Video & Transcript Research : 'labeling'

Page 1 of 132
ND

North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Senate Agriculture and Veterans Affairs Apr 10th, 2025 at 09:00 am

Agriculture and Veterans Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • that we name amendments, on line 16 and 17 for those listening, it overstrikes 'sufficient warning label
  • even read it—'commenced' and replaces it with 'sufficient to satisfy any requirement for warning or labeling
Bills: HB1318
Summary: The Agriculture and Veterans Affairs Committee met on April 10 and took up House Bill 1318, a bill dealing with pesticide-related liability and warning-label issues. The chair explained that the bill had drawn strong interest from both agriculture and public health sides, and that the committee was trying to craft language that would protect consumers without unduly harming agricultural production. He said the committee had worked through multiple draft amendments and was now considering Amendment 1006, which was described as a compromise combining earlier proposals and narrowing the bill’s scope to pesticides registered with the state commissioner. Members discussed whether the amendment would weaken the original intent of the bill. Senator Myrdal said the revised language added needed guardrails and addressed concerns about overly broad preemption language and warning-label standards, while also preserving agriculture’s ability to operate. After a motion to rescind the earlier action on the bill passed, Amendment 1006 was adopted unanimously by the members present. A motion to move the bill without committee recommendation failed for lack of a second. The committee then voted on House Bill 1318 as amended. The do-pass motion passed on a roll call vote, with Senators Weber, Luick, Myrdal, and Lemm voting yes, and Senators Marcellais and Weston voting no. The chair said he would carry the bill. The meeting ended with members thanking the chair and staff for their work during the session, and the chair noted he might call the committee back if a conference committee report required further input.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Public Health Aug 13th, 2025

Public Health

Transcript Highlights:
  • Do we find the label that matches the actual content?
  • Those packages were clearly labeled as 44% THC. Labeled. Labeled. So does it mean actual? Correct.
  • You know, the label invariably says it's less than 0.3 percent.
  • Our products are clearly labeled. They've got QR codes.
  • Labeling of that. No, I actually disagree with that.
Bills: HB5
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Health and Human Services (Part II) Feb 26th, 2025

Health & Human Services

Transcript Highlights:
  • Introduced smart label allowing consumers to access detailed nutritional information via QR codes.
  • We are concerned that the labeling provisions as written will increase consumer costs and confusion.
  • Nearly all packaged foods will require a label, and the potential litigation costs are in the tens of
  • millions of dollars a year, as we have seen under California's Prop 65 labeling program.
  • We're educating the children on how to read the labels and what these things are doing.
Bills: SB 25, SB 314
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • And then ultimately, the labeling will help consumers understand.
  • I think Texans deserve clear, honest food labeling to make informed choices. choices.
  • You have some food companies; how hard is changing your labeling?
  • Our labeling is, trust me, very lacking.
  • You don't have to put certain ingredients on labels, and it kind of varies.
Bills: SB 25, SB25, SB314
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • physical activity in schools, lack of nutrition education for doctors and medical students, and food labeling
  • Additionally, the industry has introduced smart labels, allowing consumers...
  • We are concerned that the labeling provisions will cause cost and confusion.
  • And so, you know, we know labeling, and we know how to do all that stuff, so. Great. Thank you.
  • We’re educating the parents and the children on how to read the labels and what these things are doing
Bills: SB 25, SB25, SB314
AZ

Arizona 2026 Regular Session

01/26/2026 - House Land, Agriculture & Rural Affairs

Land, Agriculture & Rural Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • This is just labeling, and this is labeling the meat.
  • Do we have any—so that I explained the bill for banning, for the labeling of meat.
  • And that is not how these types of commercial regulations and labeling laws tend to roll out.
  • Are you aware of any states that are moving to ban or, especially, the labeling?
  • The labeling, yeah. Mr. Chair, let me clarify my comments.
Summary: The House Committee on Land, Agriculture, and Rural Affairs met for its first session, with members and staff introducing themselves before taking up committee-of-reference business and several bills. The committee first heard a presentation from the Arizona Beef Council, which described its checkoff-funded promotion, education, and research work for Arizona beef producers, including classroom materials, nutrition outreach, and ranch tours. After questions about how the program is funded and whether the state would lose its Arizona-retained share if the council were not continued, the committee voted to recommend continuing the council for eight years, until July 1, 2034. The committee then considered HB 2155, which also continued the Arizona Beef Council for eight years, and advanced it on a 7-1 vote. HB 2156, which appropriates money to the livestock compensation fund for wolf depredation losses, was amended to set the appropriation at $250,000 from the general fund in fiscal year 2027 and then passed 5-2, with supporters emphasizing rancher compensation and opponents questioning use of general funds and noting unused prior funding. HB 2162, which would require at least one Arizona Game and Fish Commission member to be a cattleman or rancher, drew testimony for and against but was ultimately held by the chair after discussion about representation, existing appointment structures, and rural interests. The committee also advanced two cell-cultured protein bills. HB 2762 would require a disclaimer on packaging for food derived from cultivated cells; supporters argued for consumer transparency and opponents said federal labeling rules already apply and state-specific requirements could create confusion. It passed 5-3. HB 2791 would prohibit the sale of cell-cultured protein for human consumption and make violations a felony; supporters raised safety, innovation, and agricultural concerns, while opponents argued it would criminalize federally approved products and restrict consumer choice. That bill also passed 5-3. The committee adjourned after completing its agenda.
NM

New Mexico 2026 Regular Session

House - Judiciary Feb 14th, 2026 at 09:36 am

House Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:
  • We're simply just printing labels.
  • Those have labeling, those have certain personifications on them, and we're simply just printing labels
  • The existing language... can you tell me if your division approved the labels?
  • The labels are different from packaging.
  • Changing the label on something is not going to stop that kid.
Bills: HB294, SB40, SB43, SB35
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Trade, Workforce & Economic Development May 14th, 2025

Trade, Workforce & Economic Development

Transcript Highlights:
  • The bill mandates that fish labeled as catfish must be accurately represented.
  • distributors to ensure that the species and country of origin are identified on the packaging and labeling
  • Amanda Shaha, and I'm here to testify in support of Senate Bill 1484, which would support truth in labeling
  • This bill not only ensures that restaurants are providing truth in labeling, but also that we're getting
  • So truth in advertising, truth in labeling.
OK

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

Agriculture and Wildlife Feb 9th, 2026 at 10:00 am

Agriculture and Wildlife

Transcript Highlights:
  • I mean, we saw a provision last year that was a labeling requirement, and obviously, you know, there
  • were lots of questions and lots of debate around the labeling requirements to make sure that consumers
  • Chairman, and first of Are you aware that we did run a bill last year that would just provide truth and labeling
  • , that if this type of product was sold, that had to be labeled as non-meat and a culture, a batch of
  • eliminate the sale of this, but it wouldn't eliminate the sale of it, but it would also require a label
LA

Louisiana 2026 Regular Session

Agriculture, Forestry, Aquaculture, and Rural Development May 12th, 2026

Agriculture, Forestry, Aquaculture, and Rural Development

Transcript Highlights:
  • And so if you look at when we pass the labeling laws, we were in federal court for five years until we
  • This here is on the same lines except this here is with labeling.
  • Copies the language of the seafood industry on font size for sale meat if something happens on labeling
  • So if we label it form to table, that would be fine, but we don't want it to be...
  • It would not be a very good label. No, sir. I agree. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Water, Agriculture, and Rural Affairs May 19th, 2025

Water, Agriculture and Rural Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • So if they're not able to change a label and they get shrimp from something that doesn't meet the labeling
  • So if they're not able to change a label and they get shrimp from something that doesn't meet the labeling
  • not the right label.
  • But if it's clearly labeled China and somebody receives it clearly labeled China, who's it for?
  • Unless they change the label. Unless they change the label.
Summary: The Senate Committee on Water, Agriculture, and Rural Affairs met with only four members initially present, so quorum was not established until later in the hearing. The committee heard several agriculture-, wildlife-, and food-labeling-related bills, including HB 3479 on expanding the Rio Grande vegetative management program beyond carrizo cane to other noxious vegetation, SB 823 on shrimp origin labeling and restrictions on misrepresenting imported shrimp as Texas or Gulf shrimp, HB 3088 on giving Texas Parks and Wildlife more flexibility to procure resale goods for park gift shops, HB 1275 on permits for non-bovine dairy farms in certain TB-affected areas, HB 519 on honey production and packaging rules, HB 609 on cleaning oyster cages in-bay with bay water only, HB 1592 on a voluntary AgriLife pest and disease alert system, HB 2842 on targeted urban deer depredation permits, and HB 4163 on limiting city requirements that agricultural operators maintain roadside rights-of-way. Testimony generally came from industry groups, agency resource witnesses, and affected producers, with most witnesses supporting the bills and several bills drawing questions about enforcement, labeling responsibility, and the scope of local authority. The most extensive discussion centered on SB 823, where Vice Chair Hancock and others questioned why wholesalers would be covered if they cannot relabel products. The bill author and restaurant association witness said the measure was intended to improve transparency and allow enforcement against intentional mislabeling, while preserving a good-faith defense and clarifying that the bill does not create a private cause of action. HB 519 also drew supportive testimony from beekeepers and a family farm, who argued that current rules treat honey extraction and bottling too much like food manufacturing and burden small operations. HB 609 was presented as a way to save time and resources for cultivated oyster mariculture by allowing cage cleaning in the bay without soaps or chemicals, and HB 1592 was described as a voluntary opt-in alert system for pests and diseases coordinated through AgriLife and other state agencies. HB 43 generated the most detailed policy debate. The bill would restructure and expand the Texas Agricultural Finance Authority, update grant and loan programs, and create a pest and disease control depredation program. The committee substitute reduced some funding caps, changed references from predators to depredating animals, and made the financial provisions contingent on appropriations. Supporters from Texas Farm Bureau, cotton growers, grain and feed interests, and young farmers described severe drought, inflation, land loss, rising input costs, and shrinking infrastructure as major threats to agriculture, while one witness urged preserving priority for young farmers. After testimony, the committee adopted the committee substitute and reported HB 43 favorably. The committee also voted HB 519, HB 609, HB 1275, HB 1592, HB 3088, HB 3479, HB 2842, and HB 4163 favorably, with several recommended for the local and uncontested calendar. SB 823 was reported from committee on a 6-2 vote after adoption of the committee substitute. The meeting ended with notice that the committee would tentatively reconvene Friday morning and then recessed subject to the chair's call.