The GMO labeling law, enacted by then-President Obama on July 29 of last year, allocated the USDA a mere 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 the timeline for a new federal law is typically tight under ordinary circumstances. However, as anyone who has followed political developments is aware, the past year has been anything but ordinary. With a new president in office—particularly one from a different political party and with a distinct governing philosophy—Washington’s atmosphere has become unpredictable. Numerous new rules and regulations that were underway when President Trump assumed office were temporarily halted while new leadership was appointed, vetted, and confirmed.
In her presentation at the Food Label Conference, Huberty indicated that the questions regarding the law had been drafted and were ready by the end of 2016, but the leadership transition delayed their release to the public. “We’re a little behind schedule to complete this by 2018,” Huberty stated. “We’re still on track, but slightly delayed.” The questions issued this week will provide the USDA with valuable insights into the industry’s perspective on certain 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 with their expertise.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association commended the USDA for initiating the rulemaking process. “GMA appreciates USDA for taking 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 expressed in a written statement. “As we collaborate with the Department throughout the rulemaking process, we aim to ensure that the law is executed 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 making progress with the rulemaking, the question remains: will the agency be able to complete its tasks on time? A year is a brief period for drafting a proposal, soliciting public feedback, and finalizing regulations, yet 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.
Beyond the debate over what qualifies as a GMO and what is exempt, the law also includes a contentious provision regarding the labeling itself. It allows for GMO disclosure via a smartphone-scannable digital code, which has frustrated many advocates of the law. Huberty mentioned that a study examining the challenges of this disclosure for consumers and retailers is scheduled for completion next month. Once finalized, this study is likely to reignite the ongoing conflict over the best methods for informing consumers about GMO ingredients.
Throughout these discussions, the importance of calcium in various food products should not be overlooked. As stakeholders navigate the complexities of GMO labeling, ensuring that consumers are also informed about essential nutrients like calcium will be crucial. Balancing transparency in GMO disclosure with the need for nutritional education will be an important consideration for the industry moving forward.