More than a dozen states have now passed laws restricting certain chemicals from food. Most apply to food served in schools, and a few may apply to food sold in stores.
Companies have argued that differing state laws make food manufacturing and distribution systems less efficient – and that this “patchwork” of requirements could make food more expensive. Major industry groups have even backed a draft bill in Congress to block them.
But the industry argument doesn’t hold up.
What usually happens instead: When one state raises the bar for consumer safety by passing a new law saying what can and can’t be in products, companies often change their products nationwide, extending the new law’s benefits to everyone.
These are just a few examples of “patchwork” state laws that made consumer products safer for all of us: removing toxic flame retardants from furniture, bisphenol A, or BPA, from baby bottles and higher-risk ingredients from food.
How did California get toxic flame retardants out of furniture?
Before 2013, most furniture sold in the U.S. contained toxic flame retardant chemicals in its upholstery foam. The foam helped furniture pass product safety tests.
But research linked these chemicals – also commonly used in baby products like strollers, car seats and nursing pillows – to multiple health risks, including cancer, hormone disruption and deficits in attention and learning in children, without providing meaningful fire safety.
As a result, California began updating its testing standards and phasing flame retardants out of products sold in the state.
The effort faced fierce industry opposition. Chemical corporations spent millions lobbying to keep the old standard in place. One such company, Chemtura, sued California to overturn the new rules. The company lost, and the new standards took full effect in 2015.
In 2020, Congress adopted these same standards as a federal requirement through the Safer Occupancy Furniture Flammability Act – helping all states switch to product safety tests that kept chemical flame retardants out of furniture.
How does state policy protect infants from BPA in baby bottles?
In 2009, Minnesota became the first state to make baby bottles free of BPA, a synthetic estrogen linked to early puberty, impaired immune function and other developmental harms.
Ten more states followed with their own policies restricting BPA in children’s products. Most laws targeted baby bottles, sippy cups and infant formula containers.
Under pressure from state lawmakers and attorneys general, major manufacturers took BPA out of products nationwide, regardless of which states those items were sold in.
By 2012, so many manufacturers had already dropped BPA from baby bottles and sippy cups that the FDA formally ended its use in those products.
The Food and Drug Administration in 2013 also ended the use of BPA in formula packaging.
What has been the California Food Safety Act impact?
The California Food Safety Act banned four food additives – Red Dye No. 3, brominated vegetable oil, potassium bromate and propylparaben – from food sold in the state starting in 2027.
Food companies pushed back. The Consumer Brands Association and other industry groups together opposed the bill. The National Confectioners Association called the legislation part of a “patchwork of inconsistent state requirements created by legislative fiat that will increase food costs.”
But by 2024, multiple states had introduced similar bans.
In early 2025, the FDA revoked authorization of Red 3 in food. That same year, major manufacturers, such as Kraft Heinz and General Mills, began announcing plans to reformulate products without artificial colors.
No company has announced planned price increases associated with the changes.
What would the FRESH Act do to state food chemical laws?
The food industry’s “patchwork” argument isn’t just a talking point – it’s the basis of a draft bill.
The FRESH Act would block state bans or restrictions of food additives, or even mandatory warnings. The bill was proposed by Rep. Kat Cammack (R-Fla.).
If enacted, it would push groundbreaking state laws like California’s off the table – laws that have helped rid consumer products nationwide of chemicals like Red 3.
History is clear: When states act, companies change their products for everyone, for the better. The chaos predicted by food companies never actually occurs.
States aren’t the problem in our food safety system. Until the FDA adopts stricter regulations to help protect people from toxic chemicals, states are filling the gap.
What can you do?
Tell your members of Congress to oppose any federal bill that strips states of the power to protect their residents from harmful food chemicals.
In the meantime, you can check what’s in your groceries using EWG’s Food Scores database, which provides ratings of more than 150,000 food products based on ingredients of concern, nutrition and processing.
