The proposal stems from an agreement hammered out last week. It would preempt Vermont’s GMO labeling law, which takes effect Friday.
Sanders’ procedural maneuver prevents the bill from being considered unless it gets at least 60 votes, according to Sanders’ spokesman Josh Miller-Lewis. The bill has yet to be introduced and timing of any votes is unknown, he said.
Meanwhile, Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) said Tuesday that he will also oppose the federal bill. Last week, Leahy had said he was considering the proposal.
On the Senate floor Tuesday, Leahy criticized the deal as considerably weaker than the about-to-be-enacted Vermont labeling law .
The bipartisan Senate proposal was announced last Thursday. It would allow food manufacturers to provide GMO information by labeling products with codes that consumers could scan via smartphone, or to provide phone numbers for information. By contrast, Vermont’s law requires the labeling of food products.
Food manufacturers who have fought Vermont’s law announced their immediate support for the federal proposal.
Sanders and Gov. Peter Shumlin immediately denounced the federal proposal last week. Tuesday, Leahy chimed in.
“It falls short,” Leahy said. “This purported ‘deal’ does not go far enough to give consumers what they are asking for, a simple on-package label or symbol.”
Leahy said the bill lacks sufficient enforcement measures, leaving it up to consumers to call out manufacturers who don’t comply. It would also block Vermont’s 2004 genetically modified seed labeling law, he said.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Stabenow received over $700,000 in contributions from big ag. This kind of corporate corruption has no place when it comes to agricultural policy development. The collusion between corrupt politicians and corporations has to stop if we want any kind of policy development that will protect the rights of consumers.
WHY IS THIS BILL SO BAD? Here’s what you need to know:
* 1. The bill preempts Vermont, Connecticut, Maine and Alaska’s GMO labeling laws and prevents any other states from passing similar legislation.
* 2. The bill creates a new definition of GMO, excluding most of the genetically engineered foods currently on the market and new technologies such as CRISPR/cas9, gene editing and gene cassettes.
* 3. The bill provides for a patchwork of voluntary labeling options — QR codes, phone numbers, and symbols yet to be created by the USDA — and would result in consumer confusion and necessitate an inordinate amount of time when shopping.
* 4. The standard for non-GMO is not clearly defined and an acceptable level of GMO contamination has not been determined, leaving this open to the corrupt USDA to decide.
* 5. There are no penalties for non-compliance.
* 6. The bill would not take effect for two years.
* 7. And for the handful of GMO foods that actually will be labeled? Well, good luck finding out what’s in those. The bill would FORCE YOU to scan a QR code, call a toll free number or search for some cryptic symbol yet to be defined just to get the information you want and need. And you’ll have to wait two years for it.
* 8. This so-called “national standard” would EXEMPT what looks to be most of the foods on the market from any GMO labeling. Roundup Ready crops would be EXEMPT, nearly all insecticide producing crops would be EXEMPT, refined sugars, oils, starches and processed ingredients with no detectable DNA would be EXEMPT. The bill redefines genetic engineering in a way that EXEMPTS almost all GE foods.
These exemptions don’t exist with Vermont’s mandatory law.
Stabenow and Roberts both, should be literally KICKED out of office! This isn’t just corruption. This is collusion to defraud the American people, and just for their own enrichment. Rob Bright (above) got it right! Get rid of them both and any more like them! NOW!
So, are we going to label literally every food? Because we have been modifying plants through selective breeding since the Bronze Age. My favorite example is bananas. They aren’t natural either. We engineered them.
In re: Mr. Lurie’s comment – There is a huge difference between selective breeding and inserting genetic material into food products that comes from entirely different species. For example, inserting fish genes into tomatoes in order to increase their frost resistance. I can assure you this was not occurring in the Bronze Age.
If Sanders is in favor of Monsanto he is no better than Trump or Clinton. They don’t care if people get poisoned as long as they are safe and getting the profits from evil corporations like Monsanto.