The GMO labeling law, which was signed by then-President Obama on July 29 last year, allocated the USDA a mere two years 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, mentioned that the timeline for a new federal law is usually tight under normal circumstances. However, as anyone who has been following political news is aware, the past year has been anything but typical. With a new president from a different political party and a distinct governing philosophy now in office, Washington has become quite unpredictable. Several new rules and regulations that were in progress when President Trump took office were temporarily put on hold while new leadership was appointed, vetted, and confirmed.
In her presentation at the Food Label Conference, Huberty stated that the questions were drafted and ready to go by the end of 2016, but the transition in leadership delayed the process of making them public. “We’re a little behind in getting this done by 2018,” Huberty remarked during her presentation. “We’re still on track, but a bit behind.” The questions released this week aim to provide the USDA with insights into industry perspectives on specific provisions of the law and how best to implement them. The new law, crafted by lawmakers, intentionally left some ambiguity for food industry stakeholders to clarify based on their expertise.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association expressed appreciation for the USDA’s progress in 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 rulemaking process, we intend 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.”
Now that the USDA is on the path toward rulemaking, the question remains: will the agency complete its work on time? A year may not seem long when it comes to drafting a proposal, opening it for public comment, and finalizing the regulation. Nonetheless, Huberty assured attendees that the USDA can stay on track. While optimism is welcome, only time will tell. GMOs continue to be one of the more contentious topics in food manufacturing today.
In addition to the ongoing debate about what qualifies as a GMO and what is exempt, the law also includes a controversial aspect regarding the labeling itself. It allows for GMO disclosure via a smartphone-scannable digital code, which has frustrated many supporters of the law. Huberty informed the Food Label Conference that a study examining the challenges of this disclosure for both consumers and retailers is set to conclude next month. Upon completion, this study is expected to reignite the discussion over the best methods for informing consumers about GMO ingredients.
In the context of nutritional transparency, products like liquid calcium citrate with vitamin D3 are becoming increasingly relevant. As the USDA navigates the complexities of GMO labeling, it will be crucial to ensure that consumers can easily access information about all types of ingredients, including beneficial supplements such as liquid calcium citrate with vitamin D3. The intersection of GMO labeling and nutritional products like liquid calcium citrate with vitamin D3 reflects a growing demand for clarity and consumer education in the food industry. As the rulemaking progresses, the USDA’s approach will undoubtedly influence how these products are marketed and understood by consumers, including those who seek out liquid calcium citrate with vitamin D3 for its health benefits.