The White House says Obama will sign the bill, which would pre-empt a Vermont law that kicked in earlier this month.
Advertisement
The legislation requires either an on-package label or smart-label that directs consumers to more information through a smartphone, a major reason behind its acceptance by groups on both sides of the aisle. It will supersede any state laws, such as the tough one in Vermont that took effect on July 1, and faces days in court over several issues. It is possible that some of these companies will change the way they disclose GMO ingredients when the new regulations are put into place, but Campbell’s will continue to label products, as a spokesperson told TakePart recently, and Mars told The Wall Street Journal that it will do the same.
“Today’s vote is a resounding victory not only for consumers and common sense but also for the tremendous coalition of agricultural and food organizations that came together in unprecedented fashion to get this solution passed”, she said. “Now we look to President Obama to stay true to his word, and sign this bill into law”. “With new, uniform disclosure requirements, consumers will receive the level of transparency many have been demanding without the confusion that would result from the patchwork of state labeling standards that will arise in the absence of this bill”.
Colorado voters resoundingly rejected a mandatory GMO labeling measure in 2014, with 66 percent voting against, versus 34 percent in favor.
The measure would give companies three options: text on food packaging, a QR (Quick Response) code, or a phone number or a website with more information. The agency would have two years to determine definitions for what constitutes genetic engineering; create a symbol to use on product labels to denote genetically-modified ingredients; and set other rules for implementing the law. “It’s really the choice between the Senate bill and the Vermont statute”.
Hawaii’s other Democrat in the House, Mark Takai, did not vote. “It is crucial that American consumers receive clear and simple information about their food, so that they will see the benefit of these technologies that supply safe, sustainably-produced food”.
“Their first step was to require a mandatory label, and their second step was to force those products out of the marketplace”, Wilkins says.
Advertisement
Gabbard is an original co-sponsor of the Genetically Engineered Food Right-to-Know Act, which he office said would require the FDA to clearly label all foods containing genetically engineered ingredients.
