Just put the truth on labels. Consumers can sort it out.
Where grown.
Whether GMO or not.
Some people will care. Some will not. Give them the info.
Inferentially, you raise a very important point. Whether and how much to label are BIG issues. The fact is, we do not require too much labelling because consumers won't be bothered to read it and are easily confused by too much detail. Remember, this is a country in which a majority voted for BO. Morons. And you want to confuse them with detailed labelling?
So ... the choice of what and how much to label is not easy. The core principle is that labels should be simple, clear, and based on clearly demonstrated hazards. Since there has NEVER been a case of adverse human health effects from GM foods, there is no justification for labelling. The anti-GMO radicals want labelling precisely because they want to create an imputation of risk, as people assume that labels do, in fact, relate to tangible regulatory findings. In other words, the radicals deliberately want the labels to mislead. That is what the fuss is about.
To call the garbage that the radicals pass around junk science is an insult to junk everywhere. The science on this is clear, and overwhelming. A science based system will label a thousand other things long before it will label GMOs.