The legislation came in response to Vermont’s first-in-the-nation labeling that took effect Friday.
Advertisement
“As states move forward with their own labeling laws, using a variety of standards and definitions, it will lead to a legal patchwork which will force the ag industry to implement very costly procedures and implement new equipment and certainly consumers don’t win from that”, Smith tells reporters during a conference call. But it is that law which is in danger. Essentially, if the genetic engineering done by a company could have occurred in nature, there is no requirement to label it, which would prevent GMO corn, beet sugar, and soy oils from being labeled. Zuckerman praised a foreign visitor, Quebec’s Agriculture Minister Pierre Paradis, who is looking to require GMO labeling in the Canadian province. Stabenow said: “For the first time ever, consumers will have a national, mandatory label for food products that contain genetically modified ingredients”.
As it stands, there are several elements of the Vermont Act that make it vulnerable to a constitutional challenge, and a bipartisan agreement that would supersede the Vermont legislation was proposed on June 23, 2016 by two members of the Senate’s Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee (the “Senate Bill”).
The bill would require producers to identify foods that contain genetically modified ingredients with text on packages, a symbol or a link to a website with a QR code, a bar code that can be scanned on a smart phone.
At the Hunger Mountain Co-op in Montpelier, which specializes in natural foods and local products, general manager Kari Bradley said it was frustrating that a state law the co-op has supported since it was before lawmakers in Montpelier might be erased from the books by federal action.
Comeau said, “We had to re-do all of our labels, buy new labels, we had to go through all of our computer equipment and update all of that so it was quite the process”.
Starting July 1, processed foods sold in the state that contain genetically engineered ingredients must say so on the label. By the way, 63 other countries already have mandatory GMO food labeling, according to the Public News Service. McCluskey says she’s found that consumers may view the GMO disclosure labels much like the surgeon general’s warnings on cigarette packages. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has said he would put a hold on the bill (See previous story, 06/29/16). We expect a cloture vote-in which 60 senators would have to vote “yes” to bring the bill to a final vote-as soon as Wednesday, July 6, after the Senate returns from the 4th of July holiday, with a possible final vote on Friday.
A bill in Congress would offer a compromise for a national GMO labeling bill, less strict than Vermont’s law.
This legislation is important because people have a right to know what is in the food they and their children eat. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas.
“We will continue to comply with Vermont’s law until Congress and the president enact legislation that pre-empts and replaces it”, Tom Hushen of Campbell’s said.
Advertisement
Kolodinsky’s recent article in The Conversation https://www.theconversation.com/why-the-gm-food-labeling-debate-is-not-over-61560 has been picked up by multiple media outlets and has added needed clarity to the complicated issue that is GMO labeling. The House passed a preemption bill a year ago and will have to consider the Senate bill if it passes.
