More than 100 House members and 25 senators of both parties have sent at least seven letters to federal regulators over the past month urging them to back off proposed restrictions on food advertising for children.
The guidelines, released in April, aim to fight childhood obesity by asking food companies to voluntarily refrain from advertising to children foods that don't meet specific nutritional standards. The food industry says the guidelines would hurt business and cost jobs while doing little or nothing to curb obesity.
A motley group of lawmakers with little in common are now raising similar concerns. Everyone from freshmen Republicans worried about government overreach to lawmakers who represent dairy farmers and candy makers is weighing in as federal regulators sift through the public comments they've received about their preliminary proposal.
The strongest critics, predictably, have been on the right.
Freshmen House Republicans decry the "alarming regulatory overreach" of the proposal and are asking regulators to simply withdraw it.
And 18 Senate Republicans, joined by Nebraska Democrat Ben Nelson, want the administration to "withhold any further actions" until regulators answer questions about the science behind their proposal and its potential impact on jobs and the economy.
Additionally, 15 of the 19 members of Pennsylvania's House delegation warned that under the proposed guidelines, "most food and beverage products manufactured in the state of Pennsylvania" - America's biggest candy maker - "could no longer be marketed to children and teens."
"We strongly urge you," the letter says, "to withdraw these overreaching and misguided principles that blatantly discriminate against an industry that has made extensive voluntary strides over the years to reduce advertising to children."
Likewise, the bipartisan Dairy Farmers Caucus points out that under the proposed guidelines "many cheeses, yogurts, and some fluid milk" would fall short - even though the Department of Agriculture believes that dairy is essential for healthy children.
Democrats for the most part have been more muted in their criticism, not least because the fight against childhood obesity is a priority for First Lady Michelle ObamaMichelle ObamaWeek ahead: Net neutrality supporters rally on rule's second anniversary 5 ways politics could steal the show at Oscars Why cutting back ‘free’ school lunches would be a favor to families MORE.
A letter signed by 34 centrist House Democrats argues that more information "on the economic costs and benefits" of the proposal is needed before going forward.
And six Democratic senators - Debbie StabenowDebbie StabenowA guide to the committees: Senate Trump's pick to lead Medicare won't say if she supports negotiating prices with drug companies Overnight Finance: Fed chief tries to stay above partisan fray | Bill would eliminate consumer agency | Trump signs repeal of SEC rule on foreign payments MORE (Mich.), Robert CaseyBob CaseyA guide to the committees: Senate GOP loses top Senate contenders How many GOP senators will stand up to megadonor DeVos? Just 2. MORE (Pa.), Max BaucusMax BaucusFive reasons why Tillerson is likely to get through Business groups express support for Branstad nomination The mysterious sealed opioid report fuels speculation MORE (Mont.), Amy KlobucharAmy KlobucharDrug importation won't save dollars or lives Senators ask feds for ‘full account’ of work to secure election from cyber threats Sanders, not Trump, is the real working-class hero MORE (Minn.), Kristen Gillibrand (N.Y.) and Michael BennetMichael BennetA guide to the committees: Senate Senate advances Trump's Commerce pick Senate Dems move to nix Trump's deportation order MORE (Col.) - wrote to "encourage [regulators] to give thorough consideration to the 'real world impacts' associated with these recommendations."
Meanwhile, Rep. G.K. ButterfieldG.K. ButterfieldFCC defends not fighting legal challenge to prison call rates A guide to the committees: House 40 House Dems to urge Trump to suspend Flynn MORE (D-N.C.) sent his own letter, arguing that the regulators working on the proposal have produced "no evidence that I am aware of that the proposed restrictions will serve the government's goals of changing long-term eating habits."