UPDATED
SESSION OF 2020
SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE ON HOUSE BILL NO. 2437
As Amended by House Committee on
Agriculture

Brief*
HB 2437, as amended, would amend the Kansas Food,
Drug and Cosmetic Act (Act) to include several new terms,
including “meat analog” and “identifiable meat term,” and
specify when such foods would be deemed misbranded
under provisions of the Act. The bill would also make
technical changes.

Definitions
The bill would create the following definitions in the Act:
● “Meat analog” would mean any food that
approximates the aesthetic qualities or chemical
characteristics of any specific type of meat, meat
food product, poultry product, or poultry food
product, but does not contain any meat, meat food
product, poultry product, or poultry food product;
and
● “Identifiable meat term” would include, but not be
limited to, terms such as meat, beef, pork, poultry,
chicken, turkey, lamb, goat, jerky, steak,
hamburger, burger, ribs, roast, bacon, bratwurst,
hot dog, ham, sausage, tenderloin, wings, breast,
and other terms for food that contain any meat,
____________________
*Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research
Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental
note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at
http://www.kslegislature.org
 meat food product, poultry product, or poultry food
product.
In addition, definitions for meat, meat food product,
poultry product, and poultry food product would be added to
the Act and would have the same definitions as provided for
in the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.), as of January 1,
2020.
The bill would also amend the definition of “imitation” in
the definition section of the Act (KSA 65-656) to make clear
this definition is different from the definition in the
misbranding section of the Act (KSA 65-665).

New Misbranding Provisions
The bill would clarify the word “imitation” would mean
the same in the provisions of the Act as provided for in the
C.F.R., which prescribes when a food shall be deemed
misbranded. In the federal regulation, “imitation” means if it is
a substitute for and resembles another food, but is
nutritionally inferior. The same federal regulation includes in
the definition of “nutritionally inferior” a substitute that
contains less protein or potassium or a lesser amount of any
essential vitamin or mineral than is contained in the food
being substituted.
The bill would also stipulate that in situations when a
meat analog’s labeling utilizes an identifiable meat term, and
does not have a disclaimer in the exact font, style, and size
immediately before or after the identifiable meat term stating
the product does not contain meat, is meatless, or meat-free,
it would be deemed mislabeled under the Act. The bill would
also clarify that these provisions would not apply to a menu or
menu board or to food that can be defined as “imitation” and
is in compliance with the Act.


2- 2437
Severability
The bill also contains a severability clause, which states
if any provision of Section 2 is held to be invalid or
unconstitutional, it shall be conclusively presumed the
Legislature would have enacted the remainder of this section
without the unconstitutional provisions.

Background
The bill was introduced by Representative Highland.
In the House Committee on Agriculture hearing,
representatives of the Kansas Livestock Association and
Kansas Pork Association provided proponent testimony. The
proponents stated manufacturers of meat analogs should be
required to accurately label and advertise their products, and
the bill would require a disclaimer on a meat analog label,
rather than banning the use of an “identifiable meat term.”
Written-only proponent testimony was provided by
representatives of the Kansas Corn, Dairy, Soybean, and
Grain Sorghum Associations; Kansas Farm Bureau; and
Kansas Farmers Union.
Representatives of the Good Food Institute, Kansas
Justice Institute, and Kansas Restaurant and Hospitality
Association provided opponent testimony. Opponents
generally stated the bill would compel the use of certain
words in labels and advertisements and require the creation
of Kansas specific labels. Written-only opponent testimony
was provided by the Consumer Brands Association.
Neutral testimony was provided by a representative of
the Kansas Department of Agriculture (KDA). The
representative stated any action or enforcement that would
be required by the bill would be conducted by the KDA’s Food
Safety and Lodging Program, which is tasked with enforcing

3- 2437
the Act. Written-only neutral testimony was provided by
Americans for Prosperity Kansas.
The House Committee amended the bill on February 3,
2020, to remove references to advertising, add “meatless”
and “meat free” to the acceptable terms allowed on a
disclaimer for meat analog products, and add menus and
menu board to the listed items to which the misbranding
provisions would not apply.
On February 26, 2020, the bill, as amended by the
House Committee, was withdrawn from the House Calendar
and referred to the House Committee on Appropriations. On
March 5, 2020, the bill was withdrawn from the Committee on
Appropriations and rereferred to the House Committee on
Agriculture. On March 10, 2020, the House Committee
reported the bill be passed with the amendments previously
recommended.
According to the fiscal note prepared by the Division of
the Budget on the bill as introduced, the KDA states
enactment of the bill would have no fiscal effect on agency
operations.


4- 2437


Statutes affected:
As introduced: 65-656, 65-665
As Amended by House Committee: 65-656, 65-665