National labels better: Measure 27 puts Oregon out front - and alone

the Register Guard ^ | 5 Oct 02 | A Register Guard editorial

[Glutton]

Until the biotech giants tromped into the campaign, Measure 27 on the November ballot looked simple. This well-intentioned but impractical proposal would require that all genetically engineered foods sold in or distributed from Oregon be labelled as such - not a bad idea at the national level, but potentially troublesome for a single state. The lavishly funded campaign against Measure 27 has created a powerful temptation to vote yes - but not quite powerful enough. Oregonians should follow their heads, not their hearts, and reluctantly vote no.

Monsanto, DuPont and other producers of genetically engineered agricultural products have raised $4.6 million to fight Measure 27, with more to come. The opponents have an unenviable job. It's tough to argue that consumers shouldn't have information about the food they buy, especially when surveys show that most Americans want such information.

It's tougher yet to argue that a labeling requirement is not needed because genetically engineered foods are safe. If that's the case, then there should be no objection to labeling. Existing product labels list ingredients, all of them presumably safe. Indeed, because two-thirds or more of the products on grocery shelves contain genetically engineered ingredients, labels would inform consumers that they've been eating those products for years without ill effects. Instead, opponents of Measure 27 claim that foods labeled as genetically engineered would bear a stigma. The biotech industry's real problem is the stigma, not the label.

The difficulty of making these arguments has led opponents down some twisted paths - claiming, for instance, that Measure 27 is sponsored by organic food producers who stand to gain from having competing products labeled as genetically engineered. If Measure 27's only effect would be to give a boost to Oregon's thriving organic food industry, voters should bring it on. It's bizarre to see the Goliaths of global agribusiness attacking the profit motives of Oregon's organic Davids.

Opponents' only strong suit consists of technical and practical objections to Measure 27. It would unavoidably impose burdensome testing and enforcement programs on food producers and the state. It would discourage out-of-state food producers from selling their products in Oregon. Exporters might avoid Oregon ports if a labeling requirement were imposed.

These potential problems can't be ignored. They stem from the fact that Oregon, as the only state with a labeling law, would be out of step with the national market for food products. A national labeling program would be far preferable to Measure 27's go-it-alone approach. Measure 27 asks voters to weigh the risk of getting out front on the issue of genetically engineered foods. Oregon might lead other states to adopt labeling laws of their own, thereby building pressure for a national standard. Or the state might be left for years with a strict one-of-a-kind labeling requirement, for which consumers would ultimately pay by means of higher prices and narrower choices.

The dilemma is blunted by the fact that the USDA has adopted new national labeling regulations for organic foods. The rules bar foods containing genetically engineered ingredients from bearing the organic label. Consumers in Oregon and elsewhere who are determined to avoid genetically engineered foods will soon gain reliable guidance from labels conforming to a uniform national standard.

A similar national standard would be the most efficient and inexpensive way to respond to the concerns that gave rise to Measure 27. Those concerns won't go away if the measure is defeated - many countries, including Japan and the 15 nations of the European Union, already have labeling requirements, and the United States will catch up eventually. Despite the temptation to defy the biotech industry's attempts to influence an Oregon election, Measure 27 deserves a no vote.

[dixiechick2000]

The only state with a labeling law, the only state with universal health care, the only state with legal assisted suicide, medicinal marijuana...

This is ridiculous!

[dts32041]

They would have to label all food, genetically altered.

We humans have been gentically altering our food since the 1600's.

Very few native stock left, must are preserved on special farms.

Idiots.

It is like when you ask an organic farmer how they fertilize their crop they won't tell you.

Think about that one.

[dixiechick2000]

I heard a great debate today on a local radio talk show while I was in the car. The host made the same point you did and the guest, try as he might, could not put forth an argument that refuted it.

It would be easier to label all of the ungenetically altered food. That would take about 5 minutes.

"Idiots."

That's it!
As someone said on another thread, Oregon is making California look good. I think that's the result of some of the Cali refugees that moved here in the late 80's to mid '90's and brought the "fruit and nut" mindset with them. This was a nice state that started going downhill at a very fast pace 8 years ago.