A Senate panel voted Tuesday to advance legislation that would block states from imposing labeling requirements for genetically modified foods.
"Now is not the time for Congress to make food more expensive for anyone,” said Sen. Pat RobertsCharles (Pat) Patrick RobertsMcConnell gets GOP wake-up call Bob Dole, Pat Roberts endorse Kansas AG Derek Schmidt for governor Ex-Sen. Cory Gardner joins lobbying firm MORE (R-Kan.), who sponsored the bill.
The bill comes amid a heated fight between consumer groups who want more information about so-called GMO foods and the food industry.
Supporters of the bill say that a patchwork of state rules will make it more costly for food companies to comply and that those costs will be passed on to consumers. They also say that additional labeling requirements are unnecessary for foods that have already been deemed safe by the government.
But Democrats who oppose the bill say consumers have a right to know what’s in the food they’re eating.
The GOP-backed bill would “move production methods into the shadows” and “give agriculture a black eye,” said Sen. Patrick LeahyPatrick Joseph LeahySenate Judiciary squares off over John Lewis voting rights bill Senate Democrats introduce legislation to strengthen Voting Rights Act 92 legal scholars call on Harris to preside over Senate to include immigration in reconciliation MORE (D-Vt.).
“The legislation undermines the public’s right to know,” he added.
The bill would replace state-by-state mandatory GMO labeling requirements with a voluntary national standard.
The committee’s top Democrat, Sen. Debbie StabenowDeborah (Debbie) Ann StabenowSenate Democrats dial down the Manchin tension Democrats surprised, caught off guard by 'framework' deal Congress facing shutdown, debt crisis with no plan B MORE (Mich.) said it does not go far enough to protect consumers.
“It must contain a pathway to a national system of mandatory disclosures for consumers,” she said. “The bill before us today does not meet that important requirement. A voluntary program is not enough to meet consumer demand. That’s why I will not be voting for it."