California 20252026 Regular Session Status: Introduced Bipartisan · 1 D · 1 R cosponsors

SB 1033 — Protein products.

Last action — May 14 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

  1. 1
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Senate
  4. 4
    Passed Assembly
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been introduced in the Senate. Introduced February 11, 2026. It must pass committee before a floor vote.

Next likely step: a committee referral and hearing.

Odds of enactment

Low chance

Based on the sponsor, cosponsors, and committee posture, this bill has a low chance of becoming law.

Upgrade to see the exact probability and what's driving it.

A statistical estimate from our own model of past outcomes — an insight, not a guarantee. Policymaking is volatile.

Prognosis

Advancing 48% · moderate confidence

  • Introduced

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 3 sponsors

    1 primary, 2 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Bipartisan support

    Sponsored across 2 parties (1 D · 1 R) — cross-party backing.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 3 recorded votes so far.

Based on stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes, and cross-state momentum — a description of the observable signals, not a prediction.

Summary

Existing law, the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, under the administration and enforcement of the State Department of Public Health, provides for the regulation of various subjects relating to the manufacturing, processing, labeling, advertising, and sale of food, drugs, and cosmetics. Existing law places product testing and disclosure requirements on various products, including baby food and prenatal vitamins. A violation of the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law is punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2028, require a manufacturer of a bulk protein product or a packaged protein product, as defined, that is sold, manufactured, delivered, held, or offered for sale in this state to test a representative sample of each lot of the product for heavy metals, as defined. The bill would require both a manufacturer and brand owner to provide test results to an authorized agent of the department upon their request, as specified. The bill would, commencing January 1, 2028, require a brand owner of a packaged protein product that is sold, manufactured, delivered, held, or offered for sale in the state to disclose specified product information to the public, including, among other things, the heavy metal testing information. Commencing on or after January 1, 2028, the bill would require a statement regarding heavy metal testing to be included on the outermost package of a packaged protein product sold in a retail store and on the product details page on an internet website for products sold online or directly to consumers. The bill would, commencing January 1, 2028, prohibit a person from selling in the state or manufacturing, delivering, holding, or offering for sale in the state a protein product that does not comply with these provisions. By creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. May 14 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

  2. Set for hearing May 14.

  3. May 4 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  4. Set for hearing May 4.

  5. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 1. Page 4008.) (April 22). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  6. Set for hearing April 22.

  7. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on E.Q.

  8. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on E.Q. (Ayes 10. Noes 0. Page 3689.) (March 25).

  9. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.

  10. Set for hearing March 25.

  11. Referred to Coms. on HEALTH and E.Q.

  12. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 14.

  13. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 2 co-sponsors · 119 not signed on · 1 voted No

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (2)

Not signed on (119)

119 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 119 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Passed 4 Yea · 1 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 4001
Republican 0101
Total 4102
% of votes cast 57%14%0%29%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Blakespear, Catherine S. Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Not Voting
Menjivar, Caroline Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Not Voting

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Environmental Quality]

Passed 10 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 8001
Republican 2000
Total 10001
% of votes cast 91%0%0%9%
How each member voted (11)
Member Party Vote
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Yea
Menjivar, Caroline Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Pérez, Sasha Renée Democratic Not Voting
Rubio, Susan Democratic Yea
Smallwood-Cuevas, Lola Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

healthcare agriculture
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 1033 do?
Existing law, the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, under the administration and enforcement of the State Department of Public Health, provides for the regulation of various subjects relating to the manufacturing, processing, labeling, advertising, and sale of food, drugs, and cosmetics. Existing law places product testing and disclosure requirements on various products, including baby food and prenatal vitamins. A violation of the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law is punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would, commencing January 1, 2028, require a manufacturer of a bulk protein product or a packaged protein product, as defined, that is sold, manufactured, delivered, held, or offered for sale in this state to test a representative sample of each lot of the product for heavy metals, as defined. The bill would require both a manufacturer and brand owner to provide test results to an authorized agent of the department upon their request, as specified. The bill would, commencing January 1, 2028, require a brand owner of a packaged protein product that is sold, manufactured, delivered, held, or offered for sale in the state to disclose specified product information to the public, including, among other things, the heavy metal testing information. Commencing on or after January 1, 2028, the bill would require a statement regarding heavy metal testing to be included on the outermost package of a packaged protein product sold in a retail store and on the product details page on an internet website for products sold online or directly to consumers. The bill would, commencing January 1, 2028, prohibit a person from selling in the state or manufacturing, delivering, holding, or offering for sale in the state a protein product that does not comply with these provisions. By creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors SB 1033?
SB 1033 is sponsored by Ochoa Bogh, Alvarado-Gil, Marie (Republican), and Padilla, Stephen C. (Democratic).
What is the current status of SB 1033?
This bill has been introduced in the Senate. Introduced February 11, 2026. It must pass committee before a floor vote.
Where can I track SB 1033?
Track SB 1033 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 1033

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 1033

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →