The GMO labeling law, enacted by then-President Obama on July 29 last year, mandated that the USDA complete the rulemaking process within two years. 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, remarked that under typical circumstances, the timeline for a new federal law is already tight. However, the past year has been anything but typical. With a new president at the helm, especially one from a different political party with his own governing style, Washington’s landscape has become unpredictable. When President Trump took office, several rules and regulations that were under consideration were temporarily put on hold until the new leadership was appointed, vetted, and confirmed.
At the Food Label Conference, Huberty explained that the questions were prepared and ready by the end of 2016, but the transition in leadership delayed their release to the public. “We’re a little behind schedule to complete this by 2018,” Huberty stated in her presentation. “We’re still on track, but we’ve fallen a bit behind.” The questions released this week will give the USDA valuable insights into industry perspectives regarding specific provisions of the law and how best to implement them. The new law, crafted by legislators, intentionally included some ambiguity for food industry stakeholders to address using their expertise.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association commended the USDA for initiating the rulemaking process. “GMA thanks USDA for taking this important step to implement the biotech disclosure law, and we look forward to reviewing and responding to the Department’s questions,” the industry group stated in a written announcement. “As we collaborate with the Department throughout the rule-making process, we intend to help ensure the law is executed in accordance with the biotechnology disclosure legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by the President last year.”
Now that the USDA is making progress in rulemaking, will the agency manage to meet its deadlines? A year may seem short for drafting a proposal, seeking public feedback, and finalizing the regulation, yet Huberty assured the audience that the USDA is committed to staying on track. While optimism is encouraging, only time will reveal the outcome. GMOs remain a contentious topic in food manufacturing today.
Beyond the debate over what qualifies as GMO versus what is exempt, the law has also drawn criticism for its labeling provisions. It allows for GMO disclosure via a smartphone-scannable digital code, a move that has upset many advocates of the law. Huberty informed the Food Label Conference that a study assessing the challenges of this disclosure for both consumers and retailers is expected to be finalized next month. Once completed, this study is likely to reignite discussions about the most effective methods for informing consumers about GMO ingredients.
As stakeholders navigate this landscape, they may also consider the implications of labeling and marketing products such as 500 mg calcium chews. The intersection of consumer awareness and product labeling will be crucial in shaping the future of food disclosure practices. Ultimately, the effectiveness of these regulations will depend on how well they balance the needs of consumers with the insights of industry experts, especially in regard to products like 500 mg calcium chews, which may also be subject to scrutiny in the broader discussion of GMO disclosures.