy decisions made in the early months of the Trump administration, including dismantling critical public health programs and undermining public confidence in vaccines. There’s an additional issue, and that is the president’s executive order on prescription drug prices

But in calling for prescription drug prices in the U.S. to be tied to the lowest price charged in other countries, Trump said intriguingly, “We’re going to cut out the middleman and facilitate the direct sale of drugs at the most favored national price directly to the American citizen.” Tying prices to those of other nations is an entirely separate issue that requires additional scrutiny, but questioning the role of the PBMs as middlemen in driving up prices with little value added for consumers is long overdue. 

It’s also not unprecedented in today’s marketplace. Three years ago, entrepreneur Mark Cuban started Cost Plus Drugs, bypassing the PBM middlemen and negotiating directly with manufacturers for low list prices. It has been a model of transparency, in which consumers know they are paying the list price plus a 15% markup and a $5 pharmacy fee. By and large, consumers are getting their medicines much more cheaply than through the conventional process. 

And we’ve seen large drug manufacturers launch their own direct-to-consumer platforms to help Americans directly and more affordably get certain medicines and gain access to other healthcare services. 

This is the kind of “market disruption” that can be beneficial to patients. An immediate advantage is price transparency. In today’s conventional drug prescribing system, few patients can understand what the costs are and who is making money. We have a byzantine system of rebates and discounts that gives PBMs excessive revenue, hiding behind their opaque rebate and other practices, while patients pay higher out-of-pocket costs, and only the PBMs themselves understand how it works – and they like it that way.   

In an ideal world, PBMs would return to their original mission – using their buying power to negotiate lower prices for consumers and self-insured employers. The problem is that the three large PBMs that control over 80% of the drug prescribing market have no motivation to compete for lower prices or offer them to consumers. 

We support alternatives to PBMs – programs like Cost Plus Drugs that deliver pharmaceuticals to consumers directly and do so affordably and transparently. That might be the best medicine for the problem of middlemen reaping billions of dollars of value from the healthcare system without much gain to anyone but themselves. Call it a new way of looking at PBM reform, which Congress has been pushing for many years. Patients and consumers want transparency, so what is Congress waiting for? 

Public health sabotaged: RFK Jr. purges nation’s vaccine advisory committee

Media Contact: Lisa McDonald, Vice President of Communications, 202-207-2829  

Washington, DC – The National Consumers League (NCL) is alarmed by Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s removal of all 17 members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)—a body composed of independent public health experts who were vetted and appointed through a transparent, rigorous process during the previous administration.  ACIP plays a critical role in evaluating the safety, effectiveness, and public health need for vaccines. Its recommendations guide immunization practices for children, seniors, and the general public—including routine vaccines such as the annual flu shot. 

“Expertise is not a conflict of interest—it’s a safeguard,” said NCL CEO Sally Greenberg. “ACIP members are among the most respected scientists and physicians in the country. To remove them wholesale is reckless, and to do so without a clear plan for who will replace them, just weeks before a major meeting, puts the health of every American at risk.”     

ACIP plays a critical role in determining the safety, efficacy, and recommended use of vaccines—decisions that directly impact whether lifesaving immunizations are covered by public and private insurance. Removing the entire committee without naming qualified replacements risks delaying these essential decisions, weakening public trust, and politicizing what must remain an evidence-based process.    

The upcoming ACIP meeting scheduled for June 25–27 looms large, and it is unclear how newly appointed members, with no transition period or institutional knowledge, will be able to contribute to this complex and urgent work responsibly. The lack of continuity undermines the stability of our public health infrastructure and injects uncertainty into vaccine access and coverage.   

We call on Secretary Kennedy to ensure that new appointees are selected transparently, based on qualifications, not ideology, and to protect the scientific integrity of one of the nation’s most trusted advisory bodies.   

###  

About the National Consumers League (NCL)       

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.     

Guest Blog: Reparations Aren’t a Fad. They’re a Bill That’s Still Due

By Michele Miller

This opinion previously ran June 5, 2025 in The Afro-The Black Media Authority.  

Last week, a Wall Street Journal columnist dismissed reparations as “yesterday’s fad,” praising Maryland Governor Wes Moore for vetoing a bill that would have created a state commission to study them.

Reparations are not a trend that’s passed. They are a moral and material debt — centuries old, still unpaid. To call them “yesterday’s fad” isn’t just wrong. It’s offensive. And it follows a long American tradition: declaring the fight for justice over before it has even begun.

What’s been a fad in American politics isn’t reparations — it’s invoking justice when it’s convenient, then backing away when it requires courage. With all due respect to Governor Moore, that is the real trend. That is the real exhaustion. People are tired of waiting while leaders perform empathy but veto action.

The notion that reparations have been “studied to exhaustion” is misleading — and, frankly, a convenient excuse to avoid responsibility. H.R. 40, the bill that would simply study reparations, has been introduced in Congress for more than 30 years. It has never passed. Research doesn’t settle a debt. Payment does.

For more than 250 years, American law, policy, and commerce upheld the enslavement of Black people. Leaders permitted it. Courts defended it. Churches justified it. Families profited from it. Human beings were bought and sold. Raped. Bred. Whipped. Worked to death. Children were taken from mothers. Black people were insured as property, taxed as assets, and traded like capital.

That labor generated immense and enduring wealth. It built industries. It funded institutions. It powered a nation. And the Black people whose lives and labor made that possible received nothing in return — only more exclusion.

Not at emancipation. Not during Reconstruction. Not in the New Deal. Not now.

And the damage didn’t end with slavery. It evolved. Black Americans endured convict leasing, lynching, Jim Crow, redlining, school segregation, medical experimentation, mass incarceration. Families were torn apart not just by violence, but by policy. That harm wasn’t buried in the past. It lives in maternal mortality rates, in childhood poverty, in housing discrimination, in the criminal legal system. It lives in the wealth gap that never closes.

Reparations are not symbolic. They are a material response to material theft. They address not only what was taken, but what was broken — and what still has not been repaired.

And yet, even now — even with all of this in plain view — we see leaders stepping back. Governor Wes Moore, the nation’s only Black governor, defended his veto of Maryland’s reparations commission by saying it’s time to “focus on the work itself.” But vetoing a study commission is not doing the work — it’s deferring it. Dr. David J. Johns, CEO of the National Black Justice Coalition, called the move “a painful rejection of the very communities that helped make his historic election possible.”

In a single Wall Street Journal opinion column, Jason Riley managed to dismiss reparations as “racial pandering,” reduce them to “yesterday’s fad,” and accuse advocates of trying to “redistribute wealth.” Mr. Riley was wrong on all three counts.

Reparations are not pandering. They are not some trendy appeal to Black voters. They are a serious moral and economic response to state-sanctioned theft. If anything is pandering, it’s the performance of justice at ribbon cuttings while blocking actual repair.

Reparations are not a fad. A movement that spans generations, from the Freedmen’s Bureau to H.R. 40, cannot be dismissed because today’s political leaders lack the courage to carry it forward. If support has waned, it’s not because the moral claim has weakened. It’s because too many in power are hoping it will.

And reparations are not wealth redistribution. What do they think slavery was? Slavery was wealth redistribution — by force. It transferred land, labor, capital, and generational security from Black families to white ones. Reparations don’t take what’s not owed. They return what was never paid.

Another favorite deflection: point to cities like Chicago and ask why inequality still exists under Black leadership. It’s a lazy, cruel argument — one that pretends centuries of disinvestment can be reversed by representation alone. Reparations aren’t about instant transformation. They’re about redressing harm and rebuilding what was systematically denied.

In my town of Amherst, Massachusetts, we did something rare. In 2021, we made a financial commitment — two million dollars for Black residents — before we had a final plan, a full public process, or even full consensus. We understood something most communities still avoid: reparations without money isn’t repair. It’s performance.

We knew two million dollars wouldn’t right centuries of injustice. No local effort can match the scale of a national debt. But we didn’t let that fact paralyze us. We did what was within our power. And that early commitment made everything else possible. Today, Amherst has completed a public process, delivered a set of recommendations, and kept the full $2 million intact — waiting for implementation.

Amherst and Evanston aren’t exceptions — they’re signs that the moral arc of history is bending, slowly but deliberately, toward justice.

And they are not alone. Across the country, states, cities, universities, and even churches are examining their own roles in slavery and taking concrete steps toward repair. Just last year, Loyola University in Maryland released a report on its historical ties to slavery — part of the quiet, steady work of reckoning happening across institutions.

These efforts don’t pretend to close the wealth gap on their own. The scale of national harm demands a federal response. But local and institutional action is not a distraction from that goal — it’s how justice advances in the real world. It’s the necessary groundwork for a broader reckoning. It is not a fad. It is a movement.

The political window for reparations may be narrowing. But local governments still have power. Universities still have power. States still have power. They can act. They can lead. They can pay.

This is the work.

Michele Miller is a former Town Councilor representing District 1 in Amherst, Massachusetts.

MAHA report troubling and misleading for Americans says National Consumers League 

Media Contact: Lisa McDonald, Vice President of Communications, 202-207-2829  

Washington, DC —The National Consumers League (NCL) is concerned by the release of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) report, a 69-page report masquerading as a public health strategy.    

“This report is a diagnosis without a treatment plan. It’s a muddled mix of cherry-picked, outdated, and misleading data designed to stoke fear, not solve problems,” said Sally Greenberg, NCL CEO. “It reads less like a roadmap for public health and more like a conspiracy manifesto in a lab coat.”     

On issues NCL has long championed – vaccines, food safety, and nutrition labeling – the MAHA report is troubling. It casts baseless doubt on vaccine safety, questions food regulations grounded in science, and floats vague, unworkable notions that would unravel decades of hard-won consumer protections.   

The report’s food safety claims are flawed, painting a grim picture of pesticide use in American agriculture—claims that have already sparked a backlash from farmers. A review by NOTUS found that several cited studies either don’t exist or were misrepresented, including one falsely attributed to a researcher. “You can’t call this ‘gold-standard science’ while relying on phantom studies,” said Greenberg. “This isn’t transparency—it’s recklessness.” Despite these red flags, the White House is pushing ahead, requesting $500 million to advance the report’s next phase.   

Americans deserve evidence-based policy, not scare tactics. We call on policymakers, scientists, and the public to recommit to a health system that is modern, science-driven, and focused on consumer safety. If this report is a roadmap, NCL is fearful of what the next phase could mean for Americans. Here at NCL, we agree that it is imperative to bolster public health and encourage cleaner food production and supply, but this report falls short.   

### 

About the National Consumers League (NCL)      

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.   

The National Consumers League Applauds the Reintroduction of the Treat and Reduce Obesity Act; Urges Swift Action

Media Contact: Lisa McDonald, Vice President of Communications, 202-207-2829 

Washington, DC – Months after the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) determined in a proposed rule that Medicare Part D should cover anti-obesity medications as a “medically necessary” service for people with the disease of obesity, the National Consumers League today applauded the reintroduction of the Treat and Reduce Obesity Act (TROA) in the 119th Congress as a critical step towards realizing this goal.  

Introduced in the Senate by Senators Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), TROA aims to advance obesity care for older Americans by expanding access to intensive behavioral therapy (IBT) beyond the primary care setting and by allowing Medicare Part D to cover FDA approved anti-obesity medications (AOMs), including new injectable drugs called GLP-1s (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists). As such, TROA’s passage would end discriminatory and out-of-date Medicare policies and remove one of the biggest obstacles impeding access to quality obesity care by ensuring Medicare beneficiaries with obesity will have the same access to GLP-1s as those prescribed these drugs for treatment of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease.  

When TROA was first introduced during the 113th Congress in 2013, 37.7 percent of adult Americans, or one in three adults, were living with obesity, and the American Medical Association responded by officially recognizing obesity as a serious disease requiring treatment. Now, obesity affects 41.9 percent of US adults  – more than 100 million people – which makes obesity the most prevalent chronic disease affecting Americans, significantly eclipsing the other most prevalent chronic diseases: heart disease, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, cancer, chronic lung disease, Alzheimer’s Disease, and stroke. Even more significantly, more than 230 medical conditions are directly linked to overweight and obesity, meaning these diseases worsen as the degree of obesity increases. Thus, obesity today is responsible for an estimated 400,000 deaths a year and costs the US economy an estimated $1.72 trillion annually. 

Also of note, the science of obesity treatment has changed significantly since the Medicare Part D program went into effect in 2006, resulting in new therapeutic agents, such as GLP-1 drugs, that can help people lose up to 20 percent of their weight in 26 months. Calculating the potential savings resulting from better health outcomes when obesity is treated, studies are beginning to project the potential savings to the economy from covering obesity medications. One recent study published December 5, 2024, in JAMA Network Open, estimated that a 10 percent weight loss resulting from obesity treatment saved $2,430 in reduced medical expenditures, and for a 25 percent weight loss, the reduction in health expenditures is $5,444 per person.  

Besides these reasons, the National Consumers League welcomes the reintroduction of TROA as a way that Congress can drive nationwide adoption of the Obesity Bill of Rights, issued by NCL and the National Council on Aging (NCOA) in 2024. The Obesity Bill of Rights defines quality obesity care as the right of all adults and establishes eight essential rights, including the right for older adults to receive quality obesity care and the right to coverage for the full range of treatment options so Americans with obesity will get the care specified in medical guidelines.  

Accordingly, NCL looks forward to working with Senators Cassidy and Lujan to build support for TROA and to working with the sponsors of the companion House bill, which will be introduced soon. At a time when so much is at stake for the health of older adults, TROA can be a catalyst for Congress to help older adults realize these rights and improve the standard of care for millions of Americans with obesity.  

### 

About the National Consumers League (NCL)      

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.    

Nancy Glick

World Food Safety Day 2025 is a call to action

By Nancy Glick, Director of Food and Nutrition Policy

Most Americans know about Earth Day and World AIDS Day. But World Food Safety Day, an observance established by the World Health Organization (WHO) and celebrated around the world on June 7, largely goes unnoticed in the U.S.  

This is why the National Consumers League is flagging June 7 as a day when consumers should stop and think about the importance of preventing foodborne illnesses. Each year, this collection of diseases sickens an estimated 48 million people in the U.S., resulting in 128,000 hospitalizations and 3,000 deaths, according to the  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The toll in costs to the nation is as much as $90 billion annually in medical expenditures, lost productivity, and premature deaths.  

Foodborne illness is not a new problem. Since NCL’s founding in 1899, the organization has been fighting to protect Americans from exposure to the harmful bacteria, viruses, parasites, and chemical substances in food that cause foodborne illness. We helped expose the unsanitary practices of the meat-packing industry, which led to the passage of the Pure Food and Drug Act in 1906, laying a foundation for the nation’s first consumer protection agency, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). We also championed the passage of the Federal Meat Inspection Act of 1906 (FMIA), a landmark law aimed at guaranteeing meat is slaughtered and processed under sanitary conditions and ensuring adulterated or misbranded meat and meat products are not sold in interstate and foreign commerce.  

After these successes, NCL focused on pesticide residues in food, putting pressure on lawmakers to protect consumers from impure, improperly labeled products by passing the first pesticide legislation in 1910. We next fought to establish the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to enact the Food Quality Protection Act in 1996, which set stricter safety standards for pesticide residue levels in food.  

Then came the infamous 1993 foodborne illness outbreak when people ate undercooked hamburgers at Jack-in-the-Box restaurants in Washington state, Idaho, California, and Nevada. The hamburger meat was contaminated with E. coli O157: H7 bacteria, a potentially deadly strain, and the pathogen severely sickened approximately 700 people, caused 171 hospitalizations, and killed four young children.  

This tragedy propelled NCL and other consumer and food safety organizations to fight to transform meat and poultry inspection and many things changed.
E. coli O157: H7 was declared an adulterant in raw ground beef, triggering a mandatory testing program for the organism in federally inspected plants and retail stores. The FDA issued rules requiring that the food industry follow a food safety management system called Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) that identifies, evaluates, and controls hazards throughout the food production process, from raw materials to the finished product.  

Later, with the passage of the Food Safety Modernization Act in 2010, the FDA ushered in a series of food safety regulations and new systems, such as the proficiency testing program that integrates the FDA’s Food Emergency Response Network (FERN), the nation’s food laboratories at the local, state, and federal level that collectively test food for pathogens and contaminants to prevent foodborne illness. Similarly, the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) published a proposed rule to require poultry producers to use new technologies for early detection of foodborne pathogens to keep Salmonella-contaminated chicken carcasses and poultry parts from entering the market. 

But, even with these developments, the nation is not where it should be to keep the food supply safe. In late 2024, an E. coli O157:H7 outbreak linked to romaine lettuce sickened 89 people across 15 U.S. states, resulting in 36 hospitalizations and one death. The FDA investigated the outbreak and traced it to romaine lettuce, but the agency chose not to publicly announce the outbreak, which food safety advocates believe was a failure to protect the public.  

And now, the Trump administration is taking steps that could seriously roll back food safety protections. Among the actions, the administration has laid off scientists at food safety labs and eliminated two important food safety committees comprising top scientists and researchers with expertise on regulatory standards. Additionally, the administration delayed a requirement that food companies and grocers rapidly trace contaminated food through the supply chain and pull it off the shelves. Sadly, the administration also withdrew the USDA proposed rule to reduce Salmonella risk in poultry.  

Officials at the Department of Health and Human Services have issued statements proclaiming food safety as a priority concern. But, unless there is a strong, coordinated, and comprehensive food safety system in the U.S., there will be declining public confidence in the food supply. More significantly, we are likely to witness an increase in outbreaks and illnesses that could have been prevented.  

This is not a time to hope for the best. Foodborne pathogens are widespread, and they can kill. Accordingly, NCL and many concerned consumer and food safety organizations will continue to speak out about putting the safety of the public ahead of deregulation and federal cost-cutting.