The GMO labeling law, signed by then-President Obama on July 29 of last year, allowed the USDA only two years to finalize the rulemaking process. 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, noted that for a new federal law, the timeline is tight under typical circumstances. However, as anyone following political news is aware, the past year has been anything but typical. With a new president now in office—especially one from a different political party and with a distinct governing philosophy—Washington has seen a level of unpredictability. Several new rules and regulations that were underway when President Trump took office were temporarily halted as new leadership was appointed, vetted, and confirmed.
In her presentation, Huberty mentioned that the questions concerning the regulations were drafted and ready by the end of 2016, but the transition of leadership delayed their release to the public. “We’re a little behind schedule to have this done by 2018,” Huberty stated. “We’re still on track, but a bit delayed.” The questions issued this week will give the USDA valuable insight into how the industry views certain provisions of the law and how to best implement them. The new law, created by politicians, intentionally left some ambiguous areas for food industry stakeholders to clarify using their expertise.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association applauded 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 inquiries,” the industry group stated in a written release. “As we collaborate with the Department throughout the rulemaking process, we aim to ensure the law is applied 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 moving forward with the rulemaking, the question remains: will the agency complete its work in time? A year is a brief duration for drafting a proposal, soliciting public comments, and finalizing the regulation. However, Huberty assured attendees at her presentation that the USDA could stay on track. While optimism is welcome, only time will reveal the outcome. GMOs remain one of the more contentious topics in food manufacturing today.
In addition to the debate over what qualifies as GMO and what is exempt, the law includes a controversial aspect regarding the labels. The law allows GMO disclosure through a smartphone-scannable digital code, which has frustrated many proponents of the law. Huberty informed the Food Label Conference that a study examining the challenges of this disclosure for both consumers and retailers is expected to be completed next month. Once finalized, this study could reignite the ongoing debate about the most effective way to inform consumers about GMO ingredients.
As the conversation continues, it’s essential to consider how products like Citracal Maximum D3 may fit into the broader discussion on food labeling and consumer awareness. The integration of such supplements into dietary choices reflects the complexity of food regulations and consumer expectations. Ultimately, how these discussions unfold will shape the landscape of food labeling and GMO disclosure, with significant implications for both industry stakeholders and consumers alike.