The nation's food-safety system — too often taken for granted by consumers — has been proven time and again to be weak, ineffectual and costly.

But support is growing to change that. It's about time.

HR 2749 would give the U.S. Food and Drug Administration expanded authority to increase inspections and strengthen regulations governing the nation's food suppliers. It's a bill that won bipartisan support in a key House committee last week, and also among industry groups like the Grocery Manufacturers Association. It's easy to see why.

Recent food-contamination crises, from E. coli in spinach to salmonella in peanut products, have cost the respective industries hundreds of millions of dollars in lost sales.

Yet more disturbing, some 5,000 deaths and 325,000 hospitalizations in 2008 have been linked to tainted food.

The legislation represents an aggressive new effort to establish tough, clearer standards and keep contaminated food from reaching grocery shelves.

Facilities would be inspected more frequently, depending on their risk level, between once every four years to every 18 months. That's better than the current appalling standard, which now averages once every 10 years for domestic facilities.

Food companies would have to report on biological or chemical hazards that could contaminate their products, and institute procedures — as specified by the FDA — to prevent contamination from occurring.

The new rules would also require companies to keep accurate records of the food's origin and where it's being distributed. Yes, it means added paperwork, a sticking point for industry groups. But those records will also make it easier and faster to track down and contain a source of contamination — a benefit to both the consumer and the industry. It's the right move; time is critical in curbing food-borne illnesses.

Producers will help pay for the FDA's expanded efforts through a $500 annual fee, raising roughly $160 million a year. For the perennially cash-strapped agency, such a fee is perfectly reasonable. In fact, if the fee doesn't adequately cover the FDA's costs, it should be increased.

The FDA needs the muscle to fulfill its critically important mission — to protect the nation by safeguarding its food supply. HR 2749 is a solid step forward.