For advertising information visit www.samplerpublications.com or call 859.225.4466 | June 2014
Don’t
Trust That
Organic
Label
By Angela S. Hoover, Staff
Writer
The USDA’s complete take-over
by corporate agribusiness began last
fall with an announcement that circumvents public process and congressional intent, and makes it easier to
continue using artificial ingredients
and substances in organic food production. This includes antibiotic use
in animals and synthetic materials
added in the production of foods.
Federal organic law had a controlled process for allowing the use of
substances not normally permitted in
organic production, and any exemption was only allowed for five years in
order to encourage the development
of natural or organic alternatives. The
exemptions were required by law to
expire unless they were reinstated by
a two-thirds decisive majority vote
of the National Organic Standards
Board (NOSB) and include a public
review. The NOSB is an independent
body of 15 members made up of
organic stakeholders that represent
farmers, consumers, environmental,
retail, scientific, and food processor
interests in organic food. The NOSB
decides on the working definition of
“organic” as a food production system
and what is allowable in organic food
and production, as mandated under
the OFPA of 1990. The Organic
Foods Production Act (OFPA) specifically states that the NOSB must
approve any synthetics used in organics and must re-review these materials
when they “sunset” every five years.
In September, the USDA changed
the sunset policy with no public
comment period. Now, the burden
of identifying exempted materials
for removal relies on environmentalists and consumers. Under the new
policy, an exempt material can be
permitted indefinitely unless a twothirds majority of the NOSB votes
&
31
to remove an exempted synthetic
substance from the list. The new
policy also allows the USDA to relist
exemptions for synthetic materials
without the recommendation of the
independent board and outside of
public view, as required by federal
law.
However, the USDA took things a
step further by usurping the NOSB.
Prior to the NOSB Spring 2014
meeting (April 29 to May 2, San
Antonio), Deputy Administrator
of the Agricultural Marketing
Service (AMS) at the USDA, Miles
McEnvoy, named himself as co-chair
of the NOSB meeting, illegally taking over two decades of NOSB selfgovernance. At the meeting, NOSB
members demanded a vote and the
ability to reassert its congressionallygiven right to self-governance and
the election of meeting chairs, following Roberts Rules of Order and
challenging McEnvoy’s deviations
of the rules. McEnvoy adjourned
the meeting to confer with his present staffers and with Washington
on the phone. He then resumed the
meeting while denying the revote,
as well as having a peaceful protestor who rightfully had the floor
arrested. The NOSB has been “refusing to go along with agribusiness in
approving gimmicky synthetics and
nutraceuticals in organic food,” says
Mark A. Kastel, co-director of The
Cornucopia Institute, an organic
industry watchdog. In addition to
adding synthetic materials to organics, agri