Senate backers of the GMO-disclosure bill are optimistic of winning a showdown vote today that would allow passage of the bill this week. With little time for Congress to act before its summer recess, Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley said the Senate bill would arrive as a “take it or leave it proposition” for the House — and Rep. Mike Pompeo, sponsor of a successful GMO bill, said the House probably would accept the Senate version.
If the Senate votes this afternoon to limit debate on the GMO bill, it will be a doubly meaningful victory for Senate Agriculture chairman Pat Roberts and Democrat Debbie Stabenow, who wrote the bill. It would clear the path for a final vote on the bill and, because 60 votes are needed to limit debate, it would show a solid Senate majority for the bill. Conversely, if the so-called cloture vote fails, the bill would be stranded with little hope for passage.
“Sen. Stabenow is confident the agreement has the votes to pass the Senate,” said a Senate aide. A Republican staff worker said the sentiment on the majority side was “cautiously optimistic.” During a teleconference, Grassley, a Republican, pointed to the 68-29 procedural vote last week to consider the Roberts-Stabenow bill and told reporters, “We had eight votes to spare. I don’t see us losing eight votes.”
The Roberts-Stabenow bill would pre-empt state GMO food-labeling laws and require nationwide disclosure of GMO ingredients via a symbol, a digital code or wording on food packages. Pompeo’s bill, passed by a landslide margin a year ago, pre-empts state label laws and leaves labeling voluntary at the federal level. During an interview with Agri-Pulse, Pompeo, a Kansas Republican like Roberts, repeatedly said he opposed mandatory disclosure.
“Other than the issue of whether the disclosure ought to be mandatory or not, the Senate bill is a good one and I’m hopeful that they’ll get it done and bring it over to the House and we can pass it this year as well,” said Pompeo. “We could go to conference [House-Senate negotiations for a compromise text]. I think it’s more likely that we pass the Senate version.”
Vermont’s first-in-the-nation GMO-labeling law, which requires a special label on food packages, took effect last Friday. Farm groups and foodmakers say state pre-emption is vital to avert the potential of conflicting label rules, so they generally support the Roberts-Stabenow bill. Stabenow, the senior Democrat on the Senate Agriculture Committee, argued for months that mandatory nationwide disclosure was the quid pro quo for pre-emption.
Environmentalists, consumer groups and the organic food industry faulted the Senate bill for using a narrow definition of GMO foods that could exclude thousands of products. The bill is virtually toothless in disciplining violations of label requirements, they say. The GMO-labeling campaign says the U.S. standard should be wording on the package to alert consumers to GMO ingredients. “It comes up as a labeling bill but the truth is, they’re trying to ban them from the market,” said Pompeo.