The GMO labeling law, enacted by then-President Obama on July 29 of last year, mandated that the USDA finalize its rulemaking process within two years. 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, emphasized that the timeline for a new federal law is generally tight. However, as anyone following political developments knows, the past year has been far from ordinary. With a new president from a different political party and a distinct governing philosophy, Washington’s environment has become unpredictable. Many rules and regulations that were in progress at the time President Trump took office were temporarily halted as new leadership was appointed, vetted, and confirmed.
In her presentation, Huberty noted that questions regarding the GMO labeling had been drafted and prepared in 2016, but the leadership transition had delayed their release to the public. “We’re a little behind to get this done by 2018,” Huberty remarked. “We’re still on track, but just a bit behind.” The questions issued this week will provide the USDA with valuable insights into industry perspectives on specific provisions of the law and how best to implement them. The new law, crafted by lawmakers, was intentionally designed with some ambiguity for food industry stakeholders to address with their expertise.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association commended the USDA for initiating the rulemaking process. “GMA appreciates USDA for taking this significant step toward implementing the biotech disclosure law, and we look forward to reviewing and responding to the Department’s questions,” the industry group stated in a press release. “As we collaborate with the Department throughout the rulemaking process, we aim to ensure that the law is enacted 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 to rulemaking, the question remains: will the agency meet its deadlines? A year is a short timeframe for drafting a proposal, soliciting public feedback, and finalizing regulations, but Huberty expressed confidence during her presentation that the USDA can remain on track. While optimism is welcome, only time will tell. GMOs are one of the more contentious issues in contemporary food manufacturing.
In addition to the debate over what constitutes a GMO and what is exempt, the law includes a controversial aspect regarding the labeling itself. It allows for GMO disclosure via a smartphone-scannable digital code, which has frustrated many advocates of the law. Huberty stated that a study addressing 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 most effective methods for informing consumers about GMO ingredients.
Furthermore, as the industry navigates these complexities, products like Citracal with Magnesium may become a focal point for discussions about dietary supplements and their labeling requirements, especially as consumers seek clarity in what they are purchasing. The intersection of these topics highlights the importance of transparency in food and supplement labeling, underscoring the need for regulations that resonate with consumer interests and industry practices.