Congress Just Passed A GMO Labeling Bill. Nobody's Super Happy About It 
 
 Enlarge this image toggle caption Wilson Ring/AP Wilson Ring/AP 
 
 After years of bitter debate and legislative stalemate over the labeling of genetically modified ingredients, a compromise proposal sailed through Congress in breathtaking speed over the past three weeks. 
 
 The House of Representative passed the measure on Thursday with solid support from both Democrats and Republicans. It now goes to the White House, where President Obama is expected to sign it. 
 
 Within a few years, consumers will be able to find out whether any food in the supermarket contains GMO ingredients. But they won't necessarily see that information on the package. Instead, consumers may have to scan a "QR code" — those little square codes that you see on airline boarding passes — to get that information. 
 
 Neither side in the labeling battle sounded completely satisfied. "I don't think that it's the best bill that we could have, but it's the best bill we could pass," says Richard Wilkins, a Delaware farmer who is president of the American Soybean Association, which opposes mandatory GMO labels. 
 
 "We're not supporting the final bill, because it does allow companies to use the option of a QR code," says Scott Faber, from the Environmental Working Group, which supports mandatory labels. 
 
 Congress was forced into this compromise by Vermont, which passed its own GMO labeling law. It went into effect this month. 
 
 Faber says mandatory labeling is necessary in order to provide consumers the information they need to ensure "that their values are reflected in their food dollar." 
 
 Food companies and farm groups, meanwhile, are convinced that pro-labeling groups are simply trying to use labels to drive consumers away from GMOs — a tactic that worked in Europe. 
 
 "Their first step was to require a mandatory label, and their second step was to force those products out of the marketplace," Wilkins says. 
 
 Wilkins also says mandatory labeling of GMOs suggests that those foods are inferior or unsafe, which is simply not true. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has said labeling isn't necessary because GMO foods aren't any different than regular ones. 
 
 This is why food companies and farm groups lobbied Congress to ban mandatory GMO labeling laws, including the one in Vermont. That previous proposal passed in the House, but not the Senate, where Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow — the ranking Democrat on the agriculture committee — dug in her heels against it. 
 
 In the end, the two sides settled on a compromise that does nullify Vermont's law, but still requires a form of GMO labeling. 
 
 Under this compromise, food companies will have to reveal whether products contain GMO ingredients, but they won't have to print it on the package label. Instead, they can make that information available through a QR code. Shoppers would have to scan it with their smartphones. Small food companies also have the option of printing a website URL or a phone number that customers can call for more information. 
 
 The proposal opened up sharp divisions among groups that had previously presented a united front in favor of GMO labeling. Some critics condemned the compromise as a "betrayal," a "sham" and "inexcusable." 
 
 Yet the Organic Trade Association, which supports GMO labeling, decided to support the compromise, in part because the law includes some special benefits for the organic industry. It includes, for instance, a provision that allows organic food companies to label their products as non-GMO. 
 
 The Just Label It coalition, which includes the Environmental Working Group and a long list of food companies, declared the bill a victory of sorts, even while refusing to support it. "It's not an insignificant achievement that a Republican Congress has decided to mandate a national GMO disclosure on every food package that contains genetically engineered ingredients," says Scott Faber. 
 
 At the same time, the GMO labeling battle isn't over. For one thing, the law leaves many details of the new labeling scheme to be worked out by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. These include, for instance, whether refined products like soy oil or sugar from beets will need to be labeled. While they are made from GMO crops, the final product doesn't contain any genetically modified material, such as proteins or DNA. 
 
 Gary Hirshberg, chairman of the Just Label It coalition, released a statement sayin that "the fight for national mandatory GMO transparency now shifts to USDA and to the marketplace, where companies should think twice before they remove GMO labels from their packages." ||||| A week after passing the Senate, a bill requiring a national standard for labeling genetically modified organisms in food was approved by the House on Thursday. The bill must now be approved by President Obama. If signed (the White House has said it plans to support the legislation), the law would give the U.S. Department of Agriculture two years to create standards for labeling GMOs in food nationwide, and would preempt Vermont's new GMO labeling law, the country's first, which went into effect July 1. Some companies, including Mars, already are using Vermont's labeling standards on products nationwide. Dannon is currently using stickers declaring the presence of GMO ingredients in Vermont, and recently committed to labeling its products nationwide by the end of the year and reducing use of GMO ingredients. Yet other companies say disclosures required by the Vermont law — such as “partially produced with genetic engineering,” or “may be produced with genetic engineering” or “produced with genetic engineering” — create unnecessary fear of a safe technology for producing food. 
 
 The Vermont standard. Venessa Wong / BuzzFeed News 
 
 While the federal bill would make GMO labeling mandatory, it has been criticized by many labeling advocates for not requiring the kind of direct and transparent disclosure required in Vermont. Instead, it was widely supported by food and beverage makers who feared patchwork state-by-state legislation, which would be expensive to deal with. Agribusiness giants like Monsanto and Dow Agrosciences, which develop herbcides and the genetically engineered seeds that can withstand them, also supported the federal bill. 
 
 But some advocates are disappointed that the federal bill permits the use of “a text, symbol, or electronic or digital link” to find out if a product contains GMOs. The link or QR code could include such language as, “Scan here for more food information," and small manufacturers could list a phone number. This means the packaging wouldn't necessarily mention GMOs or genetic engineering at all. The other problem with using digital links, according to Gary Hirshberg, Chairman of the pro-labeling group Just Label It, is consumers simply will not take the time to scan every product they buy with their smartphones. One of the solutions being considered is the Grocery Manufacturers Association's trademarked SmartLabel, a system of websites, digital QR codes, apps, and phone numbers on packages that direct consumers elsewhere for more information about the product. Hershey, one of the first companies to launch SmartLabel, already uses SmartLabel on its candies — although when we tried to use one of its QR codes today, it didn't quite work. Hershey said the error message was a result of scanning the QR code with a demo app, and while there are no SmartLabel-certified apps at this time, generic QR readers are compatible. 
 
 
 
 Venessa Wong / BuzzFeed News 
 
 Scanning the regular bar code on the bag of Hershey's Kisses using the app opened this page. 
 
 SmartLabel 
 
 A tab in SmartLabel's profile of the Hershey's Kisses product called "Other Information" contained a link to the GMO disclosure, which looks like this (below). Altogether, that's three steps — scan, open tab, click on link — to get to the GMO disclosure itself. ||||| WASHINGTON (AP) — Consumers wanting to know if their foods contain genetically modified ingredients will be able to find out for the first time. 
 
 Congress sent legislation to President Barack Obama on Thursday that would require most food packages to carry a text label, a symbol or an electronic code readable by smartphone that indicates whether the food contains genetically modified ingredients, or GMOs. The Agriculture Department would have two years to write the rules. 
 
 The White House says Obama will sign the bill, which would pre-empt a Vermont law that kicked in earlier this month. The House passed the legislation 306-117 on Thursday. 
 
 Senate approval came last week over the strong objections of Vermont's congressional delegation. Sens. Bernie Sanders and Patrick Leahy and Rep. Peter Welch argued that the measure falls short, especially compared with the tougher labeling requirements in their state. While the bill gives companies the three options for labeling, the Vermont law would require items be labeled "produced with genetic engineering." 
 
 "If there is an acknowledgement about the right of a consumer to have access to information, why not give them the information in plain and simple English?" asked Welch on the House floor. 
 
 Advocates for labeling and the food industry, which has fought mandatory labeling, have wanted to find a national solution to avoid a state-by-state patchwork of laws. The food industry supports the legislation, which was the result of bipartisan Senate negotiations. But many advocates do not, arguing that many consumers won't be able to read electronic labels and that there aren't enough penalties for companies that don't comply. 
 
 While there is little scientific concern about the safety of those GMOs on the market, advocates for labeling argue that not enough is known about their risks and people want to know what's in their food. Among supporters of labeling are many organic companies that are barred by law from using modified ingredients in their foods. 
 
 The food industry says GMOs are safe and the labels could mislead people into thinking they aren't. But several companies started to label their foods anyway as Vermont's law went into effect. 
 
 Vermont's Democratic Gov. Peter Shumlin bemoaned the congressional action. 
 
 "It's a shame that Congress chose to replace our standard with a weaker one that provides multiple ways for the food industry to avoid transparent labeling," he said in a statement. 
 
 Republicans and lawmakers from rural states overwhelmingly supported the legislation. Agriculture groups have backed it, hoping it will bring more certainty to farmers who grow genetically modified corn and soybeans. 
 
 "The clock has run out, my producers need certainty and an interstate commerce nightmare will shortly ensure if we don't pass this bill," said Rep. Rodney Davis, R-Ill. 
 
 Genetically modified foods are plants or animals that have had genes copied from other plants or animals inserted into their DNA. While farmers have been selectively breeding plants for centuries, this manipulation is done in a lab, speeding up the process by transferring a gene from one plant or animal to another. The engineering is done to create certain traits, like resistance to herbicides. 
 
 The bulk of the nation's genetically engineered crops are corn and soybeans that are eaten by livestock or made into popular processed food ingredients such as cornstarch, soybean oil or high-fructose corn syrup. Only a handful of genetically engineered fruits and vegetables are available in the produce aisle, including Hawaiian papaya, some zucchini and squash and some sweet corn. 
 
 The food industry says 75 percent to 80 percent of foods contain genetically modified ingredients — most of those corn and soy-based. The Food and Drug Administration says they are safe to eat. 
 
 The legislation encompasses some foods that were exempted from the Vermont law, but it also allows the Agriculture Department to determine how much of a "bioengineered substance" must be present to require a GMO label. Labeling advocates say many foods wouldn't be labeled if the department sets a high threshold. 
 
 ___ 
 
 Associated Press writer Matthew Daly in Washington and David Gram in Vermont contributed to this report.
– A bill requiring food packages to carry information on genetically modified ingredients has passed Congress—and NPR reports that neither side of the debate is thrilled about it. Farm groups and food industry lobbyists are opposed to any kind of mandatory labeling, while those calling for GMO labels complain that the bill allows food companies to provide a QR code or even just a phone number consumers can call instead of stating on the packaging whether the product contains GMO ingredients. The bill, which President Obama is expected to sign into law, was approved by the Senate last week and sailed through the House 306-117 on Thursday, the AP reports. The compromise bill on GMO labeling was blasted as a "sham" by some pro-labeling groups and supported by food companies that wanted a national standard—preferably a loose one—instead of state-by-state regulations, BuzzFeed reports. Vermont brought in its own, more stringent law on GMO labeling at the start of this month, and state lawmakers, including Bernie Sanders, argued against the federal bill. "It's a shame that Congress chose to replace our standard with a weaker one that provides multiple ways for the food industry to avoid transparent labeling," Democratic Gov. Peter Shumlin said in a statement. (Last year, the FDA approved a genetically engineered animal for human consumption.)