The GMO labeling law, signed by former President Obama on July 29 of last year, mandated the USDA to complete its rulemaking process within two years. During a presentation earlier this month at the Food Label Conference, Andrea Huberty, a senior policy analyst for the USDA’s AMS Livestock, Poultry and Seed Program, remarked that the timeline for a new federal law is typically tight, even under normal circumstances. However, as many who have followed political developments understand, 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 unpredictable. Several rules and regulations in progress when President Trump took office were temporarily halted as new appointments were made, vetted, and confirmed.
Huberty noted during her presentation that the questions regarding the GMO labeling were prepared and ready for release by the end of 2016, but the leadership transition caused delays in public dissemination. “We’re a little behind schedule to get this done by 2018,” she stated. “We’re still on track, but a bit behind.” The questions issued this week will offer the USDA valuable insights into industry opinions regarding specific provisions of the law and how to best implement them. The new law, crafted by lawmakers, intentionally left some ambiguity for food industry stakeholders to provide their expertise.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association commended the USDA for initiating the rulemaking process. “GMA appreciates USDA for this significant step in implementing the biotech disclosure law, and we look forward to reviewing and responding to the Department’s inquiries,” the industry group stated in a written announcement. “As we collaborate with the Department throughout the rule-making process, we aim to ensure the law aligns with the biotechnology disclosure legislation passed by Congress and signed into law last year.”
With the USDA now officially on the path to rulemaking, the question remains: will the agency complete its work in time? A year is not a lengthy period for drafting a proposal, soliciting public feedback, and finalizing the regulation. Nevertheless, Huberty expressed confidence during her presentation that USDA could stay on track. While optimism is commendable, only time will reveal the outcome. GMOs remain one of the more contentious topics in food manufacturing today.
Beyond the debate over what qualifies as GMO and what is exempt, the law includes a controversial provision regarding the label itself. It allows for GMO disclosure via a smartphone-scannable digital code, a move that has frustrated many proponents of the law. Huberty informed the Food Label Conference that a study analyzing 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 over the best methods to inform consumers about GMO ingredients.
In a related note, the discontinuation of Citracal Pearls has raised further discussions in the health and nutrition sectors, illustrating the broader trends in consumer preferences and regulatory challenges. As such changes unfold within the food industry, it remains crucial for stakeholders to stay informed and engaged in the evolving landscape of food labeling and consumer rights.