GMO labeling bill exposes rift
Maine, national organic trade groups at odds
By Anthony Brino
Staff Writer
A membership group of organic seed growers led by Bridgewater farmer Jim Gerritsen has split ranks with a large national organic trade group in a dispute over how best to require labeling of foods made with genetically engineered crops.
Contributed photo/Jim Gerritsen
Jim Gerritsen, who grows organic seeds at Wood Prairie Farm in Bridgewater and is the president of the Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association. 
The Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association withdrew its membership from the Organic Trade Association on July 13 following the latter group’s support of legislation passed in the U.S. House and Senate that would override state labeling laws for food made with genetically engineered crops and replace them with a national set of rules.
Gerritsen, from the Wood Prairie Farm, argues the legislation would threaten the integrity of organic farming, which prohibits genetic engineering and synthetic fertilizers and pesticides. And he said he and his fellow organic seed growers in OSGATA feel sold out by the OTA for supporting the bill.
The legislation would give food makers three options to disclose that products contain ingredients from genetically engineered plants: a plain language statement, a symbol to be created by the U.S. Department of Agriculture or an electronic QR code that people would look up with smartphones.
The bill, which President Barack Obama is expected to sign, would prohibit state-level GE-labeling laws, such as the Vermont law that took effect July 1 requiring the label “produced with genetic engineering.” Alaska, Connecticut and Maine also have enacted labeling laws, though they have not taken effect. Maine’s label requirements can’t take effect until four other contiguous states adopt similar measures.
Gerritsen argues the national legislation has too many legal ambiguities and no penalties for companies that don’t meet requirements and would “fail to guarantee on-package product transparency,” Gerritsen argued. It “threatens the survival of organic farmers and the organic community we have all worked so hard for decades to build.”
The Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association, which certifies most organic farms in Maine, also opposed the legislation and is not a member of the Organic Trade Association.
“We felt it was a retreat from the idea that consumers have a right to know what is in their food,” Ted Quaday, MOFGA’s executive director, said. “Some people called it a compromise; we called it a sell-out of consumer interests.”
All four members of Maine’s congressional delegation voted against the federal legislation.
Republican Rep. Bruce Poliquin went against his party’s leadership to vote against the measure, stating in a news release issued Thursday, “Mainers deserve to have easy access to all the information we need to make informed decisions about the foods we buy at the grocery store. … The federal government shouldn’t dictate these policies — that should be left to the states.”
The bill was crafted by Sens. Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, and Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan, and had the support of the American Farm Bureau, the American Soybean Association, the Grocery Manufacturers Association and other agriculture and food companies and organizations, as well as the Organic Trade Association.
Gerritsen noted that the OTA’s membership list includes small farming operations and organic food companies as well as large companies such as Driscoll’s, one of the world’s largest berry growers, and Annie’s, an organic brand of prepared foods owned by General Mills.
Gerritsen argues that the OTA has made a number of decisions that are at odds with small farmers and OSGATA. One issue he cited is the OTA’s proposal for an “organic checkoff” program where farmers would pay into a fund to promote sales of organic food, as is done for a number of commodity crops.
“It’s clear that Organic Trade Association has come under the control of a small group of lobbyists controlled by giant-food corporations that also own organic brands,” Gerritsen said.
In a public letter to its members, the OTA’s CEO Laura Batcha and board president Melissa Hughes wrote that the GMO legislation “has its flaws.” But the group supported it, they said, because the legislation was likely to pass and because it “does go a long way to increased clarity for consumers.” They added that it “protects the organic standards from any weakening by the implementation of the GMO labeling program,” and that “we will need to hold USDA accountable to develop regulations.”
Responding to OSGATA’s withdrawal and criticism, the OTA said in a statement that the “organic and healthy-food movement” has many organizations “doing good work with the same objectives, but with sometimes differing details in their strategies to achieve those objectives. We do not agree with everyone in our tent all the time, and that’s understandable and even healthy if dealt with constructively.”
