Print

The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), an industry-funded group, has renewed its efforts to block states from mandating GMO labelling by lobbying the federal government to introduce a voluntary labelling standard.

This is an extremely concerning development. If the voluntary standard became law, it would prevent the establishment of mandatory and/or stricter labelling standards by the states.

The lobby group also wants the FDA to review the safety of GMO foods - a proposal that has a pre-determined outcome, since 1) there is very little data examining long term effects of consuming GMOs, and 2) FDA is not going to admit that GM foods are unsafe after basing its entire GMO policy on the unproven assumption that they are safe.

Those campaigning for labelling in the states will doubtless work to try to ensure that this dangerous development is turned into a rigorous mandatory federal labelling standard.

1. Center for Food Safety denounces GMA's coalition to keep consumers in the dark about genetically engineered (GE) foods

2. Maine, Connecticut approve of GMO labeling, but food industry forms group to stop the initiative

---

1. Center for Food Safety denounces GMA's coalition to keep consumers in the dark about genetically engineered (GE) foods

Center for Food Safety, February 6 2014

http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/press-releases/2890/center-for-food-safety-denounces-gmas-coalition-to-keep-consumers-in-the-dark-about-genetically-engineered-ge-foods

Grocery and agrichemical companies join forces to stop the growing power of the food movement

Center for Food Safety (CFS) today strongly criticized the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) for renewing their efforts to block states from mandating the labeling of genetically engineered (GE) foods. In an attempt to counter public pressure from the food movement, GMA announced the formation of the Coalition for Safe Affordable Food. The coalition is made up of big food, chemical, and biotechnology lobbying groups.

“These companies spent nearly $70 million in California and Washington State to defeat GE labeling initiatives. They know that the food movement’s power is growing and that labeling is not a matter of if but when. These companies have failed to win over consumers who overwhelmingly support the mandatory labeling of GMOs and now they’re trying to steal away consumer choice in Congress,” said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director for Center for food Safety.

Connecticut and Maine have already passed GE labeling legislation. Alaska passed a bill requiring the labeling of genetically engineered fish and fish products. It is expected that over 30 states will introduce GE labeling laws in the 2014 legislative session and Oregon is already planning a ballot initiative on the issue.

Building on public demand for information, Senator Barbara Boxer and Congressman Peter DeFazio introduced legislation that would require mandatory labeling of GE foods at the federal level. Despite claiming that it supports a federal standard for labeling, the GMA coalition has not supported the Boxer and DeFazio bills. Instead the coalition is advocating for a voluntary labeling standard that perpetuates consumer confusion in the market place.

“Voluntary labeling of GE foods is already permitted under the law, but no company has ever chosen to do so because GE foods offer consumers no benefits and only potential risk. Voluntary labeling is an absolutely ineffective policy solution and is not a substitute for mandatory labeling,” said Kimbrell. “Instead of working together to meet consumer demand, GMA is using its deep pockets to ensure that congress and consumers are misled about their food supply.”

In a 2011 legal petition, Center for Food Safety provided FDA with a blueprint for a federal labeling of genetically engineered foods. FDA has yet to formally respond to that petition, though the agency has received more than 1.4 million comments supporting the petition and mandatory labeling. Just two weeks ago, over 200 companies and organizations sent a letter to President Obama asking him to fulfill his 2007 campaign promise to label foods made with genetically engineered ingredients.

In addition to blocking states from pursuing mandatory GE labeling, the corporate coalition of lobbyists also seeks to authorize the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to define the word “natural” to include GE products.  This would codify deception in the marketplace. CFS recently submitted a letter to FDA explaining why GE foods cannot be defined as “natural.”

---

2. Maine, Connecticut approve of GMO labeling, but food industry forms group to stop the initiative

Jack Kaskey

Bloomberg, Feb 6, 2014

http://bangordailynews.com/2014/02/06/business/maine-connecticut-approve-of-gene-modified-labeling-but-food-industry-forms-group-to-stop-the-initiative/

Groups representing seed, grain, and packaged-food companies formed an organization to stop states from requiring labels on products containing genetically modified ingredients.

The 29 members of the Coalition for Safe Affordable Food include trade groups representing companies such as Pepsico, the world’s largest snack food maker, and Monsanto, the biggest seed company.

The coalition said Thursday it seeks to fend off labeling initiatives like those already approved by voters in Connecticut and Maine, and urged Congress to pass a bill preempting such laws.

Federal legislation should give the Food and Drug Administration sole authority to determine whether genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, pose a health or safety risk in food and need labeling, said Pam G. Bailey, chief executive officer of the Grocery Manufacturers Association. The FDA has repeatedly said labels aren’t needed.

“We want to make it clear to consumers that FDA is looking out for their safety when it comes to GMO technology,” Bailey said Thursday on a conference call with reporters.

Labeling advocates say identifying GMOs is needed so that consumers who distrust the technology can avoid buying food containing those ingredients.

Connecticut and Maine have approved labeling, although those laws don’t take effect until more states follow with their own legislation. While such initiatives have been voted down in California, Oregon and Washington, similar bills are pending in several other state legislatures.

The companies opposing such measures “have failed to win over consumers who overwhelmingly support the mandatory labeling of GMOs, and now they’re trying to steal away consumer choice in congress,” Andrew Kimbrell, executive director for the Center for food Safety, a health and environmental campaign group, said Thursday in an emailed statement.

Opponents of labeling say it will drive up food costs, create a cumbersome patchwork of state laws and confuse consumers by implying a risk they say doesn’t exist.

The anti-labeling coalition will seek a statutory requirement for the FDA to review the safety of all new genetically engineered foods, Cathleen Enright, executive vice president of the Biotechnology Industry Organization, said on the call.

The Biotechnology Industry Organization’s members include seed makers such as Monsanto and DuPont Co. The FDA reviews currently are conducted at the discretion of biotechnology developers.

The coalition said it plans to educate the public about the safety of GMOs. It also said it wants the FDA to set federal standards for voluntary labeling of foods that do or don’t contain engineered ingredients, as well as setting a legal definition for the term “natural” on food and beverage labels.

The group’s 29 members also include the National Corn Growers Association, the National Restaurant Association, and the American Beverage Association.