The bill addressing bioengineered, or genetically modified (GMO), crops and items made from them was brought to the Senate Agriculture Committee, by Senator Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, chairman of the Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee. It was approved by a 14-6 vote and moved into the Senate for consideration.
The National Grain and Feed Association (NGFA) and American Soybean Association (ASA) have commended the decision and support efforts to move the proposed bill forward.
“We hope the significant step taken today will galvanize congressional efforts to get federal preemption legislation on biotech labeling enacted expeditiously,” said Randy Gordon, NGFA president, in a release earlier this week.
Bill commentary
There is a ‘sense of urgency’ about passage of a federal law to address labeling of bioengineered products, said Gordon. A state-level law in Vermont takes effect on July 1, if no federal law preempting it is approved.
“We believe that the hearings conducted by both the Senate and House on this issue have demonstrated overwhelmingly the need for a national, uniform solution that does not involve on-package labeling of biotech-enhanced products, which would run the risk of unjustifiably stigmatizing this safe and important technology that enables our nation's farmers and agribusinesses to competitively and affordably feed a growing population,” he said. “If states create different labeling rules, food and feed manufacturers would be forced to either not serve that market or transfer the heavy costs of compliance to consumers.”
There also is a potential for confusion if state labels are not similar, he said.
“Congressional action is needed to avert major supply chain disruptions and inefficiencies in production, storage, transportation, manufacturing and distribution of food and feed that would translate into significant cost increases for consumers,” said NGFA officials.
Members of the ASA supported the bill for similar reasons, said officials. The group is set to continue pushing for the bill’s passage in the Senate.
“For soybean farmers, the bill represents our continued ability to use biotechnology within our operations,” said Richard Wilkins, ASA president. “It means growing more while using less, and it means meeting the needs of a demanding American marketplace, and growing global population. We will communicate those benefits to senators every day until this bill is passed and signed into law.”
Committee members who voted against the bill included Senator Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan, ranking member in the Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee.
In a statement about the bill, she said, she supported the idea of having one labeling system that applied to all the states, rather than multiple state systems. And that biotechnology is both safe and offers important tools for farmers and producers.
But, any federal bill that preempts state-level laws needs to include mandatory disclosure when biotech traits are present, she said.
“A voluntary program is not enough to meet consumer demand,” she said. “That is why I cannot support it.”
Bill details
If approved, the bill seeks to create a federal labeling system for products that include crops or ingredients that were bioengineered, committee officials said in the bill. It also defines bioengineered food.
However, the labeling system would be voluntary and it would preempt any state-level laws or regulations, they said. And, it would restrict statements being made about bioengineered food being safer or less safe.
The bill also sets a two year timeframe for the Secretary of Agriculture to develop a national labeling standard for any food that is bioengineered or includes ingredients that were created and any procedures needed to carry out the standard, said officials.
“The Secretary, in coordination with other Federal agencies as appropriate, shall provide science-based information, including any information on the environmental, nutritional, economic, and humanitarian benefits of agricultural biotechnology, through education, outreach, and promotion to address consumer acceptance of agricultural biotechnology,” they said.