GM Watch
  • Main Menu
    • Home
    • News
      • Latest News
      • Newsletter subscription
      • Daily Digest
      • News Reviews
      • News Languages
    • Articles
      • GM Myth Makers
      • GM Reports
      • GM Quotes
      • GM Myths
      • Non-GM successes
      • GM Firms
        • Monsanto: a history
        • Monsanto: resources
        • Bayer: a history
        • Bayer: resources
    • Videos
      • Latest Videos
      • Must see videos
      • Cornell videos
      • Agriculture videos
      • Labeling videos
      • Animals videos
      • Corporations videos
      • Corporate takeover videos
      • Contamination videos
      • Latin America videos
      • India videos
      • Asia videos
      • Food safety videos
      • Songs videos
      • Protests videos
      • Biofuel myths videos
      • Index of GM crops and foods
      • Index of speakers
      • Health Effects
    • Contact
    • About
    • Links
    • Donations
    • How donations will help us
News and comment on genetically modified foods and their associated pesticides    
  • News
    • Latest News
    • Newsletter subscription
    • Archive
      • 2019 articles
      • 2018 articles
      • 2017 articles
      • 2016 articles
      • 2015 articles
      • 2014 articles
      • 2013 articles
      • 2012 articles
      • 2011 articles
      • 2010 articles
      • 2009 articles
      • 2008 articles
      • 2007 articles
      • 2006 articles
      • 2005 articles
      • 2004 articles
      • 2003 articles
      • 2002 articles
      • 2001 articles
      • 2000 articles
    • Daily Digest
    • News Reviews
    • News Languages
      • Notícias em Português
      • Nieuws in het Nederlands
      • Nachrichten in Deutsch
  • Articles
    • GM Myth Makers
    • GM Reports
    • How donations will help us
    • GM Quotes
    • GM Myths
    • Non-GM successes
    • GM Firms
      • Monsanto: a history
      • Monsanto: resources
      • Bayer: a history
      • Bayer: resources
  • Videos
    • Index of speakers
    • Glyphosate Videos
    • Latest Videos
    • Must see videos
    • Health Effects
    • Cornell videos
    • Agriculture videos
    • Labeling videos
    • Animals videos
    • Corporations videos
    • Corporate takeover videos
    • Contamination videos
    • Latin America videos
    • India videos
    • Asia videos
    • Food safety videos
    • Songs videos
    • Protests videos
    • Biofuel myths videos
    • Index of GM crops and foods
  • Contact
  • About
  • Links
  • Donations
SUBSCRIBE TO REVIEWS

GMO INFO

10 Questions About GM Foods
Do GMOs increase yields and reduce pesticide use, and are they needed to feed the world? Find out in the 16-page document, 10 Questions About GM Foods.

News Menu

  • Latest News
  • News Reviews
  • Archive
  • Languages

Please support GMWatch

Donations

You can donate via Paypal or credit/debit card.

Some of you have opted to give a regular donation. This is greatly appreciated as it helps place us on a more stable financial basis. Thank you for your support!

2016 articles

Senate panel advances bill blocking state GMO labelling rules

  • Print
  • Email
Details
Published: 01 March 2016
Created: 01 March 2016
Last Updated: 01 March 2016
Twitter

Senate Agriculture Committee approved the bill 14-6, sending it to the upper chamber's floor

Bad news – the Dark Act, which would forbid states from requiring GMO labelling, has won backing from the Senate Agriculture Committee.

However, Food Navigator reports that the bill “faces an uphill battle when it goes to the Senate floor for a vote”.

1. Senate panel advances bill blocking state GMO labeling rules
2. UPDATE: GMO labeling bill going to complete Senate, following 14-6 bipartisan committee vote
——

1. Senate panel advances bill blocking state GMO labeling rules

By Tim Devaney
The Hill, 1 March 2016
http://thehill.com/regulation/healthcare/271282-gmo-labeling-bill-clears-senate-hurdle

A Senate panel voted Tuesday to advance legislation that would block states from imposing labeling requirements for genetically modified foods.

The Senate Agriculture Committee approved the bill in a 14-6 vote, sending it to the upper chamber's floor. The House passed similar legislation last year.

"Now is not the time for Congress to make food more expensive for anyone,” said Sen. Pat Roberts (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 Leahy (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 Stabenow (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."
—

2. UPDATE: GMO labeling bill going to complete Senate, following 14-6 bipartisan committee vote

By Carolyn Heneghan
FoodDive, February 29, 2016
http://www.fooddive.com/news/update-gmo-labeling-bill-going-to-complete-senate-following-14-6-bipartis/414746/

UPDATE: The Senate Agriculture Committee passed the GMO labeling bill 14-6 in a bipartisan vote. The bill will now go to the complete Senate.

Dive Brief:

* The Senate Agriculture Committee is scheduled on Tuesday to markup the voluntary GMO labeling bill introduced by Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) in February, following its postponement.
* Though it did give Roberts and the bill's supporters additional time to garner up more Democratic support, it still may not have been enough.
* Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) has expressed interest in reaching a compromise on the legislation that would appease both the sugar beet producers in her state and consumers. However, she doesn't believe the bill's voluntary labeling policy as it currently stands goes far enough, Heitkamp told Agri-Pulse.

Dive Insight:

Supporters of the bill tout higher costs for manufacturers regarding the logistics involved in distribution and creating different labels for individual state. Manufacturers may have to pass those costs on to consumers, which is another concern for legislators.

Opponents argue that Campbell, which backs mandatory GMO labeling, won't be raising prices for consumers when the company begins labeling GMO ingredients in its products over the next year and a half. Legislators also cite states' rights and consumers' right to know what is in their food as reasons that voluntary GMO labeling doesn't go far enough.

Compromise could come in the form of GMO information provided to consumers somewhere other than directly on the label, but that may still not be enough for Democratic legislators that are demanding labeling on the packaging.

Menu

Home

News

News Archive

News Reviews

Videos

Articles

GM Myth Makers

GM Reports

GM Myths

GM Quotes

How Donations Will Help Us

Contacts

Contact Us

About

Facebook

Twitter

RSS

Content 1999 - 2019 GMWatch.
Web Development By SCS Web Design