Help us tell Senators we need a strong, mandatory labeling law that relies on words on the package, not high-tech gimmicks.
Advertisement
WASHINGTON-Food packages nationwide would for the first time be required to carry labels listing genetically modified ingredients under legislation the Senate backed July 7.
“We commend those 65 senators voting in favor of moving this time-sensitive matter another step closer to final passage”, said Leslie Sarasin, president and CEO of the Food Marketing Institute, in a statement. Jeff Merkley, an Oregon Democrat, called use of the code “an impossible obstacle course”. “Both farmers and consumers deserve this certainty”. “And that’s if you have an iPhone and that’s if the store has wifi”.
In a statement, Klobuchar said the new legislation creates “a national mandatory labeling standard” that avoids “subjecting our entire food supply to a patchwork of state laws”. “And consumers are voting with their dollars to make Organic and non-GMO the fastest growth trends in the food industry”.
Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., and the panel’s top Democrat, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan, and Sen.
Even worse, the federal government, not just one small state, would be providing legitimacy to mandatory labeling.
“The Senate wants to throw out the work Vermont has done … to say we know better”, Leahy said. “Biotechnology products are safe”.
Food and agricultural organizations were quick to praise the Senate action and call for passage of the bill.
What happens to Vermont’s law? They argued that the measure falls short, especially compared to tougher labeling requirements in their state that kicked in last Friday.
The food industry also supported the measure, since it would override the Vermont law and head off a move by other states considering their own GMO labels.
What’s the deal with (alleged) loopholes?
The Senate passed a bill Wednesday that would mandate foods containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) be labelled. This charge gained traction among bill opponents because the FDA, in a letter to the Senate Agriculture Committee, stated that the bill’s definition of “bio-engineering” opens the possibility that many GMO products would not be subject to the labeling bill.
The reason is that once the commodity is processed, the product would not have any detectable amounts of the genetic material.
The Agriculture Department would have two years to write the rules.
The Environmental Working Group calculated that food and biotech companies and trade associations have spent almost $200 million to oppose state GMO labeling ballot initiatives such as Vermont’s.
EFSP, which the agency funds out of its global disaster assistance account, allowed USAID to start buying regionally produced commodities or to provide cash vouchers to people so they could buy food locally.
Advertisement
Yes. Most recently, the National Academies of Science found that genetically-engineered crops are safe to eat and don’t cause diseases. An estimated 80 percent of packaged food products sold in the United States contain the controversial ingredients.
