RSN August 14 Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

"The nation's largest agribusiness and biotech companies are pouring millions of dollars into California to stop the first-ever initiative to require special labels on foods made with genetically modified ingredients, a sign of their determination to keep the measure from sparking a nationwide movement."

The nation's largest agribusiness and biotech companies are pouring millions of dollars into California to stop the first-ever initiative to require the labeling of GMO foods. (photo: AP)
The nation's largest agribusiness and biotech companies are pouring millions of dollars into California to stop the first-ever initiative to require the labeling of GMO foods. (photo: AP)



Monsanto, Dupont, Cargill Spend Big to Defeat GMO Labeling Initiative

By Garance Burke, Associated Press

16 August 12

 

he nation's largest agribusiness and biotech companies are pouring millions of dollars into California to stop the first-ever initiative to require special labels on foods made with genetically modified ingredients, a sign of their determination to keep the measure from sparking a nationwide movement.

So far, farming giants such as Monsanto, Dupont Pioneer and Cargill have contributed nearly $25 million to defeat the proposal, with much of that cash coming in the past few days. It's nearly 10 times the amount raised by backers of the ballot measure who say California's health-conscious shoppers want more information about the food they eat.

With nearly three months to go before the November election, the measure's opponents appear to be following the previous blueprint developed by major industries to defeat ballot initiatives in the nation's largest consumer market: Raise large sums of money to swamp the airwaves with negative advertising.

The tactic previously worked for the pharmaceutical industry. And in California's June primary, the tobacco industry helped defeat an initiative supported by cycling legend Lance Armstrong that would have raised cigarette taxes to fund cancer research.

The food initiative, known as Proposition 37, is one of 11 statewide measures to go before California voters in November. It would require most processed foods to bear a label by 2014 letting shoppers know if the items contain ingredients derived from plants with DNA altered with genes from other plants, animals, viruses or bacteria.

If the proposal passes, California would be the first state to require labeling of such a wide range of foods containing genetically modified organisms, or GMOs.

It also could force a major production shift in the industry, given that Californians eat about 12 percent of all food consumed in the U.S., said Daniel Sumner, an agricultural economist at the University of California, Davis.

Supporters of similar legislation in more than a dozen states say the intent is to give consumers more information about what they are eating and to foster transparency and trust in the food system.

"It's an epic food fight between the pesticide companies and consumers who want to know what's in their food," said Stacy Malkan, media director for the California Right to Know campaign, which by Monday had amassed about $2.4 million to promote the initiative, largely from consumer advocates, organic farmers, organic food manufacturers and health food retailers.

Major agricultural groups and the processed food industry oppose stricter labeling, saying it risks sowing fear and confusion among shoppers. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has said genetically engineered crops, or GE crops, pose no greater health risks than traditional foods.

The latest influx of cash seeking to defeat Proposition 37 puts the coalition of farming groups, food producers, pesticide companies and taxpayer organizations in a good position to fund media and mailers saying that grocery bills would increase if the initiative succeeds, said Kathy Fairbanks, spokeswoman for the No on 37 campaign.

Monsanto, the largest contributor, gave $4.2 million this week.

"Everyone is impacted because everyone buys groceries, and one of the impacts is going to be higher grocery bills," Fairbanks said. "Prop. 37 leaves consumers with the incorrect impression that there is something wrong with GE crops, when that is not true."

Opponents also said new labeling rules could pose a future burden on taxpayers if Californians have to pay more for state inspectors to verify that labels are appropriately applied, and could leave the state open to lawsuits.

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+21 # Phlippinout 2012-08-16 10:40
Wouldnt it be awesome if we actually had a government that cared about us?
 
 
+13 # jwb110 2012-08-16 11:04
I maintain that the GMO labeling is a desire to not impinge on the right of free exercise of religion. For those citizens who have dietary restriction, Seventh Day Adventist, Orthodox Jews,etc., the splicing of genes from animals into grain products is very important. Any of these groups are put at risk of not be allowed to know whether they are being forced to not recognize their religious tenants and put them at risk with the God in which they believe.
From the consumer POV checking to see if items are
considered Kosher may be the only way to determine if GMO grains are being used in food products.
 
 
0 # colvictoria 2012-08-16 20:18
This GMO issue is very important but let's not forget another dire situation. They predict that the US will see 2 more decades of serious drought. Our corn crops this year are down 30% soy didn't fare well either and many heads of cattle died because there just wasn't enough food or water to sustain them.
For all the talk about GMO the sad truth is that the US may experience a very serious food crisis.
 
 
+6 # Eliza D 2012-08-18 08:37
Does anyone else find it supremely ironic that Monsanto et al. have 25 million to lobby against food labeling, but are crying poverty when it comes to labeling food so that we know how unnaturally it was produced? I'm having a hard time believing it would cost more than 25 million to roll out the paper presses once to make new labels. And aren't we and our children worth it?
 
 
0 # turnright 2012-09-07 21:26
I like the part where the symbols count at the bottom of the window says I have 70 synmbols left, and then in submitting the comment I am told that it is too long.

That's modern technology at near its best.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN