Pompeo bill set for action this week as biotech advocates continue to spar
July 20, 2015 |05:25 PM
The House Rules Committee has scheduled a meeting for 5 p.m. Tuesday to consider the rule for debating H.R. 1599, the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act, better known as the bill introduced by Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kan., to stop labeling of foods with genetically modified ingredients at the state level and establish a GMO-free labeling program at the Agriculture Department.
Amendments were due to be submitted to the committee by 3 p.m. today.
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., has scheduled consideration of the bill on the House floor for Thursday.
Meanwhile, Just Label It, the Environmental Working Group, the Center for Food Safety and the Organic Trade Council continued their campaign against the bill.
Most conventional agriculture groups issued statements in favor of it, although the National Farmers Union has yet to take a position. An NFU spokesman told The Hagstrom Report that NFU President Roger Johnson is “reviewing” the bill and may have to take it the board.
“We came out against Pompeo’s initial bill when it was introduced this spring because it set up a voluntary standard, but will review the most current edition,” the spokesman said.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack told The Hagstrom Report last week that he believes the proposal by food companies to come up with a uniform barcode labeling system to cover ingredients including those that are genetically modified will do a better job than Pompeo’s proposal.
Critics of genetic modification have been vigorous in their opposition.
“With this vote, the proponents of this bill are clearly saying they are against states’ rights, against small farmers looking to protect their livelihoods and against consumers who want to exercise their freedom to choose what they eat. This is unacceptable,” said Colin O’Neil, director of government affairs at Center for Food Safety.
O’Neil praised Reps. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., and Chris Gibson, R-N.Y., for “standing up for the consumer’s right to know, and vocally opposing this bill” when they were the only Agriculture members to speak against the bill during the markup session.
“This bill is counter to clear market trends and common-sense notions of transparency and consumer choice, and is an obvious case of government overreach,” said Gary Hirshberg, chairman of Stonyfield Farm and chairman of Just Label It. “The backers of this bill are siding with protecting big chemical and food companies in their efforts to hide basic facts and against average citizens who simply want to know more about their food and how it’s produced.”
“We will use every tool at our disposal to educate the 90 percent of Americans who support mandatory GMO labeling about how bad this bill is,” said Scott Faber, executive director of Just Label It and senior vice president of EWG. “It’s time for members of Congress to listen to the voices of consumers who want more transparency in our food system, rather than bowing to big chemical companies like Monsanto.”
“The Organic Trade Association opposes the bill approved by the Agriculture Committee this morning,” Laura Batcha, OTA executive director and CEO, said in a statement. “Absent a federal mandate, OTA strongly believes that states should retain the right to require GMO labels on genetically modified products.
“We expressed our many concerns prior to today’s vote,” Batcha added. “Despite consideration of some specific concerns about conflicts between the organic label administered by USDA and the labeling requirements of the bill, concerns remain, and we will continue to work to address these issues as the bill moves through the legislative process.”
The Coalition for Safe Affordable Food, the industry group that favors the bill, complained on Friday that the opponents had made inaccurate statements that the bill would interfere with state regulation of agricultural production and noted that House Agriculture Committee Chairman Mike Conaway, R-Texas, and House Agriculture ranking member Collin Peterson, D-Minn., had issued a joint statement on the bill’s intent.
Conaway and Peterson said in a statement, “A centerpiece of H.R. 1599, ‘The Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015,’ authored by Representatives Pompeo and Butterfield and cosponsored by 106 members including ourselves, is to avoid the patchwork of state laws dealing with biotech food labeling. The bill that the House of Representatives will soon consider provides preemption solely for food use and labeling. The preemption provision does not delve into areas beyond this — such as cultivation of crops.”
“In particular, the Just Label It campaign, the Environmental Working Group and the Center for Food Safety have been pushing an unfounded narrative that is either intentionally dishonest or remarkably uninformed,” said Claire Parker, spokesperson for the Coalition for Safe Affordable Food. “It is unfortunate that groups that claim the mantle of consumer advocacy would employ tactics that do nothing but undermine the public discourse.”
“It is now clearer than ever that the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act will create the transparent, informative labeling framework consumers deserve, keep food prices stable and bring much-needed certainty to the marketplace. The bill also gives those who choose to buy non-GMO foods a reliable means of doing so through a USDA GMO-free certification program, a program based on the popular National Organics Program. Consumers have ready and able access to organic products, so, too, will they have the consistent capacity to buy GMO-free foods,” Parker added.
National Council of Farmer Co-operatives President and CEO Chuck Conner told The Hagstrom Report in an email that “passing HR 1599 – and preventing the chaos that would be created by a state-by-state patchwork of labeling laws – is the top priority for NCFC and our members right now. There’s a great deal of momentum behind the legislation, and it’s bringing together a broad-based, and almost unprecedented, coalition of groups in support of a common-sense solution to the issue.”
In a news release when the committee approved the bill, Conner said, “The House Agriculture Committee has taken an important step in moving forward legislation to ensure that farmer co-ops, their producer-owners and other agribusinesses have the certainty of a uniform, national standard when it comes to labeling foods made with biotech-derived ingredients. H.R. 1599 would eliminate the possibility of a state-by-state patchwork of labeling laws, something that would increase costs and reduce choices for both farmers and consumers.”
NCFC noted the committee approved an amendment in the nature of a substitute that would “enhance coordination between the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in the biotechnology approval process;
The same day, American Farm Bureau President Bob Stallman said his group “is pleased that Congress is moving to bring greater clarity to food labeling. H.R. 1599 empowers consumers by continuing to require warning labels for foods that may have adverse effects on the public. At the same time, it does away with labeling schemes that would stigmatize foods based on nothing more than the way in which they were developed.”
“This bill is an antidote to anti-GMO initiatives that make people wrongly fear the food they eat,” Stallman added. “Such regulations generally ignore science and undermine the public’s understanding of the food farmers and ranchers produce. H.R. 1599 restores reason to our food discussions and shows pseudoscience and food quackery the door. We look forward to passage by the full House in the very near future.”
The American Soybean Association issued a statement that it would engage in “a full-court press in each of the 30 soybean-growing states to garner chamber-wide support for the bill.”
“We’ve seen that the effort to bring clarity to the GMO labeling debate has significant support on both sides of the aisle,” ASA President Wade Cowan, a Texas soybean grower, said in a news release. “It’s clear that consumers want practical solutions that give them the confidence they want in their food, and this legislation does exactly that. In the coming weeks, we’ll meet with every lawmaker in soybean country to urge them to support this legislation. It’s a bill that moves us closer to a science-based dialogue on food and farm issues, and we will encourage every member of the House to get behind it.”
Amendments were due to be submitted to the committee by 3 p.m. today.
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., has scheduled consideration of the bill on the House floor for Thursday.
Meanwhile, Just Label It, the Environmental Working Group, the Center for Food Safety and the Organic Trade Council continued their campaign against the bill.
Most conventional agriculture groups issued statements in favor of it, although the National Farmers Union has yet to take a position. An NFU spokesman told The Hagstrom Report that NFU President Roger Johnson is “reviewing” the bill and may have to take it the board.
“We came out against Pompeo’s initial bill when it was introduced this spring because it set up a voluntary standard, but will review the most current edition,” the spokesman said.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack told The Hagstrom Report last week that he believes the proposal by food companies to come up with a uniform barcode labeling system to cover ingredients including those that are genetically modified will do a better job than Pompeo’s proposal.
Critics of genetic modification have been vigorous in their opposition.
“With this vote, the proponents of this bill are clearly saying they are against states’ rights, against small farmers looking to protect their livelihoods and against consumers who want to exercise their freedom to choose what they eat. This is unacceptable,” said Colin O’Neil, director of government affairs at Center for Food Safety.
O’Neil praised Reps. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., and Chris Gibson, R-N.Y., for “standing up for the consumer’s right to know, and vocally opposing this bill” when they were the only Agriculture members to speak against the bill during the markup session.
“This bill is counter to clear market trends and common-sense notions of transparency and consumer choice, and is an obvious case of government overreach,” said Gary Hirshberg, chairman of Stonyfield Farm and chairman of Just Label It. “The backers of this bill are siding with protecting big chemical and food companies in their efforts to hide basic facts and against average citizens who simply want to know more about their food and how it’s produced.”
“We will use every tool at our disposal to educate the 90 percent of Americans who support mandatory GMO labeling about how bad this bill is,” said Scott Faber, executive director of Just Label It and senior vice president of EWG. “It’s time for members of Congress to listen to the voices of consumers who want more transparency in our food system, rather than bowing to big chemical companies like Monsanto.”
“The Organic Trade Association opposes the bill approved by the Agriculture Committee this morning,” Laura Batcha, OTA executive director and CEO, said in a statement. “Absent a federal mandate, OTA strongly believes that states should retain the right to require GMO labels on genetically modified products.
“We expressed our many concerns prior to today’s vote,” Batcha added. “Despite consideration of some specific concerns about conflicts between the organic label administered by USDA and the labeling requirements of the bill, concerns remain, and we will continue to work to address these issues as the bill moves through the legislative process.”
The Coalition for Safe Affordable Food, the industry group that favors the bill, complained on Friday that the opponents had made inaccurate statements that the bill would interfere with state regulation of agricultural production and noted that House Agriculture Committee Chairman Mike Conaway, R-Texas, and House Agriculture ranking member Collin Peterson, D-Minn., had issued a joint statement on the bill’s intent.
Conaway and Peterson said in a statement, “A centerpiece of H.R. 1599, ‘The Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015,’ authored by Representatives Pompeo and Butterfield and cosponsored by 106 members including ourselves, is to avoid the patchwork of state laws dealing with biotech food labeling. The bill that the House of Representatives will soon consider provides preemption solely for food use and labeling. The preemption provision does not delve into areas beyond this — such as cultivation of crops.”
“In particular, the Just Label It campaign, the Environmental Working Group and the Center for Food Safety have been pushing an unfounded narrative that is either intentionally dishonest or remarkably uninformed,” said Claire Parker, spokesperson for the Coalition for Safe Affordable Food. “It is unfortunate that groups that claim the mantle of consumer advocacy would employ tactics that do nothing but undermine the public discourse.”
“It is now clearer than ever that the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act will create the transparent, informative labeling framework consumers deserve, keep food prices stable and bring much-needed certainty to the marketplace. The bill also gives those who choose to buy non-GMO foods a reliable means of doing so through a USDA GMO-free certification program, a program based on the popular National Organics Program. Consumers have ready and able access to organic products, so, too, will they have the consistent capacity to buy GMO-free foods,” Parker added.
National Council of Farmer Co-operatives President and CEO Chuck Conner told The Hagstrom Report in an email that “passing HR 1599 – and preventing the chaos that would be created by a state-by-state patchwork of labeling laws – is the top priority for NCFC and our members right now. There’s a great deal of momentum behind the legislation, and it’s bringing together a broad-based, and almost unprecedented, coalition of groups in support of a common-sense solution to the issue.”
In a news release when the committee approved the bill, Conner said, “The House Agriculture Committee has taken an important step in moving forward legislation to ensure that farmer co-ops, their producer-owners and other agribusinesses have the certainty of a uniform, national standard when it comes to labeling foods made with biotech-derived ingredients. H.R. 1599 would eliminate the possibility of a state-by-state patchwork of labeling laws, something that would increase costs and reduce choices for both farmers and consumers.”
NCFC noted the committee approved an amendment in the nature of a substitute that would “enhance coordination between the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in the biotechnology approval process;
- “Strengthen confidence in the safety of genetically engineered foods by requiring developers to receive written FDA notification that any questions on food safety have been resolved before introduction of new bio-engineered products into the marketplace; and
- “Provide consumers greater transparency and confidence by establishing a public website listing all bioengineered plants.”
The same day, American Farm Bureau President Bob Stallman said his group “is pleased that Congress is moving to bring greater clarity to food labeling. H.R. 1599 empowers consumers by continuing to require warning labels for foods that may have adverse effects on the public. At the same time, it does away with labeling schemes that would stigmatize foods based on nothing more than the way in which they were developed.”
“This bill is an antidote to anti-GMO initiatives that make people wrongly fear the food they eat,” Stallman added. “Such regulations generally ignore science and undermine the public’s understanding of the food farmers and ranchers produce. H.R. 1599 restores reason to our food discussions and shows pseudoscience and food quackery the door. We look forward to passage by the full House in the very near future.”
The American Soybean Association issued a statement that it would engage in “a full-court press in each of the 30 soybean-growing states to garner chamber-wide support for the bill.”
“We’ve seen that the effort to bring clarity to the GMO labeling debate has significant support on both sides of the aisle,” ASA President Wade Cowan, a Texas soybean grower, said in a news release. “It’s clear that consumers want practical solutions that give them the confidence they want in their food, and this legislation does exactly that. In the coming weeks, we’ll meet with every lawmaker in soybean country to urge them to support this legislation. It’s a bill that moves us closer to a science-based dialogue on food and farm issues, and we will encourage every member of the House to get behind it.”
