[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 115 (Wednesday, July 22, 2015)]
[House]
[Page H5338]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, as a subcommittee chair of 
the Committee on Agriculture, I am committed to safe and affordable 
food.
  In recent years, there has been increased interest in where our food 
comes from and how it is grown. In my view, this movement is long 
overdue, as far too many Americans are removed from the family farm for 
several generations.
  Agriculture is the backbone of rural America, and its success is 
critical for local economies and to deliver a product every American 
needs on a daily basis.
  With a growing world demand for food and less Americans engaged in 
farming, science and innovation have become essential components of 
agriculture and remain paramount to meet increased demands.
  Aside from tractors, combines, and physical technology, innovation 
also extends to biotechnology. Biotech ensures that America will always 
have the safest, most abundant, and affordable food supply.
  As world populations continue to increase, producing more food on 
less land will be an ongoing challenge, but one that can be addressed 
through advances in biotechnology.
  With this in mind, there has been an ongoing debate and much 
attention to what have been dubbed GMOs, or genetically modified 
organisms, seeds or crops.
  Despite the alarmist claims of some, GM products, GM seeds, have 
provided great benefits to farmers, ranchers, food producers, and 
consumers.
  For instance, some varieties of GM seeds have been engineered to host 
genetic traits that resist certain types of insects, molds or diseases 
that destroy crops or, in other cases, GM seeds allow for longer 
growing seasons or greater crop yields.
  GM crops have had an enormously positive impact on farmers, ranchers, 
and food producers. GM seeds have also had a positive environmental 
impact because they have reduced the need for large-scale sprays or 
open-range distribution of pesticides or insecticides.
  While some continue to question the safety of consuming GM seeds, the 
overwhelming consensus among the various credible scientific 
organizations, such as the National Academy of Sciences, the World 
Health Organization, and the American Medical Association, remains.
  Quite simply, there is no sound scientific evidence that such crops 
or foods are harmful to human health or the environment.
  In fact, a January 2015 study from the Pew Research Center found that 
88 percent of surveyed scientists believe that GM seeds or crops are 
perfectly safe for human consumption.
  However, one of the real challenges that has developed regarding GM 
foods is the lack of a fair and consistent regulatory structure.
  Recently several States have made attempts to mandate all GM foods 
are labeled as genetically modified organisms. As a result, a patchwork 
of different State laws have begun to emerge over the labeling 
requirements of GM foods.
  Now, this is already causing confusion as to how such labeling 
standards would directly apply to farmers, ranchers, food processors 
and, yes, also regulators.
  This patchwork of State laws could also create some constitutional 
questions, should such laws affect interstate commerce and trade.
  Nearly 80 percent of the food produced in the United States contains 
some kind of GM product, and the implications of a State-by-State 
labeling requirement would be vast.

                              {time}  1030

  This week, Mr. Speaker, the House will consider H.R. 1599, the Safe 
and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015, in an effort to address this 
confusion. Because there are so many myths surrounding this debate, 
let's start with what the bill does.
  This legislation is squarely centered on State labeling efforts. 
While the bill does preclude States from enacting their own GM labeling 
laws, it also creates a Federal framework for premarket review and 
labeling of GM foods; or, in other words, the legislation requires the 
FDA to conduct a review of any and all new plant or seed varieties 
before such products are commercially available.
  The bill would also require standards for defining whether a product 
is of the ``GM'' or ``natural.'' The legislation does not prohibit 
States from outright banning GM crops or writing new relevant laws, but 
what the bill will do is give farmers, ranchers, and food producers 
much-needed certainty by establishing a unified and clear regulatory 
process.
  Mr. Speaker, as a cosponsor of H.R. 1599, I rise in support of the 
legislation, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on it.

                          ____________________