Still, the larger point is that the law was created to set standards and work in the direction of improving them, not to water them down, and some of that has occurred since.

There are many reasons why it is important to keep these standards high and the consumer’s confidence in them high. One is the consumer’s right to know what his food contains. Another is the fact that having many people eat organic is valuable for the society … being healthier, it decreases national health care costs. A third reason is that the organic industry is growing very quickly and it makes no sense to jeopardize a rapidly growing area of business. All of these benefits are threatened if the consumer loses confidence in the organic standards.

What is needed is to restore the standards to the higher levels that existed before the Bush administration.

It would also be tremendous if there was a chance to remove the copyrighting of life forms including seeds. That abomination is also harming small farmers and locking us into unsafe soybeans, corn, and soon rice and other items.

First, the federal organic standards have not been “relaxed.” Rigorously enforced standards can and do go hand-in-hand with the growth the organic industry has experienced. The industry and OTA have long pushed for national organic regulations that consumers can rely on. As a result, organic agriculture and products remain the most strictly regulated, as well as the fastest growing, food system in the United States today.

Second, the approved use of a very limited number of non-organic natural and synthetic materials has always been recognized as being important in order to allow consumers organic choices for everyday products. This is why the Final Rule for USDA’s National Organic Program provided for 54 synthetic materials to be allowed in crop production; 31 synthetics to be allowed in livestock production, and 41 synthetics to be allowed in organic processing (along with 27 non-synthetic, non-agricultural materials such as baking soda).

Since 2002, only two additional synthetics have been allowed in crop production; seven additional synthetics have been allowed for livestock production, and eight additional synthetics have been allowed for use in organic processing. Moreover, one material has been removed, and one material was recommended for removal at the last National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) meeting on May 6, 2009 for a net gain of 15 new synthetic materials and 13 new non-organic natural materials approved for use since 2002.

Third, important work is being done to develop standards for emerging sectors of the organic industry. In Fall 2008, NOSB developed a recommendation on aquaculture and pet food standards. Similarly, in May 2009 NOSB took up the issue of personal care standards and committed to developing a recommendation, which it will present at its Fall 2009 meeting. The development of a rule around organic ruminants’ access to pasture is also well underway.

Finally, OTA would like to encourage a sense of optimism around the future of organic. Thanks to the support of the Obama administration, which has advocated for greater human and financial resources for the National Organic Program, this future looks bright. Such resources will help to ensure that organic continues to be the gold standard of eco-labels, and that it remains a symbol of integrity in which consumers can trust.