The GMO labeling law, signed by former President Obama on July 29 of last year, set a two-year timeframe for the USDA to complete its rulemaking process. 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 for a new federal law, the timeline is typically tight. However, as anyone following political news can attest, the past year has been anything but typical. With a new president from a different political party and a distinct governing philosophy, Washington has become increasingly unpredictable. Several rules and regulations that were in progress at the time President Trump took office were temporarily halted as new leadership was appointed, vetted, and confirmed.
In her presentation, Huberty mentioned that the questions were drafted and ready to be released by the end of 2016, but the leadership transition delayed their public dissemination. “We’re a little behind schedule to complete this by 2018,” Huberty stated. “We’re still on track, but slightly behind.” The questions released this week will provide the USDA with valuable insights into industry perspectives on specific provisions of the law and how best to implement them. The new law, which was crafted by lawmakers, intentionally left some ambiguous areas for food industry stakeholders to clarify based on their expertise.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association expressed appreciation for the USDA’s efforts to initiate 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 response. “As we collaborate with the Department throughout the rule-making process, we aim to ensure that the law is implemented in accordance with the biotechnology disclosure legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by the President last year.”
With the USDA now on the path to rulemaking, the question remains: can the agency complete its work on time? A year is a relatively short period for drafting a proposal, soliciting public comments, and finalizing regulations. Nonetheless, Huberty expressed confidence in her presentation that the USDA can remain on schedule. While optimism is encouraging, only time will truly reveal the outcome. GMOs continue to be a contentious topic in food manufacturing today.
Beyond the debates surrounding what constitutes a GMO and what is exempt, the law also includes a controversial labeling provision. It allows for GMO disclosures via a smartphone-scannable digital code, a feature that has frustrated many proponents of the law. Huberty informed the Food Label Conference 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 methods for informing consumers about GMO ingredients.
In the context of nutritional supplements, products like Kirkland Signature Calcium Citrate 500mg 1000 Tablets also highlight the importance of transparent labeling, as consumers increasingly demand clarity about the contents of their products. As the conversation around GMOs and labeling continues, it is crucial for consumers to have access to comprehensive information, whether it’s about food ingredients or dietary supplements like Kirkland Signature Calcium Citrate. The ongoing dialogue emphasizes the need for regulations that not only inform but also protect consumer interests in an ever-evolving marketplace.