Bill · H.R. 10324· House(119-HR-10324)
ROMA Act
- Introduced
- 9/8/2026
- Last activity
- 9/8/2026 — Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
- Sponsored by
- David Valadao
- Cosponsors
- - 4 - 3
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The bill is known as the Rooting Out Mislabeled Agriculture Act or the ROMA Act. It requires the Secretary, acting through the Administrator of the Agricultural Research Service, to establish and maintain a database of isotopic signatures for processing tomatoes. The Secretary must collect domestic and foreign scientific samples and provide database information upon request. Additionally, the Secretary must conduct research on testing methodologies, coordinate with the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and submit a report to Congress within two years.
Yes· 3 of 12
Would farmers be better off under this?+4
Specifically benefits processing tomato farmers by ensuring product origin is verified and mislabeling is reduced.
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?+3
Directly supports agricultural production and rural economies involved in tomato processing.
Does this tighten control of the border?+3
Enhances the ability of Customs and Border Protection to inspect and verify the origin of imports.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Access to Database Information: Under Section 3, adding new Section 1473I(a)(3), the Secretary must provide information from the database in a timely fashion upon the request of an individual or entity, which includes federal agencies, higher education institutions, agricultural research stations, or private entities. This is positive because it gives interested groups and the public open access to the tracking data.
-
Research and Development: Under Section 3, adding new Section 1473I(b)(1), the Secretary must conduct research on the further development of isotopic testing methods to increase accuracy or the breadth of testable biological materials. This is positive because it helps improve the scientific tools used for agricultural testing.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- The provided text does not contain any specific provisions outlining negative consequences, burdens, or negative impacts for individuals or groups of people in the United States.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Farmers+4Good For Rural Residents+3Good For Business Owners+1Good For Students+1
- Governance And Ideology
- Improves Government Transparency+2Increases Federal Power+1
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Border Security+3
- Economy And Finance
- Improves Consumer Protection+2
- Education And Technology
- Increases Scientific Research Funding+2
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Improves Rural Development+2
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Improves International Trade+2
- Healthcare
- Increases Research Funding+1
- 9/24/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/21/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/8/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
- 5 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
Ken CalvertRepublican · California
Jim CostaDemocrat · California
Donald DavisDemocrat · North Carolina
Vince FongRepublican · California
James GallagherRepublican · California
David RouzerRepublican · North Carolina
Mike ThompsonDemocrat · California