UPF food bill shows how MAHA has scrambled Capitol Hill politics

As discussions continue over the potential decline of the Make America Healthy Again movement’s political influence, a new Senate bill advanced on Wednesday, highlighting ongoing concerns surrounding ultra-processed foods that transcend traditional party lines in Washington. 

The proposed legislation, introduced by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), seeks to prohibit junk food advertising aimed at children and mandate the Food and Drug Administration to enforce prominent warning labels on ultra-processed foods high in sugar, salt, and saturated fat.

A previous version of the bill was unsuccessful when Sanders introduced it in 2024. However, this was prior to President Trump’s appointment of MAHA leader Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as health secretary, which saw Republicans begin to back food industry regulation—a stance traditionally associated with Democrats. Now, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions has voted 12-10 to advance the bill to the full Senate.

“I think it’s terrific, particularly the part about marketing [ultra-processed foods] to kids,” nutrition researcher Marion Nestle commented via email. Previously, the U.S. has largely relied on industry self-regulation in this area. 

Lindsey Smith Taillie, a nutrition epidemiologist at UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, suggested that the food label proposal is “substantially better” than the FDA’s 2025 nutrition label proposal. She noted that Sanders’ proposal aligns more closely with Latin American warning labels, which alert consumers to high levels of concerning nutrients, unlike the FDA’s proposal, which categorizes them as low, middle, or high.

Taillie also noted that the bill includes specific warning labels for sugar-sweetened beverages and ultra-processed foods, which would be unprecedented globally if enacted. 

“I think MAHA plus the clear bipartisan support on these issues had completely revolutionized the landscape — this might be a unique and rare window to see some meaningful policy action,” Taillie remarked.

During the Senate HELP Committee markup, bipartisan cooperation was evident. Bill Cassidy, a Republican from Louisiana, supported Sanders’ proposal, describing it as a starting point for necessary bipartisan regulatory changes. Roger Marshall, a Republican from Kansas, agreed, suggesting that although he typically opposes more regulation, current challenges demand action. “We have to do something, and this is the most significant something I can see,” he said.

Meanwhile, Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, proposed an amendment to exclude items like soda and candy from eligibility for food stamps. This gained backing from Tim Kaine, a Democrat from Virginia, but not from Sanders. Marshall expressed uncertainty about how to vote on it. Ultimately, Cassidy tabled the amendment, citing jurisdictional reasons with the agriculture committee.

Not all Republicans were in favor of Sanders’ proposal. Susan Collins, a Republican from Maine, cautioned that stronger labeling requirements might make food more costly for Americans. 

Echoing this sentiment, the National Association of Manufacturers commented that the bill might unfairly target nutritious products, leading to confusion and increased costs when affordability is crucial.

Despite the bill’s advancement, Jerold Mande, head of the nonprofit Nourish Science, believes it could still face hurdles in the Senate due to the food industry’s influence. However, he was encouraged by the support for Paul’s amendment, suggesting it might succeed as a separate initiative.

STAT’s coverage of chronic health issues is supported by a grant from Bloomberg Philanthropies. Our financial supporters are not involved in any decisions about our journalism.