American Consumer Institute

Our mission is to promote consumer welfare by improving the understanding and impact that public policies and regulations have on American consumers.

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

State-by-state food ingredient laws are creating a costly regulatory patchwork that could raise grocery prices, reduce consumer choice, and complicate interstate commerce.

The FRESH Act of 2026 would establish a uniform federal framework for ingredient oversight while preempting conflicting state rules. That’s a meaningful step toward reducing compliance burdens and protecting consumers from higher costs caused by 50 different food-rule regimes.

At the same time, the bill should avoid replacing state overreach with unnecessary federal bottlenecks. Oversight should focus on evidence, transparency, and real risk—not politics or paperwork for its own sake.

A smarter national standard can protect both food safety and affordability.

Read more by @JustinLeventhal here: https://t.co/n7YvBFNAfM

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

Public backlash against data centers is escalating, with concerns ranging from water use and AI development to electricity demand. But when it comes to energy costs, the evidence is increasingly clear: data centers are not necessarily leading to higher electric bills.

Data centers add large, steady, and predictable electricity demand. As overall consumption grows, utilities can distribute the fixed costs of maintaining grid infrastructure across more kilowatt-hours, reducing the cost per unit of electricity. Studies cited in the analysis find that rising electricity rates are more closely tied to factors such as operating expenses, inflation, and broader energy policies than data center development itself.

As demand for digital services continues to grow, the question is not whether data centers will be built—but how communities and policymakers choose to manage that growth.

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

As opposition to data centers grows, one claim continues to dominate the debate: that they cause higher electricity bills.

While data centers consume significant amounts of power, growing evidence finds they are not the primary driver of rising electricity rates. In some states, increased demand has allowed utilities to spread infrastructure costs across more electricity consumption, helping lower costs per unit.

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

Are data centers driving up your electric bill?

Evidence from states with the most data center growth suggests otherwise. In some cases, increased demand helps spread fixed grid costs across more electricity use, putting downward pressure on rates.

Read more here: https://t.co/QSFfLbjrSy

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

ACI Co-Leads Coalition Opposing RSA Mandates in Surface Transportation Package

https://t.co/yeteodgbMf

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

Buying in bulk saves money because larger orders lower per-unit costs. That principle drives everything from warehouse retailers to grocery supply chains.

But some policymakers are now advancing theories that could treat those volume discounts as discriminatory under the Robinson-Patman Act.

The concern isn’t theoretical: limiting scale-based pricing could reduce one of the most practical ways consumers manage rising costs.

Competition policy should protect consumers — not make everyday purchases more expensive.

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

The debate over the Robinson-Patman Act isn’t just about antitrust law — it’s about how markets function.

Recent enforcement actions and legislative proposals could challenge common pricing practices like bulk discounts, even when those discounts are available to any buyer meeting the same purchasing threshold.

The result could mean fewer discounts, compressed pricing, and higher costs for households already managing tight budgets.

Consumers benefit when markets reward efficiency and scale.

Read more by @tzduren here: https://t.co/My1WCjApWe

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

There’s a reason consumers shop at warehouse stores: buying more lowers the per-unit cost.

That’s not a loophole — it’s basic economics. Economies of scale reduce distribution and transaction costs, and those savings get passed on to consumers.

New efforts to reinterpret the Robinson-Patman Act could put standard volume discounts under regulatory scrutiny, treating lower prices for bulk purchases as potentially “unfair.”

If policymakers undermine scale-based pricing, consumers may ultimately see the impact where it matters most: at the checkout line.

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

Today we honor the brave men and women who gave their lives in service to our country and the freedoms Americans cherish.

Their sacrifice reminds us that liberty, opportunity, and the freedom to choose are protected through courage and service.

We remember and honor them today and always.

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

ACI Urges FTC to Prioritize Transparency Without Undermining Consumer Choice in Food Delivery Pricing

https://t.co/LKLCdrhGXk

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

ACI Urges Congress to Reject Expansion of FDIC Deposit Insurance

https://t.co/cdlPIbNGPN

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

The ESA Amendments Act of 2025 would strengthen collaboration between federal agencies, states, local governments, and private landowners — recognizing that conservation solutions work best when informed by local expertise.

The legislation also aims to reduce excessive litigation, improve scientific transparency, and shift resources toward actual species recovery instead of procedural disputes.

A modernized ESA should deliver results for both species conservation and project certainty.

Read more here: https://t.co/j4Yqx9hpSf

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

The Endangered Species Act was designed to protect wildlife — but after 50 years, only 3% of listed species have recovered. Meanwhile, infrastructure and land management projects face mounting delays, litigation, and rising costs.

The ESA Amendments Act of 2025 would refocus the law on measurable species recovery, stronger scientific standards, and greater transparency in agency decision-making.

Modernizing ESA implementation can support both conservation and responsible development.

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

Consumers benefit from safe, affordable food—not from 50 conflicting state regulatory regimes governing the same ingredients. Yet across the country, states are increasingly adopting their own food-additive bans, warning-label mandates, school-food restrictions, and disclosure requirements. The result is a growing compliance maze that could force manufacturers to reformulate products, redesign labels, maintain separate inventories, or leave smaller markets entirely. Those costs ultimately show up in grocery prices and reduced consumer choice.

The FDA Review and Evaluation for Safe, Healthy (FRESH) and Affordable Foods Act of 2026 is an attempt to address that problem by replacing the emerging state-by-state patchwork with a uniform federal framework. The bill would strengthen oversight of food ingredients, formalize portions of the GRAS process, establish post-market review mechanisms, and preempt certain state ingredient regulations affecting interstate commerce.

Its strongest feature is national uniformity. A single federal standard would reduce uncertainty, simplify compliance, and preserve the efficiencies of a national food market. The bill also moves in the right direction by emphasizing post-market review over blanket premarket restrictions, allowing regulators to respond when credible evidence of harm emerges without unnecessarily blocking market access.

Still, the legislation could be improved further. Greater federal oversight should not become centralized overregulation. GRAS notification requirements should remain predictable and evidence-based, third-party review standards should be transparent, and long-established low-risk ingredients should not face unnecessary new barriers absent credible safety concerns.

The broader issue is straightforward: fragmented regulation increases costs for consumers. A balanced national framework can help protect food safety while also preserving affordability, competition, and consumer choice.

[Patrick Bampfield @PatBampfield]

Consumers need safe, affordable food. A growing patchwork of state bans, warning labels, and ingredient mandates risks higher grocery prices, fewer choices, and costly compliance chaos. A uniform national standard can protect safety, preserve consumer choice, and keep food costs down while relying on evidence-based oversight instead of political patchworks.
#ConsumerPolicy #FRESHAct

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

The growing patchwork of state food-additive laws threatens to increase grocery costs, reduce product availability, and create confusion for consumers and manufacturers alike.

The FRESH Act aims to solve that problem by creating a single national standard for food ingredient oversight and limiting conflicting state regulations. National uniformity would help preserve economies of scale, reduce compliance costs, and make it easier for companies to sell the same products nationwide.

The bill also includes reforms to the GRAS process, expanded post-market review authority, and pathways for third-party scientific review. While these changes could improve transparency and consistency, lawmakers should ensure the system does not become overly centralized or burdensome for smaller innovators.

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

"Our freight train system is the envy of the world today."

-Marc Scribner

[American Consumer Institute @consumerpal]

"When you make permitting more streamlined and efficient, that doesn't hurt the environment."

-Kristen Walker