Senate Ag Committee Finds Compromise on Biotech Labeling Bill
The Senate Agriculture Committee settled on bipartisan compromise legislation (here) for biotech food labeling that would establish a national disclosure standard for genetically modified (GMO) food ingredients, apparently a more rigorous standard than the voluntary labeling guideline pitched in prior legislation that failed in March (see 1603170023). The legislation would put much of the onus for developing GMO qualification standards on the Department of Agriculture secretary, but would also safeguard certain foods from adopting “bioengineered” designations. For example, an animal product would not be eligible for GMO status only because the animal ate feed derived from a bioengineered substance. The disclosure standard would apply to foods whose leading ingredient would itself be subject to existing labeling requirements under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and to foods whose main ingredient is broth, stock or water, but whose second-most predominant ingredient would be separately subject to that law’s requirements.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
The bill would task the Agriculture secretary to, within two years of enactment, develop a process for requesting and granting determinations of other factors under which a food would be considered bioengineered. Companies would be able to decide whether to disclose on packages via printed text, a symbol or digital link, excluding URLs not embedded in the link. But small food manufacturers would have one year after regular enactment to implement more flexible measures the bill dedicates for them. For instance, in addition to the normal disclosure methods, small manufacturers would be able to either post on packages a telephone number or name their website, to satisfy the bill’s requirements. “Very small food manufacturers” and food served in restaurants would be exempt from the measures.
The bill would also pre-empt any state, county or municipal law relating to whether labeling of food or seed is bioengineered, such as a labeling law in Vermont set to take effect July 1. Some senators are concerned that the Vermont law, along with others set to take effect in states like Connecticut, Maryland and California, would result in a growing, unpredictable patchwork of state laws that could skyrocket supply costs. The House is on recess until July 5. "Unfortunately, due to [Senate Agriculture Committee Ranking Member] Senator [Debbie] Stabenow[, D-Mich.,] dragging this process out for months, Congress will not be able to act before Vermont’s mandatory labeling law goes into effect on July 1," House Agriculture Committee Chairman Mike Conaway, R-Texas said in a statement (here). "Although the House acted in a timely manner, I have just received the text of ... this agreement and will need time to review the language and the varied impacts, be they positive or negative, before stating my support or opposition." The Senate Agriculture Committee "is working to get the bill to the floor ASAP,” a spokeswoman said.
The bill would deny the Agriculture secretary any recall authority on the basis of whether packaging carries mandatory disclosures. Companies would be permitted to claim the absence of bioengineering for foods certified under the national organic program, according to the bill.