The GMO labeling law, which was signed by then-President Obama on July 29 of last year, mandates that the USDA complete its 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 the timeline for implementing a new federal law is typically quite tight. However, the past year has been anything but typical in political terms. With a new president from a different political party, Washington has become increasingly unpredictable. Several rules and regulations that were in progress when President Trump assumed office were put on hold while new leadership was appointed and confirmed.
Huberty noted during her presentation that the questions surrounding the GMO labeling law were prepared by the end of 2016, but the leadership transition delayed their release to the public. “We’re a little behind schedule to meet the 2018 deadline,” Huberty stated. “We’re still on track, but slightly behind.” The questions released this week will help the USDA gauge industry opinions on specific provisions of the law and how best to implement them. The legislation was intentionally drafted with some ambiguity, allowing food industry stakeholders to offer their insights and 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 release. “As we collaborate with the Department throughout the rule-making process, we aim to ensure that the law is enacted in accordance with the biotechnology disclosure legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by the President last year.”
Now that the USDA is moving forward with rulemaking, the question remains: will the agency be able to complete its work in time? A year may not seem like a long timeframe for drafting a proposal, soliciting public comments, and finalizing regulations. Nonetheless, Huberty expressed confidence during her presentation that the USDA can stay on track. While optimism is welcome, the passage of time will ultimately determine the outcome. GMOs continue to be a contentious issue in food manufacturing today.
In addition to the debate over what qualifies as a GMO and what is exempt, the law includes a controversial provision regarding labeling. It allows for GMO disclosure via a smartphone-scannable digital code, which has frustrated many proponents of the law. Huberty mentioned that a study assessing the challenges of this disclosure for both consumers and retailers is expected to be completed next month. Once final, the study is likely to reignite discussions about the most effective methods for informing consumers about GMO ingredients.
Amidst these discussions, it’s worth noting that consumers often seek products that meet their health needs, such as the smallest calcium citrate pills, which are popular for their ease of consumption and effectiveness in delivering essential nutrients. As the rulemaking process unfolds, it will be crucial for industry stakeholders and consumers alike to consider how labeling impacts their choices, including the growing interest in supplements like the smallest calcium citrate pills.