Spending Soars for Anti-GMO Label Lobbying
'These numbers speak for themselves,' says labeling advocate. 'They also speak to everything that's wrong with our government.'
Food and biotechnology giants are accelerating their efforts to thwart legislation that mandates labels for food made with genetically modified ingredients, or GMOs, according to a new analysis by the Environmental Working Group released Tuesday.
In the first quarter of 2014 alone, major food and biotech companies disclosed over $9 million in lobbying expenditures that made reference to GMO labeling, nearly matching the $9.3 million spent in 2013 fighting against similar initiatives in 2013.
According to Environmental Working Group (EWG) policy analyst Libby Foley, this "burst" of political spending can be seen largely as an effort to "muster Congressional support" for a House bill that was introduced in April that would block states from requiring GMO labeling on food packages. As states nationwide have begun to consider ballot proposals that support labeling transparency, Bill H.R.4432--dubbed the Deny Americans the Right to Know (DARK) Act by critics--threatens those efforts.
Twenty-two of the 26 members of Congress who co-sponsored the DARK Act reportedly received campaign contributions from Super PACs representing the major food and biotech companies, with the lead sponsor, Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.), being the second-largest recipient of those contributions. Further, 8 of those representatives, including Pompeo, serve on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over GMO labeling.
"The DARK Act is a blatant attack on consumer and states' rights, and a clear indication of just how desperate corporations are to protect their profits at the expense of public health and basic democracy," Katherine Paul, communications director for the Organic Consumers Association, told Common Dreams. However, she noted that the growing support for grassroots labeling initiatives makes it is clear that "corporations are losing this battle, despite their lavish spending."
In May, Vermont became the first state to require GMO labeling, following the earlier passage of similar laws in Connecticut and Maine, which both require a number of other states to follow suit before they are implemented. Oregon has also placed GMO labeling on its November ballot, and in Colorado citizens are gathering signatures for a similar initiative.
In addition to promoting a legislative block on these 'right-to-know' initiatives, this increased political spending roughly coincided with the launch last summer of an industry-backed "information" campaign called GMO Answers. Executives from Monsanto, Dow AgroSciences, and Dupont, among others, have fielded over 600 questions in their online forum meant to "combat consumer fears," Reuters reports.
According to the EWG analysis, the $9 million tally excludes any spending by major GMO producers, including Monsanto, Syngenta and Dow. Their disclosures cited general advocacy on "biotechnology and biotech product issues," "biotech innovation and regulation" and "biotechnology acceptance"--language that, according to Foley, "could easily include [GMO] labeling, but that wouldn't be obvious to the general public."
"The Gene Giants and Corporate Agribusiness are stepping up their lobbying in Washington, D.C. in order to keep consumers in the dark about whether their food has been genetically engineered or not; to maintain their routine fraudulent practice of labeling GMO-tainted products as 'natural'; and to stamp out state's rights such as Vermont and others to pass laws requiring mandatory labeling of GMOs," said Ronnie Cummins, OCA national director. "Despite their frantic efforts, Big Food is losing the battle for the hearts and minds of the American consumer."
Among those major food and beverage companies which did report spending big against GMO labeling initiatives, Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo together spent almost $4 million in the first quarter of 2014. The multi-billion dollar lobby group, the Grocery Manufacturer's Association--of which both soda giants are members--disclosed an additional $1.2 million in lobbying expenditures.
Bayer Corporation, which is a producer of GMO seeds, reported over $2 million in lobby costs associated with GMO labeling.
"These numbers speak for themselves," Paul continued. "They also speak to everything that's wrong with our government. More than 60 other countries require mandatory labeling of GMOs, and 93 percent of Americans have told their elected officials that they want this same right."
EWG produced this graph to compare industry spending with lobbying expenditures by the grassroots pro-labeling initiatives:
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just two days to go in our Spring Campaign, we're falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Food and biotechnology giants are accelerating their efforts to thwart legislation that mandates labels for food made with genetically modified ingredients, or GMOs, according to a new analysis by the Environmental Working Group released Tuesday.
In the first quarter of 2014 alone, major food and biotech companies disclosed over $9 million in lobbying expenditures that made reference to GMO labeling, nearly matching the $9.3 million spent in 2013 fighting against similar initiatives in 2013.
According to Environmental Working Group (EWG) policy analyst Libby Foley, this "burst" of political spending can be seen largely as an effort to "muster Congressional support" for a House bill that was introduced in April that would block states from requiring GMO labeling on food packages. As states nationwide have begun to consider ballot proposals that support labeling transparency, Bill H.R.4432--dubbed the Deny Americans the Right to Know (DARK) Act by critics--threatens those efforts.
Twenty-two of the 26 members of Congress who co-sponsored the DARK Act reportedly received campaign contributions from Super PACs representing the major food and biotech companies, with the lead sponsor, Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.), being the second-largest recipient of those contributions. Further, 8 of those representatives, including Pompeo, serve on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over GMO labeling.
"The DARK Act is a blatant attack on consumer and states' rights, and a clear indication of just how desperate corporations are to protect their profits at the expense of public health and basic democracy," Katherine Paul, communications director for the Organic Consumers Association, told Common Dreams. However, she noted that the growing support for grassroots labeling initiatives makes it is clear that "corporations are losing this battle, despite their lavish spending."
In May, Vermont became the first state to require GMO labeling, following the earlier passage of similar laws in Connecticut and Maine, which both require a number of other states to follow suit before they are implemented. Oregon has also placed GMO labeling on its November ballot, and in Colorado citizens are gathering signatures for a similar initiative.
In addition to promoting a legislative block on these 'right-to-know' initiatives, this increased political spending roughly coincided with the launch last summer of an industry-backed "information" campaign called GMO Answers. Executives from Monsanto, Dow AgroSciences, and Dupont, among others, have fielded over 600 questions in their online forum meant to "combat consumer fears," Reuters reports.
According to the EWG analysis, the $9 million tally excludes any spending by major GMO producers, including Monsanto, Syngenta and Dow. Their disclosures cited general advocacy on "biotechnology and biotech product issues," "biotech innovation and regulation" and "biotechnology acceptance"--language that, according to Foley, "could easily include [GMO] labeling, but that wouldn't be obvious to the general public."
"The Gene Giants and Corporate Agribusiness are stepping up their lobbying in Washington, D.C. in order to keep consumers in the dark about whether their food has been genetically engineered or not; to maintain their routine fraudulent practice of labeling GMO-tainted products as 'natural'; and to stamp out state's rights such as Vermont and others to pass laws requiring mandatory labeling of GMOs," said Ronnie Cummins, OCA national director. "Despite their frantic efforts, Big Food is losing the battle for the hearts and minds of the American consumer."
Among those major food and beverage companies which did report spending big against GMO labeling initiatives, Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo together spent almost $4 million in the first quarter of 2014. The multi-billion dollar lobby group, the Grocery Manufacturer's Association--of which both soda giants are members--disclosed an additional $1.2 million in lobbying expenditures.
Bayer Corporation, which is a producer of GMO seeds, reported over $2 million in lobby costs associated with GMO labeling.
"These numbers speak for themselves," Paul continued. "They also speak to everything that's wrong with our government. More than 60 other countries require mandatory labeling of GMOs, and 93 percent of Americans have told their elected officials that they want this same right."
EWG produced this graph to compare industry spending with lobbying expenditures by the grassroots pro-labeling initiatives:
Food and biotechnology giants are accelerating their efforts to thwart legislation that mandates labels for food made with genetically modified ingredients, or GMOs, according to a new analysis by the Environmental Working Group released Tuesday.
In the first quarter of 2014 alone, major food and biotech companies disclosed over $9 million in lobbying expenditures that made reference to GMO labeling, nearly matching the $9.3 million spent in 2013 fighting against similar initiatives in 2013.
According to Environmental Working Group (EWG) policy analyst Libby Foley, this "burst" of political spending can be seen largely as an effort to "muster Congressional support" for a House bill that was introduced in April that would block states from requiring GMO labeling on food packages. As states nationwide have begun to consider ballot proposals that support labeling transparency, Bill H.R.4432--dubbed the Deny Americans the Right to Know (DARK) Act by critics--threatens those efforts.
Twenty-two of the 26 members of Congress who co-sponsored the DARK Act reportedly received campaign contributions from Super PACs representing the major food and biotech companies, with the lead sponsor, Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.), being the second-largest recipient of those contributions. Further, 8 of those representatives, including Pompeo, serve on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over GMO labeling.
"The DARK Act is a blatant attack on consumer and states' rights, and a clear indication of just how desperate corporations are to protect their profits at the expense of public health and basic democracy," Katherine Paul, communications director for the Organic Consumers Association, told Common Dreams. However, she noted that the growing support for grassroots labeling initiatives makes it is clear that "corporations are losing this battle, despite their lavish spending."
In May, Vermont became the first state to require GMO labeling, following the earlier passage of similar laws in Connecticut and Maine, which both require a number of other states to follow suit before they are implemented. Oregon has also placed GMO labeling on its November ballot, and in Colorado citizens are gathering signatures for a similar initiative.
In addition to promoting a legislative block on these 'right-to-know' initiatives, this increased political spending roughly coincided with the launch last summer of an industry-backed "information" campaign called GMO Answers. Executives from Monsanto, Dow AgroSciences, and Dupont, among others, have fielded over 600 questions in their online forum meant to "combat consumer fears," Reuters reports.
According to the EWG analysis, the $9 million tally excludes any spending by major GMO producers, including Monsanto, Syngenta and Dow. Their disclosures cited general advocacy on "biotechnology and biotech product issues," "biotech innovation and regulation" and "biotechnology acceptance"--language that, according to Foley, "could easily include [GMO] labeling, but that wouldn't be obvious to the general public."
"The Gene Giants and Corporate Agribusiness are stepping up their lobbying in Washington, D.C. in order to keep consumers in the dark about whether their food has been genetically engineered or not; to maintain their routine fraudulent practice of labeling GMO-tainted products as 'natural'; and to stamp out state's rights such as Vermont and others to pass laws requiring mandatory labeling of GMOs," said Ronnie Cummins, OCA national director. "Despite their frantic efforts, Big Food is losing the battle for the hearts and minds of the American consumer."
Among those major food and beverage companies which did report spending big against GMO labeling initiatives, Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo together spent almost $4 million in the first quarter of 2014. The multi-billion dollar lobby group, the Grocery Manufacturer's Association--of which both soda giants are members--disclosed an additional $1.2 million in lobbying expenditures.
Bayer Corporation, which is a producer of GMO seeds, reported over $2 million in lobby costs associated with GMO labeling.
"These numbers speak for themselves," Paul continued. "They also speak to everything that's wrong with our government. More than 60 other countries require mandatory labeling of GMOs, and 93 percent of Americans have told their elected officials that they want this same right."
EWG produced this graph to compare industry spending with lobbying expenditures by the grassroots pro-labeling initiatives: