Look Out Monsanto: Campaigns to Label Genetically Engineered Foods Are Heating Up

[xchrom]

http://www.alternet.org/food/look-out-monsanto-campaigns-label-genetically-engineered-foods-are-heating



On November 6, after spending $46 million burying California's voters under an avalanche of deception , Monsanto and their buddies in the pesticide and junk food business declared victory. They had defeated the "right to know", and successfully protected their "right" to keep you in the dark about whether your food is genetically engineered.

Jennifer Hatcher, senior vice president of government and public affairs for the anti-labeling Food Marketing Institute, breathed a sigh of relief after Prop 37 narrowly lost, saying: "This gives us hope that you can... defeat a ballot initiative and go directly to the voters." But she also expressed concern: "We hope we don't have too many of them, because you can't keep doing that over and over again."

If Ms. Hatcher wants to keep labeling suppressed, it looks like she may be in for a rough couple of years. Because what Monsanto and its allies hadn't counted on was that despite all their lies and deception, it's actually pretty hard to convince people that they shouldn't be allowed to know what they're eating. And although $46 million managed to put out one fire, it seems to have started about 30 new ones.

Indeed, efforts are already underway to put a similar initiative on the ballot in Washington for the 2013 election (where San Juan County voters chose on November 6 to make growing GMOs illegal in their county). And organizers in 30 other states have also begun building labeling campaigns, under the banner of the Coalition of States for Mandatory GMO labeling.

[Scootaloo]

1. My thing is...

Proposition 37 wouldn't have actually enlightened you as to what you were getting. Labeling wouldn't have been required to provide any information other than "this has been altered." Even if it had, what sort of information would you expect to get from it?

While I understand the desire to know what you're putting in your mouth, prop 37 wouldn't have done much in that direction. Plus, another bit of trouble is that "genetic engineering" would technically include any food that had a human hand in varietal development. it's an excessively broad term.

A better angle would be turning the battle against the patenting of organisms, genes, and genomes. That's the core of the problem right there, and doing away with that ability would undercut the very problems that the proponents of prop 37 were hoping[;/i] to address.