A bill to block GMO labeling fails key Senate vote

Screen Shot at AM

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.

A bill that would have stopped states from mandating labels for genetically engineered food failed a key vote on [March 16]. The measure would have quashed local laws, including one about to take effect in Vermont, that require food companies to label packages with genetically modified ingredients.

The Senate’s rejection of the current bill doesn’t mean its dead. Senators are likely to resume negotiations on the bill after they return from a two-week break and vote on it again. . . .

Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) sponsored the bill and got broad support from his party. But Republicans needed the help of farm-state Democrats who wound up voting against it. Earlier this month I predicted that Roberts would need to compromise with Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) to get this passed. . . . But Roberts never compromised. . And on [March 15], after meeting with organic industry leaders, Sen. Stabenow said she was against the bill as it stood. She wants something that will provide eaters with more information than they currently get, but that wouldn’t stigmatize GMOs.

. . . .Before the vote, Roberts sounded like someone playing the long game. “We are working both sides of the aisle very hard and, if we are not successful in getting 60 [votes] … we will have to come back after the [Easter] break and get something done,” Roberts said on [March 15], according to Politico.

Sen. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) proposed an amendment that could serve as a compromise and draw in those 60 votes. His amendment would give food manufacturers a chance to propose their own method of labeling. If companies failed to come up with a transparent method in three years, then labeling would become mandatory. . . .

Read full, original post: A bill to block GMO labeling fails key Senate vote

 

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

wuhan institute of virology main entrance
​​COVID lab leak? Making a case that the Wuhan market origins theory is wrong
Screenshot-2026-06-18-at-11.41.51-AM
Viewpoint—Protecting baloney science: Far right senators move to protect the phony homeopathy industry
Screenshot-2026-06-17-at-9.44.03-AM
Viewpoint: Embryos are becoming the newest battleground of love, loss, and legal uncertainty
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Screenshot-2026-06-16-at-10.02.22-PM
Viewpoint: ‘Industrial food’ primer—Challenging the dangerous delusions of the alternative food movement
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-9-2026-01_11_37-PM
Turmeric supplements: More risks than benefits
Screenshot-2026-06-17-at-11.57.12-AM
Viewpoint: Raw milk and the myth of safety—ProPublica exposes the growing anti-homogenization movement
Screenshot-2026-06-18-at-2.52.05-PM
Activist organization accuses Trump of protecting methane-generating stripper wells to benefit billionaire and donor Jeffrey Hildebrand 

Sorry. No data so far.

glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.