Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Warning: Label Fatigue
Townhall.com ^ | June 2, 2013 | Debra J. Saunders

Posted on 06/02/2013 4:04:14 AM PDT by Kaslin

Sen. Barbara Boxer says she is co-sponsoring the Genetically Engineered Food Right-to-Know Act in part because, with 26 states trying to pass legislation requiring said labeling, it makes more sense to have a uniform federal law. California's junior Democratic senator has a point. It's probably better for the folks who keep affordable food on American tables to have one big gun pointed at their collective head than 26 guns.

Except that most of these guns aren't loaded, including the big gun. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., introduced a farm bill provision, which was designed to protect states that require labeling for genetically engineered food or genetically modified organisms from lawsuits from big food and big chemical. The Senate voted on it last week. And it tanked, 71-27.

Sanders argued that "an overwhelming majority of Americans favor GMO labeling." I don't think so, not when health-conscious Californians rejected, if narrowly, Proposition 37, a GMO labeling ballot measure, last year. Boxer now stands as the rare senator who wants to make the Food and Drug Administration require labeling that her own voters rejected.

The pro-label lobby credits the industry's spending $44 million to defeat the measure. But money isn't everything in California politics. Just ask Gov. Meg Whitman.

I think Californians rejected the measure because they're sick of living in a State of Too Much Information. Since voters approved Proposition 65, the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, Californians have been bombarded with warning signs for 774 different chemicals. There are signs in hotels, in cars, at the gas station, all over supermarkets.

"It's like highlighting everything in a textbook," said Ken DeVore, California legislative director of the National Federation of Independent Business. "Nothing's highlighted when everything's highlighted."

For Boxer's part, she started with no co-sponsors. The Hill reports she now has more than 30 co-sponsors in the House and Senate. The FDA is considering approval for genetically modified salmon eggs for human consumption -- and that has delivered the support of two Alaska Republicans.

Though the overwhelming vote against the Sanders measure foreshadows defeat for Boxer's bill this year, she cannot lose for losing. Her argument sounds reasonable. As she noted in a press release, "Americans have the right to know what is in the food they eat so they can make the best choices for their families." Her bill wouldn't make packagers put a skull and crossbones on the label, she says -- just more information.

The problem is that Boxer's push to mandate labels for all GMO foods, unless they are exempted, is a recipe for information overload. "We see calls for mandatory labeling as a means to misinform consumers," countered Cathleen Enright, executive vice president of the Biotechnology Industry Organization, "at the least to misinform, at the most to scare" consumers by suggesting that modified foods are "unsafe or different."

To the contrary, modified is the norm. Humans have been modifying plants for millenniums. About 70 to 80 percent of processed foods are made with genetically engineered ingredients.

If the measure ever did become law, it would be a bonanza for lobbyists and lawmakers as industry groups bow and scrape before federal dignitaries to win exemptions for their goods. Boxer's bill, the San Francisco Chronicle's Stacy Finz reported, would exempt meat and dairy that is, though not modified, fed engineered grain. Proposition 37 would have exempted alcohol; Boxer's bill would not. Imagine the scramble to win indulgences for restaurant meals, dairy and drink.

If the public really has a right to know, there should be a warning label on all such measures that reads, simply: Shakedown.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; US: California
KEYWORDS: barbaraboxer; foodlabel; gmfoods; gmo; lobbyists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last
To: LearsFool
I admit to a reluctance at agreeing with those hippie fruit-loops.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. But the fruit loops are anti-business. I am pro science. But not junk science, from either side.

21 posted on 06/02/2013 6:10:47 AM PDT by FatherofFive (Islam is evil and must be eradicated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: bert

Few things have been more “modified” than Barbara Boxer’s face.


22 posted on 06/02/2013 6:13:13 AM PDT by andy58-in-nh (Cogito, ergo armatum sum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: andy58-in-nh

And it still causes nightmares.


23 posted on 06/02/2013 6:15:43 AM PDT by Lurkina.n.Learnin (President Obma; The Slumlord of the Rentseekers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Popman

GMO wheat has always been illegal in the USA.

Genetically Engineered wheat is probably what you meant.

The author of the article conflates the two either to mislead or out of ignorance.

There should be no labeling law. Purveyors of non-GMO food are already doing very well putting “non-GMO” on their labels.


24 posted on 06/02/2013 6:45:05 AM PDT by free me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I for one would like to see this labeling. That way I can make the choice of what I want to purchase and consume.


25 posted on 06/02/2013 7:11:42 AM PDT by Buffalo Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
"It's like highlighting everything in a textbook," said Ken DeVore, California legislative director of the National Federation of Independent Business. "Nothing's highlighted when everything's highlighted."

He is exactly correct. The Monsanto types of this world LOVE legislation like this because it gives them cover and lumps everybody in with them.

There is a vast difference between a GMO that simply changes the harvest date (Zaiger does this with fruit trees) and one that embeds a toxin (such as Bt corn). This is a situation that screams for PRIVATE certification and labeling, where the third party then becomes responsible for the assessment and information provided. Of course, that price for risk management would then be add to the cost and the product could then compete with the "heirloom" variety on an even footing. The system provides incentives to both competitors regarding the distinctions that make their products attractive to customers.

This kind of labeling is already starting to happen. The big guys don't like it. THAT is why Babbsie is jumping in on it.

26 posted on 06/02/2013 7:21:18 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (An economy is not a zero-sum game, but politics usually is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool
...conservatives see the Earth-worshipping hippie greenies protesting GMO food and react impulsively, rushing to defend "capitalism".

I have a similar reaction when I see the left promoting global warming, and I don't think that's just me being impulsive. To me the GMO issue feels a lot like the global warming issue.

27 posted on 06/02/2013 7:50:04 AM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick
To me the GMO issue feels a lot like the global warming issue.

Believe me, I know that feeling well! No doubt such a reaction makes Monsanto all warm and fuzzy inside.

Take a quick read of this comment, though, and see if it plants a seed of doubt. (No pun intended!)

It's beginning to look like the "scientific consensus" is as trustworthy on GMO (and our food supply in general) as it is on global warming. Seems to me that it's not Left or Right that controls science, but money and power.
28 posted on 06/02/2013 9:52:06 AM PDT by LearsFool ("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Label should read:

“Thank the lawyers for running up your food bill”


29 posted on 06/02/2013 10:13:15 AM PDT by P.O.E. (Pray for America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool

We’re supposed to be scared of the weather and now the food supply too? Until someone shows me the proof I’m not going down that rabbit hole. I’m especially wary of conspiracy theories that cast producers and innovators as the villains.


30 posted on 06/02/2013 3:32:29 PM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick
We’re supposed to be scared of the weather and now the food supply too? Until someone shows me the proof I’m not going down that rabbit hole.

Actually, you should be asking for proof that GM food is SAFE. The pro man-made global warmists and the GM-food-is-safe crowd both use junk science or no science at all.

31 posted on 06/02/2013 5:40:02 PM PDT by FatherofFive (Islam is evil and must be eradicated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson