Should GMOs be Labeled on a Case by Case Basis — Determined by the FDA? (H.R. 1599)
Do you support or oppose this bill?
What is H.R. 1599?
(Updated December 12, 2017)
This bill would create a nationwide, uniform system for reviewing and labeling genetically engineered foods (aka genetically modified organisms or GMOs) before they go to market. In response to contentious efforts by nearly 30 states to implement their own labeling regulations, this bill establishes federal labeling standards that preempt all state and local laws on the matter.
Products containing GMOs would not be required to have a label unless the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decides that labeling is necessary for public health reasons or to avoid misleading statements. Direct or implied claims that foods made with GMOs are safer would be prohibited. Businesses would be allowed to voluntarily add labeling to products that were made with GMOs to differentiate them from comparable foods.
The FDA would be required to conduct a safety review of all new plant varieties used for genetically engineered foods before they are made commercially available. It would also establish a public website where information about genetically engineered plants intended for use in food could be accessed.
If the FDA believes it is necessary to require special labeling to protect health and safety, it would have the authority to establish those requirements. The FDA would also oversee a new legal framework governing label claims related to the absence or use of GMOs in food.
This bill also tasks the FDA with developing a definition of “natural” for claims on product labels that the federal government could use in regulating those products. An accreditation and certification process would be established within the USDA for businesses that would like to label their products as GMO-free — similar to the way organic products are currently certified.
Argument in favor
National labeling standards would level the playing field for producers by avoiding a costly state-by-state patchwork of labeling regulations. This bill also gives consumers more information about their food and could save them over $500 per year.
Argument opposed
Preventing states from keeping or enacting GMO labeling regulations that are stronger than the new federal standards ignores public opinion in places that want strict requirements. People should be able to know what’s in their food.
Impact
Anyone who eats, advocates for and against GMO labeling, food and agricultural businesses that must comply with the regulations, states that would otherwise enact their own differing GMO labeling regulations, and the FDA.
Cost of H.R. 1599
The CBO estimates that implementing this bill would cost a total of about $4 million over the 2016-2020 period. It would also increase both direct spending and revenues by an estimated $1 million each annually, and as a result its net impact on the federal budget would be negligible.
Additional Info
In-Depth: In introducing his legislation, Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS) cited positive feedback from both producers and consumers following a December hearing that the bill would “provide clarity and transparency in food labeling, support innovation, and keep food affordable.”
His cosponsor Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-NC) concurred, expressing skepticism about the ability of states to independently regulate food labels:
“The potential for a 50 state patchwork of varying labeling standards would increase costs for producers and translate into higher prices for consumers to the tune of more than $500 per year for the average family.”
Groups such as Just Label It!, the Environmental Working Group, and the Center for Food Safety
have rallied against this legislation, derisively calling it the “Deny
Consumers the Right to Know Act.” The executive director of the Center
for Food Safety said that:
“This bill is simply not the solution Americans are looking for. An overwhelming majority of American consumers want to know if their food has been produced using genetic engineering. That is their right and they will not relent until Congress or the FDA heed their call.”
This bill was approved by the House Agriculture Committee via voice vote, and currently features 106 cosponsors — including 15 Democrats and 91 Republicans.
Of Note: While the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Medical Association, and the World Health Organization have all said that GMOs are safe, consumers are still worried about what is going into their food. About 90 percent of the corn, soybeans, and cotton grown in the U.S. is genetically engineered — usually to make them more pest resistant or use less water.
After a 2013-14 state legislative period that saw 28 states consider GMO labeling legislation, so far in 2015 there have been 101 state-level bills addressing GMO labeling introduced, 15 of which have become law in 13 states. Most of these laws dealt with using scientific research to assess the best methods to regulate GMOs, and assessments of the need to regulate them, while four bills actually adopted food labeling standards.
There are also groups lobbying for state-level initiatives to require GMO labeling in 21 states, and in the 2014 elections groups in Colorado and Oregon managed to get their initiatives on the ballot. The Colorado initiative was rejected by a 66 to 34 percent margin, but Oregon’s ballot measure was defeated by a narrow margin of 50.03 to 49.97 percent — with only 837 voters making up the difference.
Media:
- Sponsoring Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS) Press Release
- Rep. Pompeo (R-KS) Summary
- House Agriculture Committee Press Release
- CBO Cost Estimate
- Farm and Ranch
- Reuters
- Roll Call
- Washington Post
- National Conference of State Legislatures (Context)
Summary by Eric Revell
(Photo Credit: Flickr user Chiot's Run)
The Latest
-
Should U.S. Implement a New Tax on AI to Fund Worker Benefits?The debate As technology advances, artificial intelligence (AI) becomes more integrated into our society. While leaders in AI read more... Artificial Intelligence
-
SCOTUS Hears Arguments of Abortion Pill Mifepristone CaseUpdated March 27, 2024, 12:30 p.m. EST On Tuesday, March 26, the Supreme Court heard arguments about the mifepristone case, read more... Women's Health
-
IT: ⛑️ It's American Red Cross Giving Day, and... How will you give back today?Welcome to Wednesday, March 27th, philanthropists and entrepreneurs... It's American Red Cross Giving Day - a time to ensure the read more...
-
Moscow Concert Hall, Russia’s Deadliest Attack in DecadesOn Friday, March 22, at least four men fired automatic weapons into a sold-out show at the Crocus City Hall auditorium in read more... Public Safety