States Create Patchwork of Transgenic Crop Laws

WASHINGTON, DC, May 19, 2004 (ENS) - State legislatures in 2003 considered more measures in support of agricultural biotechnology than in the entire 2001-2002 legislative session, according to a new report released Monday by the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology.

Once again, lawmakers from Hawaii introduced more legislation on agricultural biotechnology than any other state, accounting for 19 percent of all biotech legislation introduced last year - 19 bills and six resolutions.

Legislation introduced in Hawaii includes bills that try to increase the amount of agricultural research in the state, that attempt to protect and potentially capitalize on Hawaii’s unique natural biodiversity, and others that seek to make information about genetically modified crop field trials available to the public.

The Iowa legislature was also very active, introducing 16 bills and passing four. The legislation introduced in Iowa was supportive of biotechnology, reflecting support for agricultural biotechnology as an important tool which can help Iowa maintain its position as an agricultural powerhouse.

Legislators from the Northern Plains States - Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota - introduced 10 bills which reflect growing concern among wheat producers over the market impact of applying genetic engineering technology to wheat, a valuable export commodity for these states. Their concern registered with Monsanto, the company developing biotech wheat, which earlier this month shelved plans to introduce the engineered grain.

Legislators from Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont – states that have a significant organic agricultural sector – introduced five bills which seek moratoria, six bills on labeling requirements, and three bills which could curb the introduction of agricultural biotechnology in that region.

“The 2003 legislative session confirms our belief that the introduction of biotechnology has given rise to a complex web of issues that vary from region to region, and that state legislators may feel are inadequately addressed at the federal level,” said Michael Rodemeyer, executive director of the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology.

Thirty-two states introduced 130 pieces of agricultural biotechnology legislation in 2003, compared to the 121 pieces of legislation introduced in 31 states during the first year of the 2001-2002 legislative session.

No bills introduced in 2003 address the violent or willful destruction of genetically modified crops. Since "anti-crop destruction” was the largest category of bills introduced during the 2001-2002 session, the Pew Initiative said, the absence of bills on this topic likely means states have already enacted legislation addressing this issue in prior sessions.

Less than a third of the legislation introduced actually passed and become law. Of the 130 pieces of legislation introduced in 32 states in 2003, only 27 pieces - 21 bills and six resolutions - were passed, representing 21 percent of the total introduced.

This reflects a slight decline from the first year of the 2001-2002 legislative session when 30 percent of all bills introduced passed.

Rodemeyer said, “The increasing level of state activity raises the question of whether or not state laws will ultimately create a checkerboard of inconsistent legislation where rules for agricultural biotechnology vary from state-to-state.”

Track state agricultural biotechnology legislation online at: http://pewagbiotech.org/