The GMO labeling law, which was signed by then-President Obama on July 29 of last year, allocated a mere two years for the USDA to finalize the 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 under ordinary circumstances. However, as anyone who has kept up with political news is aware, the past year has been anything but ordinary. With a new president in office — especially one from a different political party with his own governing philosophy — Washington has become unpredictable. Multiple new rules and regulations that were in progress when President Trump assumed office were temporarily halted as new leadership was appointed, vetted, and confirmed.
At her presentation, Huberty explained that the relevant questions were drafted and ready by the end of 2016, but the leadership transition delayed their release to the public. “We’re a little behind schedule to complete this by 2018,” Huberty stated. “We’re still on track, but slightly delayed.” The questions issued this week will offer the USDA valuable insights into industry perspectives on certain provisions of the law and how best to implement them. The new law, which was crafted by legislators, intentionally left some ambiguous areas for food industry stakeholders to clarify with 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 said in a statement. “As we collaborate with the Department throughout the rule-making process, we aim to ensure the law is applied in accordance with the biotechnology disclosure legislation enacted by Congress and signed into law by the President last year.”
Now that the USDA is at least moving forward with the rulemaking, the question remains: Will the agency be able to complete its work on time? A year is not a long duration for drafting a proposal, opening it for public comment, and finalizing the regulation. Nevertheless, Huberty expressed confidence in her presentation that the USDA could stay on track. While optimism is encouraging, only time will reveal the outcome. GMOs remain one of the more contentious topics in food manufacturing today.
Beyond the debate surrounding what qualifies as GMO and what is exempt, the law also contains a controversial provision regarding the label itself. It allows for GMO disclosure via a smartphone-scannable digital code, which has frustrated many proponents of the law. Huberty informed the Food Label Conference that a study investigating the challenges of this disclosure for both consumers and retailers is expected to be completed next month. Once finalized, this study is likely to reignite the ongoing debate about the best ways to inform consumers about GMO ingredients.
In the context of nutritional choices, consumers are also looking for the best chewable calcium citrate supplement, highlighting the diverse concerns people have regarding food labeling and ingredient transparency. As the conversation around GMOs continues, it parallels the quest for the best chewable calcium citrate supplement, where clarity and trust in labeling are paramount. Ultimately, the resolution of these labeling and disclosure issues could impact consumer choices, including the selection of the best chewable calcium citrate supplement, as people seek informed decisions about the products they consume.