Splintered array of Rules could hurt smaller, family-run stores or businesses
AUSTIN, Texas (Texas Insider Report) — When working class Texans walk into their local H-E-B to grab groceries that fit their weekly budget, they arrive with some hopes and expectations of stable prices. In 2024, the soaring price of eggs, beef, and coffee were obvious sore spots for folks – just to name a few. But what if average consumers were forced to encounter many more increased costs in other aisles of their stores?
Unfortunately, this higher-cost reality is exactly what the Texas Legislature is prepared to create as lawmakers prepare to possibly vote on more excessive new regulations on store bought goods.
In particular, some observers are concerned Texas may advance a measure that would add new requirements on top of the state's already existing food labeling rules, in addition to more regulations on a number of food ingredients and other restrictions on the types of goods purchased through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program known as SNAP – or as Food Stamps.
For those with fixed incomes and tight budgets, it will undoubtedly turn their shopping experience from bad to worse knowing that there is an even narrower range of modestly priced products from which they can select.Notably, inflated costs are on the horizon as food producers navigate inconsistent state-by-state regulatory codes, as well arduous tasks in packaging redesign, distribution reorganization and more.
The splintered array of rules could especially hurts smaller businesses with limited resources – family-run stores, and others in rural and hard-to-reach areas.
It doesn’t stop there.
Key items in food production that face restrictions have in some ways been taken for granted in terms how much they keep foods fresh for longer, and greatly reduce food costs when compared to natural ingredients which often face many challenges with often unreliable sourcing and complex production practices.
It doesn’t stop there.
Key items in food production that face restrictions have in some ways been taken for granted in terms how much they keep foods fresh for longer, and greatly reduce food costs when compared to natural ingredients which often face many challenges with often unreliable sourcing and complex production practices.
While lawmakers’ rules are ushered to the forefront under the banner of supporting public health, it is hard to ignore the unspoken purposes that these lawmakers are after: more government intrusion into people’s lives. After all, when it comes to ingredients, the U.S. already has a robust process, through the FDA, to regularly manage and certifying the safety of foods.
The regular playbook by governments has always been to start small with interventions in common ways of living – and then steadily expand, meddling even further to exert greater power over average citizens. Take for instance, in 2019, Berkeley, California became the first city to ban gas stoves in new buildings – which subsequently snowballed to bans in San Francisco and New York City, then ultimately a statewide law in New York in 2023, and who knows what’s next.
You give them an inch – and they'll take a mile.
California, in particular, has been notorious as a proving ground for Democrat-led policies, and it should come as no surprise that they are among the most heavy-handed when it comes to restricting foods. Last year, Governor Gavin Newsom enacted a sweeping ban on food dyes with the hope that other regions would latch onto the progressive trend.Florida, for one, hasn’t taken the bait on the liberally minded platform. Leading Republicans in the Sunshine State echoed a litany of concerns with the onerous nature of ingredients rules, the overly broad definitions that could lead to even further unintended consequences, as well as a stifling impact to small businesses.
Curiously, West Virginia rushed into action this year with an ingredients restriction bill that was recently signed by Governor Patrick Morrisey. The hastily considered legislation may ultimately prove to be canary in the coal mine when it comes to the inevitable impacts that West Virginians will have to withstand – and then possibly respond to at the ballot box.
The political calculations are not particularly hard to understand when you consider that food restrictions impact the most price-sensitive consumers. Economically vulnerable voters rallied in a major way behind President Trump last November. Those who said inflation was the most important factor for their vote were almost twice as likely to support Trump over Harris.
Recent polls also found that 2 out of 3 Republicans nationally cautioned against states overriding federal food safety regulations, emphasizing the need for a consistent national standard.
If it wasn’t abundantly clear already, consumer-centered policy is the most sure-fire winning strategy for Texas. This means supporting measures that will bring prices down, and expand food access for all.
When these proposals for over-extensive labels and food restrictions come up for consideration in Austin, let’s hope that lawmakers side with commonsense and roundly reject them.
