I have a big family — and be­­tween me, my kids and my grandkids, we’re spread out across America. We live in Florida, California, Illinois, North Carolina and Texas. We’re constantly traveling back and forth.

As we visit each other, we’re also preparing and shar­­ing meals. Sometimes it feels like I spend as much time making trips to grocery stores as I do relaxing in homes!

Should food labels look different everywhere we go? Of course not. Americans need easy to read and understandable standards that reveal pertinent information, no matter where we buy our food.

I’m a label reader. When my grandchildren are grocery shopping with me — whether it is 21-year-old Kellee or 4-year-old Faith — I’m often asked: "Why are you reading the label?" or "What does this label mean?"

I depend on accurate and reliable labels for nutritional information and assume that labeled food products are safe and in compliance with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) standards. I don’t want labels to push me or my family away from safe and healthy food.

Unfortunately, a step in the wrong direction was taken this month when Vermont became the first state in the country to demand special labeling on food packages that contain genetically modified (GMO) ingredients. Signed by Vermont’s governor into law, the rules are due to take effect in two years.

49 labels too many

If other states decide to go down that path, now we’re on the verge of a confusing and dysfunctional food-labeling system, with 50 sets of rules in our 50 states

The food labels already ap­­proved by the FDA are pretty good. Soon, they may become even better. In February, the FDA announced plans to fine-tune them.

The last thing we need are a bunch of legislators striking out on their own, thinking they can fix a system that isn’t broken.

Patchwork looks good on a quilt, but it doesn’t make sense for a regulatory regime. When it comes to food labels, we should expect consistency across state lines. My grandchildren in Houston should be able to understand food labels when they go to my local grocery store near Tampa Bay. Their shopping experience should not demand an act of decipherment.

At a recent White House event, First Lady Michelle Obama des­cribed the problem of poorly conceived food labels: "So you marched into the supermarket, you picked up a can or a box of something, you squinted at that little tiny label, and you were totally and utterly lost." She wasn’t talking about the threat of labels for GMO food, but she might as well have been.

Vermont’s latest action undermines the clear, national standards we need. Other states may add to the chaos. The National Conference of State Legislatures counts 84 bills in 29 states involving GMO food labels. Although voters in California, Oregon and Washington State have rejected ballot initiatives to require special labels, more referenda may be on the way. At some point, one may succeed.

Consumer confusion

This is a recipe for bewilderment among consumers.

Moreover, these laws are bad on the merits. GMO foods are safe and healthy. They don’t need warning labels, as organizations ranging from the American Medical Association (AMA) to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) have said.

I don’t know about you, but I’d rather entrust my food labels to the experts who work at the FDA and listen to the advice of the AMA and the NAS — and not to a few politicians in Vermont.

Labels should educate, conveying reliable information rather than propaganda. We must honor their basic purpose, not let them become marketing devices for favored groups.

A bill in Congress offers a solution. Introduced last month, the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act would make the FDA the final authority on labels for GMO food, preventing states from complicating matters. Its author is Rep. Mike Pompeo from Kansas, and the bill already enjoys bipartisan support from Democrats and Republicans.

Food labels should serve consumers, not ideological agendas and special interests. Let’s keep labels simple, clear and understandable to all age groups and generations, regardless of where they shop for their food. We need a single standard that makes sense for everyone.

 

Keiser owns and operates cattle feeding operations in Kansas, Nebraska and Illinois. This was reprinted with permission from the website of Truth About Trade & Technology www.truthabouttrade.org.