Bill Requiring Genetically Engineered Food Labeling Introduced

U.S. Capitol building

U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-OR) this week introduced the Genetically Engineered Food Right-to-Know Act, bipartisan legislation that would require the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to clearly label genetically engineered (GE) foods so that consumers can make informed choices about what they eat.

“Americans have the right to know what is in the food they eat so they can make the best choices for their families,” Boxer stated in a press release. “This legislation is supported by a broad coalition of consumer groups, businesses, farmers, fishermen, and parents who all agree that consumers deserve more — not less — information about the food they buy.”

A similar Calfornia state measure on labeling GE foods, also known as genetically modified organisms (GMOs), was rejected by California voters this past November. Most Americans consume GE foods on a daily basis, as two extremely common ingredients, corn and soybeans, are frequently produced from GE seed. However, both Boxer and DeFazio claim widespread support for labeling.

“When American families purchase food, they deserve to know if that food was genetically engineered in a laboratory,” DeFazio said in the press release. “This legislation is supported by consumer’s rights advocates, family farms, environmental organizations, and businesses, and it allows consumers to make an informed choice.”

The bipartisan legislation would require clear labels for genetically engineered whole foods and processed foods, including fish and seafood. The measure would direct the FDA to write new labeling standards that are consistent with U.S. labeling standards and international standards. Sixty-four countries around the world already require the labeling of GE foods, including all the member nations of the European Union, Russia, Japan, China, Australia, and New Zealand.

The FDA has long opposed the mandatory labeling of GMO foods because it agrees with a scientific consensus that these foods pose no new risk to human health or the environment. The American Medical Association has declared that such labeling is completely unnecessary. Currently, the AMA noted, if consumers want to make sure they are not consuming GMOs, they can purchase foods labeled organic.

Cosponsors of the Senate bill are Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Mark Begich (D-AK), Jon Tester (D-MT), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Brian Schatz (D-HI), and Martin Heinrich (D-NM). Representatives Jared Polis (D-CO), Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), Chellie Pingree (D-ME), Donna Christensen (D-Virgin Islands), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Peter Welch (D-VT), James Moran (D-VA), Louise Slaughter (D-NY), Don Young (R-AK), Jim McDermott (D-WA), Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), Jared Huffman (D-CA), Jackie Speier (D-CA), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Gerry Connolly (DVA), George Miller (D-CA), David Cicilline (D-RI), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Grace Napolitano (D-CA), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), and Ann Kuster (D-NH) are cosponsors of the House bill.

Topics:

Leave a Reply

14 comments on “Bill Requiring Genetically Engineered Food Labeling Introduced

  1. Finally someone in office with common sense. THIS great country and we continue to place garbage in food. GMO labeling hurray. Monsanto and their genetically engineered crops are destroying our food sources. I want to know what is in my food!!!!!!

  2. This "defeated" bill should not be introduced again at the taxpayers money. GMO food has been consumed for decades; this appears to be another money grabbing issue for those involved. Nothing is gained. This bill could hardly be called "bipartisan". What do those two (R) want from the rest of the cosponsors? How much foreign grown food is consumed by these people that "need/want" to know what is in their food? Good luck on that one!

  3. In California, voters passed a proposition 65 several years ago. This requires a warning wherever a carcinogen might be present. As a result, every building or facility has a plaque or sticker warning that carcinogens may be present. I think we will see a generic statement on future labels that this package may contain some GMO ingredients. There will be compliance with the law but it won't be useful information to anyone.

  4. Sure hope someone gets this labeling through, I sure don't want to be eating it. SAFE! sure! On testing with rats in three generations they are STERILE. What are we doing to our children? Playing with our food and creating animals with genetic changes is dangerous. What kind of monster is next? Pollen drifts, so soon all will be contaminated, then what?????

  5. Consumers need to be able to vote with their wallets, and that only works with complete information. I'm all for GMO labeling. People who want it can buy it, those that don't can opt out. What's more American than a freedom like that?

  6. This should not even get debated. If the GMO foods is so safe why not label it. We put sugar in foods we label that. Why not GMO's? Why because they know that when it is labeled that way people will stop buying it. That's what happened in England. If you don't believe it is harmfull,check out some of the studies that are out there. They scare me to death, you are dealing with our genetics. Buy Organic until they label.

  7. This is really laughable. "Americans deserve to know if their food was engineered in a lab" What a moron. I'm so tired of the scare tactics. In no way does Gmo mean that it isn't natural. It's a manual selection of the best plant characteristics. It could be achieved through old fashioned plant breeding, but would take decades. The whole organic and anti GMO movement is hard to understand. People join up and fight for causes they know little about. Most biologists and chemists agree that there is nothing about organic or non-GMO foods that makes them safer or more nitricious, but it's clear that they yield less and cost more. Extra labeling and segregation of conventional foods will add expense and accomplish nothing. I hope this falls on its face. But who knows, the last decade is proof that "stupid" can often prevail!

  8. I never thought the day would come when I would support a bill a Democrat introduced. I am 100% behind a labeling law. It affect NO ONE and adds ZERO cost to companies. They already LABEL the product with nutritional and ingredient information. Adding a * after an ingredient and then adding "* Maybe be Genetically Engineered" Adds ZERO cost to the product. If consumers don't care, they will by the product anyway. My guess is the large companies are terrified of consumers choosing NOT to purchase foods with GE ingredients. No exemptions for McDonalds or other fast food companies either.

  9. It is completely misleading to say that "Most Americans consume GE foods on a daily basis…". That is an overstatement of the fact. It is true that Americans may use corn oil or soybean oil in their cooking or consume fructose syrup from corn in some product that is derived from a GE corn or soybean plant. However, none of these products contains the protein that was coded from a GE expressed gene, and that is a distinction that must be recognized and acknowledged. Americans are NOT consuming genetically engineered protein, and therefore, there is absolutely no risk whatsoever to the public. The concerns raised over GE crop labelling are only coming from individuals who do not understand science. Ignorance always breeds fear.

  10. Several pieces of complete false hood posted on here, such as rats going sterile after eating GMO crops. Pure balderdash. Nature has a good issue on plant biotechnology. This link is good until next Wednesday, May 8. Use it an learn. http://www.nature.com/nature/current_issue.html An excerpt: The analyst who spoke of an uninformed public may have been correct in 1993, but such a claim no longer applies. People are positively swimming in information about GM technologies. Much of it is wrong — on both sides of the debate. But a lot of this incorrect information is sophisticated, backed by legitimate-sounding research and written with certitude. With GM crops, a good gauge of a statement’s fallacy is the conviction with which it is delivered.

  11. Good grief. Here we go again. It will simply cost the farmers more money. I really don't care for others wanting to jam the way they eat down my throat. If they don't want GMO food, fine. Don't buy it. I often avoid GMO food, but that is MY choice, and I do not want to jam it down everyone else's throat. Not to mention there aren't (m)any studies that really show GMO's are bad. Folks need to wake up and see what is really going on. This is pure absurdity. As food prices keep going up, people will complain about that, not realizing they are doing it to themselves. Oh yes, and for those of you who said it "it won't cost anybody anything," that is totally wrong. When you make statement's like that, it tells everybody else that you are grasping at straws and don't have a clue. In the end that does work out well, though.

  12. The bottom line is that people have the right to make the decision on whether to buy and consume GMO foods. Not much is known about long-term GMO food consumption. Those who believe that GMO food is completely safe for long-term use should have no problem in labeling it. Wanting to keep people in the dark is a huge red flag!

  13. It's not all about the human body… what about the fact that the corn rootworm has evolved to be Bt resistant…Bt is one of the main controls that Organic farmers use for everyday control of lepidoptera species.. now becoming more and more ineffective. Or the millions of gallons of roundup being sprayed on fields by conventional farmers to raise these crops.. now our weeds are even becoming resistant to these chemicals. It's time more and more of us farmers leave the GMO crops alone…. GMOs are already banned in many EU countries, why not ours?? We simply don't need them. Farms would put a lot more folks to work and help with unemployment across the board without GMO crops.

Crop Protection Stories

Crop ProtectionManaging Lepidoptera In Tomatoes
August 22, 2014
This video provides information on how to best identify and control Lepidoptera in tomatoes. Read More
Crop ProtectionGetting To The Root Of Good Soil Health Requires Some Digging
August 21, 2014
Dave Gilliam of Horticultural Alliance says more citrus growers are paying attention to what's happening below the ground in their groves. Read More
Crop ProtectionBioConsortia Inc. Bolsters Executive Team
August 18, 2014
Industry veterans Christina Huben and Dr. Susan Turner bring experience to plant biotechnology firm. Read More
Crop ProtectionCover Crop Solutions Offers New Three-Way Cover Crop Mix
August 13, 2014
A fast-growing cover crop mix needs 45 to 60 days of growth in warm conditions. Read More
Crop ProtectionBiopesticides Vs. Traditional Agrochemicals
August 4, 2014
To effectively control pests, understand how the products work and know the biology of insect pests. Read More
Crop ProtectionFrench Crop Protection Firm Acquires Fine Holdings Ltd.
August 4, 2014
De Sangosse group seeks to bolster its business with purchase of plant growth regulator specialist. Read More
CEU SeriesCEU Series: Gain A Deeper Understanding Of Fertilizers
August 1, 2014
It's never too late to grow your knowledge of plant nutrients. Read More

The Latest

Crop ProtectionManaging Lepidoptera In Tomatoes
August 22, 2014
This video provides information on how to best identify and control Lepidoptera in tomatoes. Read More
Crop ProtectionGetting To The Root Of Good Soil Health Requires Some D…
August 21, 2014
Dave Gilliam of Horticultural Alliance says more citrus growers are paying attention to what's happening below the ground in their groves. Read More
Crop ProtectionBioConsortia Inc. Bolsters Executive Team
August 18, 2014
Industry veterans Christina Huben and Dr. Susan Turner bring experience to plant biotechnology firm. Read More
Crop ProtectionCover Crop Solutions Offers New Three-Way Cover Crop Mi…
August 13, 2014
A fast-growing cover crop mix needs 45 to 60 days of growth in warm conditions. Read More
Crop ProtectionBiopesticides Vs. Traditional Agrochemicals
August 4, 2014
To effectively control pests, understand how the products work and know the biology of insect pests. Read More
Crop ProtectionFrench Crop Protection Firm Acquires Fine Holdings Ltd.
August 4, 2014
De Sangosse group seeks to bolster its business with purchase of plant growth regulator specialist. Read More
CEU SeriesCEU Series: Gain A Deeper Understanding Of Fertilizers
August 1, 2014
It's never too late to grow your knowledge of plant nutrients. Read More
BerriesNew Study Finds Simple Solution To Monitoring Spotted W…
July 31, 2014
UF/IFAS researchers are using a mixture of yeast, sugar, and water to lure, trap major berry pest. Read More
Crop ProtectionNew York Combats Giant Weed
July 30, 2014
The state continues efforts to control this species that is harmful to humans. Read More
CitrusThe Exponential Rise Of Biopesticides
July 28, 2014
The first sustainable commercial success stories in the biopesticide market were seen in the 1980s and 1990s. Since then, the market has grown exponentially, and is projected to exceed $3 billion by 2016. Read More
Citrus9 Resources For All Of Your Biopesticide Questions
July 25, 2014
As the use of biopesticides continues to increase at a staggering rate, more and more resources are being made available to the public to help increase awareness of the sector. Read More
Apples & PearsAn Awakening To The Value Of Biopesticides [Opinion]
July 25, 2014
With the entry of major suppliers into the biopesticide arena, whether or not biopesticides work is no longer the question. Now, people want to understand how they work. Read More
Apples & PearsPGRs: The Overlooked Piece Of The Biopesticides Puzzle
July 25, 2014
Yield and quality can be as important to growers as crop protection. Read More
Crop ProtectionDon’t Let Your Cruciferous Crops Get Beaten By Cl…
July 23, 2014
Learn how to ID, the survival and spread, as well as management methods for this vegetable disease. Read More
Crop Protection4 Methyl Bromide Alternatives To Consider
July 22, 2014
With the phase-out of the popular soil fumigant, it's important to know you have crop protection options. Read More
Crop ProtectionFlorida Farmers Feeling Pains Of Methyl Bromide Phase-O…
July 22, 2014
Growers look for recommendations to keep fields clean in the absence of the long-used fumigant. Read More
CitrusPhytech To Bring PlantBeat Service To U.S. Farmers
July 22, 2014
After growth in Israel, Phytech’s PlantBeat comes to California. Read More
Crop Protection2014 Florida Agricultural-Environmental Leadership Awar…
July 17, 2014
Growers place an emphasis on protecting the state's fragile water resources. Read More