Senate Reaches Agreement On GMO Labeling Law

Senate Reaches Agreement On GMO Labeling Law

A bipartisan agreement has been reached among negotiators in the U.S. Senate on national disclosure standards for genetically engineered foods.


The compromise bill was announced recently by Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-MI, the Agriculture Committee’s ranking member, and its chairman, Sen. Pat Roberts, R-KS. The legislation would create the first mandatory, nationwide label for food products containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs), according to the Vermont Press Bureau.

“This bipartisan agreement is an important path forward that represents a true compromise. Since time is of the essence, we urge our colleagues to move swiftly to support this bill,” the two lawmakers said in a joint statement.

The National Potato Council (NPC) supports the legislation released by Roberts and Stabenow.  The agreement preempts all state labeling laws related to the labeling of genetically modified food and uses a definition of genetic engineering that potato growers support.

“This is a timely and important step forward in the labeling discussion as it would prevent a patchwork of confusing state laws,” said NPC CEO John Keeling. “We thank the Senators for their hard work on this bipartisan legislation and urge the Senate to vote on it next week.”

The measure would also nullify Vermont’s first-in-the-nation GMO labeling law, which takes effect July 1, and would bar any other state from enacting labeling requirements that differ from the federal standards. This was an important facet of the bill, said Midwest Food Processors Association President Nick George.

The legislation will need 60 votes to pass the Senate. The House, which is on break until July 5, would also have to approve the legislation since it differs in many respects from the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act (H.R. 1599) the chamber passed last July by a vote of 275-150.

Leave a Reply

Johnny says:

This is a bad piece of legislation! Coming from a farmer.

Orlin Knutson says:

This is a weak, watered down compromise that denies the consumer basic information about their food supply. What are the big Ag producers worried about? We already have country of origin, nutritional information and ingredient information on our products, as well as allowing nebulous claims, like “Natural”. Now consumers want one little, easy to read, demarcation to know if what they’re eating has been altered by a process that is yet to be proven safe in the long run. History is littered with beliefs of things being safe, only to have unintended consequences appear later. Research has been too biased at this point with very little peer review on the effects of GMO food in the long term.

Marc says:

Our representatives in the government stab the people in the back at every opportunity they get! Let the Vermont law stand!