The GMO labeling law, which was signed by then-President Obama on July 29 last year, allows the USDA only two years to complete the rulemaking process. During a recent presentation at the Food Label Conference, Andrea Huberty, a senior policy analyst for the USDA’s AMS Livestock, Poultry, and Seed Program, noted that under typical circumstances, the timeline for a new federal law is already tight. However, as anyone who follows political news is aware, the past year has been anything but typical. With a new president in charge—especially one from a different political party with his own governing philosophy—Washington has become quite unpredictable. Many new rules and regulations that were in progress when President Trump took office were temporarily stalled while new leadership was appointed, vetted, and confirmed.
At the Food Label Conference, Huberty mentioned that the questions were prepared and ready to be released at the end of 2016, but the transition in leadership delayed their public rollout. “We’re a little behind schedule to get this completed by 2018,” Huberty stated during her presentation. “We’re still on track, but slightly delayed.” The questions issued this week will help the USDA gauge industry perspectives on specific provisions in the law and how best to implement them. The new law, crafted by politicians, intentionally left some ambiguities for food industry stakeholders to clarify with their expertise.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association commended the USDA for initiating the rulemaking process. “GMA appreciates USDA for taking this significant step to implement the biotech disclosure law, and we look forward to reviewing and responding to the Department’s inquiries,” the industry group said 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 into law by the President last year.”
Now that the USDA is at least on the path to rulemaking, the question remains: will the agency be able to complete its work on time? A year is not a long period for drafting a proposal, soliciting public comments, and finalizing the regulation. Nevertheless, Huberty expressed confidence in her presentation that the USDA can stay on track. While optimism is encouraging, only time will reveal the outcome. GMOs are among the more contentious topics in food manufacturing today.
In addition to the debates surrounding what qualifies as GMO and what is exempt, the law also includes a controversial provision regarding the labeling itself. It allows for GMO disclosure through a smartphone-scannable digital code, a move 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 concluded, this study is likely to reignite discussions about the best methods for informing consumers about GMO ingredients.
In the context of nutritional transparency and consumer awareness, products like bariatric advantage calcium citrate chews are often discussed alongside GMO labeling initiatives. As consumers become more conscious of what they are ingesting, the implications of food labeling laws, including those regarding GMOs, become increasingly significant. The intersection of these issues will undoubtedly shape future conversations around food safety and consumer rights in the coming months.