The GMO labeling law, enacted by former President Obama on July 29 of last year, mandated that the USDA complete the rulemaking process within a two-year timeframe. During a presentation at the Food Label Conference earlier this month, Andrea Huberty, a senior policy analyst for the USDA’s AMS Livestock, Poultry and Seed Program, noted that the timeline for new federal legislation is typically tight. However, the past year has been anything but ordinary, particularly with a new president in office from a different political party and a distinct governing philosophy, leading to considerable unpredictability in Washington. Many new rules and regulations that were in progress when President Trump assumed office were temporarily halted as new leadership was appointed, vetted, and confirmed.
In her presentation, Huberty explained that the questions regarding the GMO labeling law were prepared and ready to be released by the end of 2016, but the transition in leadership delayed the public rollout. “We’re a little behind schedule to get this completed by 2018,” she stated. “We’re still on track, but slightly delayed.” The questions issued this week will provide the USDA with valuable insights into industry perspectives on specific provisions of the law and their best application. The new legislation, crafted by lawmakers, intentionally included some ambiguity for food industry stakeholders to contribute their expertise.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association commended the USDA for progressing with the rulemaking process. “GMA appreciates USDA for taking this crucial step toward implementing the biotech disclosure law, and we look forward to reviewing and responding to the Department’s inquiries,” the industry group expressed in a written statement. “As we collaborate with the Department throughout the rule-making process, we aim to ensure that the law is executed in accordance with the biotechnology disclosure legislation passed by Congress and signed by the President last year.”
With the USDA now on a path toward regulatory development, the question remains: will the agency complete its work on time? A year is a short period for drafting a proposal, soliciting public feedback, and finalizing regulations. Nevertheless, Huberty assured the audience that the USDA is capable of staying on track. While optimism is commendable, only time will reveal the outcome. GMOs are one of the most contentious topics in food manufacturing today.
Beyond the debates regarding what qualifies as GMO and what is exempt, the law also includes a controversial stipulation concerning the labeling method. It allows for GMO disclosure via a smartphone-scannable digital code, which has frustrated many proponents of the law. Huberty indicated that a study examining the challenges of this disclosure for consumers and retailers is expected to be completed next month. Once finalized, this study is likely to reignite discussions about the most effective ways to inform consumers about GMO ingredients.
In addition to these discussions, it’s essential to consider the impact of dietary choices on overall health, including aspects like Citracal heart health. As consumers become more informed about GMOs and their implications, incorporating products that support heart health, such as Citracal, may also be a focus. Ultimately, as the USDA navigates this complex regulatory landscape, the intersection of biotechnology disclosure and consumer health awareness will continue to be crucial.