Personal Explanation on Concurring in the Senate Amendment to the House Amendment to S. 764

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I regret that I was not present for the vote on concurring in the Senate Amendment to the House Amendment to S. 764, dealing with labeling requirements for genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Had I been here, I would have supported this legislation as a step forward in improving consumers' right to know more about the products they consume.

I appreciate that many of my constituents, like many across the country, have expressed a desire to know whether the food they purchase and consume contains GMO ingredients. However, the status quo does not work for consumers, for manufacturers, or for our country.

Today, if a consumer wants to know more about where the ingredients in their food come from, it is far from an easy process. Some manufacturers choose to print it on the packaging, others don't. Some define a genetically-modified ingredient one way, others another.

There's not much more clarity right now for food manufacturers. Depending on the state or even city, they may face different requirements about what foods to label, what ingredients need to be labeled, or how the label should look. Many companies have started taking steps to provide more information, but the lack of a consistent standard makes it difficult for consumers to access this information in an easy way.

The bill that came before the House is not perfect, but I believe it moves us in the right direction. It creates a national standard, instead of a patchwork of state and local laws. And under this standard, it will be mandatory, not voluntary, for manufacturers to disclose whether a product has genetically-modified ingredients, which will now be clearly defined.

The measure includes some flexibility for manufacturers to determine for their products what format makes the most sense for this disclosure, but I am pleased that there are clear requirements in place that this disclosure must meet. There is certainly more that can be done to build awareness about what to look for on packaging and how the information can be used, and so I believe this bill can be the first step in a process of education and information-sharing that will help consumers. I also believe the use of electronic scannable codes holds a lot of promise, particularly as manufacturers come together to standardize the codes and information that is provided. I strongly feel that this information should remain easily accessible to the consumer, so that once a code is scanned, there is a direct link to information such as GMO disclosure, ingredients, and nutrition facts. I am heartened that many manufacturers have begun recognizing the need to make this information clearly available, and I look forward to continued progress in this area.

Overall, I believe that the legislation considered by the House is a needed step forward from the situation we have today, and a significant improvement from previous legislation that did not require the kind of labeling that consumers have asked for. I support this version of the legislation, and I look forward to continuing to work to strengthen our food safety, nutrition, and anti-hunger laws and programs so that all consumers are able to access healthy, affordable food for themselves and their families.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source