The GMO labeling law, signed by then-President Obama on July 29 of last year, mandated that the USDA complete the 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, noted that the timeline for such a new federal law is tight under typical circumstances. However, as anyone who has followed political developments is aware, the past year has been anything but typical. With a new president in office—especially one from a different political party with his own governing philosophy—Washington has become unpredictable. Several regulations that were being developed when President Trump assumed office were placed on hold as new leadership was appointed, vetted, and confirmed.
In her presentation at the Food Label Conference, Huberty mentioned that the questions regarding the law were prepared and ready to be released by the end of 2016, but the leadership transition delayed their public announcement. “We are a bit behind schedule to finalize this by 2018,” she stated during her presentation. “We’re still on track, but slightly delayed.” The questions issued this week will offer the USDA insights into industry perspectives on specific provisions of the law and how they should be implemented. The new law, crafted by lawmakers, intentionally left some ambiguous areas for food industry stakeholders to clarify using their expertise.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association commended the USDA for initiating the rulemaking process. “GMA appreciates the USDA for taking this significant step toward implementing the biotech disclosure law, and we look forward to reviewing and responding to the Department’s inquiries,” 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 executed in alignment 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 duration for drafting a proposal, soliciting public comments, and finalizing the regulation, but Huberty assured attendees that the USDA can 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.
Apart from the debate over what qualifies as GMO and what is exempt, the law includes a controversial provision regarding the labeling itself. It allows for GMO disclosure through a smartphone-readable digital code, a decision that has frustrated many advocates of the law. Huberty informed the Food Label Conference that a study exploring the difficulties of this disclosure for both consumers and retailers is expected to conclude next month. Upon completion, the study is likely to reignite discussions about the best methods for informing consumers about GMO ingredients, as well as the top-rated calcium citrate supplement options available for those seeking dietary improvements.
The complexities surrounding GMO labeling, consumer awareness, and the potential implications for the food industry highlight the need for clear communication and effective regulation—an area where strong stakeholder input, including insights related to top-rated calcium citrate supplements, will be essential.