GMO Labeling: ‘Big Food’ Pushes For Nationwide Standard

GMO labeling efforts by food safety advocates have garnered enough attention to prompt what might be a positive reaction from food industry giants. FMI MidWinter recently updated its GMO policy statement to “clarify” its position noting whether or not genetically modified ingredients were used in a food products and “help steer the government” and the food industry towards a nationwide labeling standard. The FMI Midwinter executive conference concluded yesterday. The conference was a gathering of the top executives from the food manufacturing, service, wholesale, and grocery retail industry.

FMI Midwinter Chair Fred Morganthall had this to say about establishing federal GMO guidelines:

“This policy allows FMI to go down a number of avenues in pursuing solutions to the consumer request for non-GMO labeling.”

GMO labeling amendments may have died a tragic death during the fall election cycle, but a bright light may now be shining on the horizon. Food industry giants that spent millions of dollars fighting state laws pertaining to genetically modified crops are now pushing for a federal law to accomplish the same goals. Despite the progress in the fight to know what is in your food, there may not be a cause for celebration just yet.

The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), which was a major foe in the GMO labeling state initiative fight, is not exactly ready to hold up the white flag. The organization is promoting what many consider a “watered-down” version of GMO labeling laws with only voluntary standards put in place. A host of food advocacy groups have deemed the proposal merely a power grab by the food industry which has consistently placed hurdles in front of transparency initiatives in the past. The GMA represents food and beverage suppliers such as Kraft, ConAgra, and PepsiCo.

Statements coming from the group claim the industry is attempting to find a “national solution” to the GMO labeling debate. The food and beverage manufacturers have also maintained that navigating a “patchwork” of laws which vary by state would mean creating different packaging for the same food items dependent upon its final destination. While such an argument may appear valid on its face, if the food manufacturers simply opted for full disclosure across the board, the alleged need for alternative packaging would be eliminated.

A draft of the nationwide GMO labeling proposal will be submitted to Congress in the near future. Part of the bill, according to excerpts published by Politico, indicate that the food industry is willing to submit to more FDA oversight. Considering the fact that the United States Food and Drug Administration has ignored European and Japanese tests and reports about the dangers posed by genetically modified food, the enhanced oversight by the federal agency will not amount to much of a change in the industry’s standard operating procedure.

Grocery Manufacturers Association Government Affairs Head Louis Finkel had this to say about the voluntary GMO labeling proposal:

“We believe it’s important for Congress to engage and provide FDA with the ability to have a national standard. A 50-state patchwork of regulations is irresponsible. We’ve fought a mandatory label at the state level because we believe that a mandatory label misinforms consumers” by implying that there is something wrong with the product.”

Both Colorado and Oregon are pushing forward with GMO labeling initiatives later this year. Maine and Connecticut both passed similar labeling measures in 2013. The downside of the passage involves the “trigger clauses” in the laws. For the two states to actually implement their labeling plans, four other states must first approve similar regulations. Washington and California did not pass their genetically modified food labeling statutes, with both failing by minuscule margins. The food industry, assisted by biotech giants like Monsanto, pumped approximately $70 million in anti-GMO labeling campaigns.

Environmental Working Group Vice President of Government Affairs and former GMA lobbyist Scott Faber had this to say about the nationwide GMO labeling proposal:

“Every lobbyist in this town can name the dozen senators who would read the Bible backwards before this would become law and that’s what’s so striking. A far better course would be for industry to come to the table” and work with consumers to gain the disclosure of more information on their products.”

Faber went on to call the shift in policy a “legislative hail Mary.” The American Frozen Food Institute, Snack Food Association, and the American Bakers Association are also joining in with the GMA on the voluntary nationwide labeling project. If the food industry proposal is approved by Congress, it will look significantly different that recently passed state bills, according to food safety advocates.

Two nationwide GMO labeling bills were introduced last April by Representative Peter DeFazio (Dem. Oregon) and Senator Barbara Boxer (Dem. California) and are still pending. The bills have each garnered 48 and 14 co-sponsors respectively, but have failed to muster much traction. DeFazio said the voluntary labeling could actually be a misstep by the GMA. “If they are going to kindle a national debate, given the polling on the issue, they better be thinking billions of dollars instead of tens of millions to fight it.”

What do you think about the creation of a nationwide GMO labeling policy?

[Image Via: Shutterstock.com]