Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The California Ballot Initiative: Standing Up to Monsanto
"If you put a label on genetically engineered food you might as well put a skull and crossbones on it." - Norman Braksick, president of Asgrow Seed Co., a subsidiary of Monsanto, quoted in the Kansas City Star, March 7, 1994
photo: MillionsAgainstMonsanto
Monsanto and Food Inc.’s stranglehold over the nation’s food and farming system is about to be challenged in a food fight that will largely determine the future of American agriculture. A growing corps of organic food and health activists in California—supported by consumers and farmers across the nation—are boldly standing up to Monsanto and its minions, taking the first steps to expose the widespread contamination of non-organic grocery store foods with Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), and moving to implement mandatory GMO labeling through a grassroots-powered Citizens Ballot Initiative process.
This month, lawyers representing a broad and unprecedented health, environmental, and consumer coalition, including the Organic Consumers Association, Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soap, Center for Food Safety, Mercola.com, Nature’s Path, Natural News.com, LabelGMOs.org, Food Democracy Now, and the Institute for Responsible Technology, are filing papers with the California Attorney General’s office to place a Citizens Initiative on the Ballot in November 2012 that would require mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods and food ingredients. If California voters pass this ballot initiative in 2012, it will likely be the beginning of the end for Monsanto and genetically engineered food in the U.S.
According to Zuri Starr, a Southern California field organizer for the Organic Consumers Association, “The California Ballot Initiative is perhaps our last chance to stop the Biotech Express, to overthrow Biotechnology’s dictatorial regime and build a safe and sustainable food and farming system based upon the ethical principles of consumer choice and BioDemocracy.”
Moving the Battleground
After twenty years of biotech bullying and force-feeding unlabeled and hazardous genetically engineered (GE) foods to animals and humans—aided and abetted by the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations— a critical mass of food and health activists have decided it’s time to move beyond small skirmishes and losing battles and go on the offensive. It’s time to move the food fight over labeling GE food from the unfavorable terrain of Washington D.C. and Capital Hill, where Monsanto and Food Inc. exercise near-dictatorial control, to California, the heartland of organic food and farming and anti-GMO sentiment, where 80-85% of the body politic, according to recent polls, support mandatory labeling.
The trillion-dollar biotech, supermarket, and food industry are acutely conscious of the fact that North American consumers, like their European counterparts, are wary and suspicious of genetically engineered food. Consumers understand you don't want your food safety or environmental sustainability decisions to be made by out-of-control chemical and biotech companies like Monsanto, Dow, or DuPont--the same people who brought us toxic pesticides and industrial chemicals, Agent Orange, carcinogenic food additives, PCBs, and now global warming. Biotech, food, and grocery corporations are alarmed by the fact that every poll over the last 20 years has shown that 85-95% of American consumers want mandatory labels on genetically engineered foods.
Europe Shows Labels Drive GMOs off the Market
Why are there basically no genetically engineered foods or crops anywhere in Europe, while 75% of U.S. supermarket foods—including many so-called “natural” foods—are GE-tainted? The answer is simple. In Europe genetically engineered foods and ingredients have to be labeled. In the U.S. they do not. Up until now, in North America, Monsanto and the Biotechnocrats have enjoyed free reign to secretly lace non-organic foods with gene-spliced viruses, bacteria, antibiotic-resistant marker genes, and foreign DNA—mutant “Frankenfoods” shown to severely damage the health of animals, plants, and other living organisms in numerous scientific studies.
Monsanto and their allies understand the threat that truth-in-labeling poses for GMOs. As soon as genetically engineered foods start to be labeled in the U.S., millions of consumers will start to read these labels and react. They’ll complain to grocery store managers and companies, they’ll talk to their family and friends. They’ll start switching to foods that are organic or at least GMO-free. Once enough consumers start complaining about GE foods and food ingredients; stores will eventually stop selling them; and farmers will stop planting them.
Genetically engineered foods have absolutely no benefits for consumers or the environment, only hazards. This is why Monsanto and their friends in the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations have prevented consumer GMO truth-in-labeling laws from ever getting a public discussion, much less coming to a vote in Congress. And this is why activists are launching the California Ballot Initiative. By moving the battle from the federal level to the state level, by employing one of the last remaining tools of direct grassroots democracy in the USA, the ballot initiative, concerned consumers can bypass Washington and regain their fundamental right to know what they are eating.
Passing mandatory GMO labeling in just one large state, California, where there is tremendous opposition to GE foods as well as a multi-billion dollar organic food industry, will ultimately have the same impact as a national labeling law.
If California food and health activists succeed in putting a GMO labeling initiative on the ballot in 2012 and the voters pass it, the biotech and food industry will face an intractable dilemma. Will they dare put labels on their branded food products in just one state, California, admitting these products contain or may contain genetically engineered ingredients, while withholding this ingredient label information in the other states? Will they allow their organic and non-GMO competitors to drive down their GMO-tainted brand market share? The answer to both of these questions is likely no. What most of them will do is start to shift to organic and non-GMO ingredients, so as to avoid what the Monsanto executive 16 years ago aptly described as the “skull and crossbones” label.
California Label Laws Have National Impact: Proposition 65
A clear indication of the impact of warning labels on consumer products was established in California in 1986 when voters passed, over the strenuous opposition of industry, a ballot initiative called Proposition 65, which required consumer products with potential cancer-causing ingredients to bear warning labels. Rather than label their products sold in California as likely carcinogenic, most companies reformulated their product ingredients so as to avoid warning labels altogether, and they did this on a national scale, not just in California.
This same scenario will likely unfold again in California in 2012. Can you imagine Kellogg’s selling its Corn Flakes breakfast cereal in California with a label that admits it contains or may contain genetically engineered corn? This would be the kiss of death for their iconic brand. How about Kraft Boca Burgers admitting that their soybean ingredients are genetically modified? How about the entire non-organic food industry (including many so-called “natural” brands) admitting that a large proportion of their products are GE-tainted? Once food manufacturers and supermarkets are forced to come clean and label genetically engineered products, they will likely remove all GE ingredients, to avoid the “skull and crossbones” effect, just like the food industry in the EU has done. In the wake of this development American farmers will convert millions of acres of GE crops to non-GMO or organic varieties.
Finally consumers will be able to tell the difference between organic food (labeled as “organic” and thereby GMO-free); natural food (which will not have not have a GMO label), and bogus “natural” food (which will be required to display the label “contains or may contain GMOs”).
What Now? The Campaign Needs Volunteers and Money
Monsanto, the Farm Bureau, and the Grocery Manufacturers Association are already gearing up to fight against the California Ballot Initiative. They will literally spend millions to spread lies and disinformation that GMO foods and crops are perfectly safe; and that we need more, not less GMO food and biofuel crops in this era of climate change and growing population, etc. As the campaign progresses, they will lie and say that GMO labels will be costly to the food industry and raise food prices. We’ll have to counter these lies of course, now and throughout the campaign, but first of all we must make sure that the 2012 GE Food Labeling Initiative actually gets on the ballot.
When corporations like Monsanto decide to launch a ballot initiative in California, or other states, one of the first things they do is hand over a couple of million dollars to a professional petition gathering business. Since we don’t have a couple of million dollars to spare however, like Monsanto does, we’re going to have to rely on an army of volunteers to gather signatures. These volunteers can be trained and coordinated by our small, but highly dedicated and experienced, paid campaign staff and consultants, but for the most part we must drive this campaign forward with volunteer labor.
In order to hit the ground running in December, gathering 500-700,000 petition signatures of registered voters to put this measure on the ballot, we need your help now. We need an army of thousands of volunteer petition gatherers to step forward in California. And we need money. OCA and our allied lobbying organization, the Organic Consumers Fund, estimate that we need to raise at least $60,000 over the next month in order to effectively play our part in the California Ballot Initiative Campaign, to pay our staff, consultants, and other campaign expenses.
If you want more information, or if you are willing to volunteer to collect petition signatures, or donate money to this campaign click here.
It’s time to take back control over our food and farming system. It’s time to stand up to Monsanto and the Biotech Bullies. Join us!
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
37 Comments so far
Show All"Monsanto, the Farm Bureau, and the Grocery Manufacturers Association are already gearing up to fight against the California Ballot Initiative. They will literally spend millions to spread lies and disinformation that GMO foods and crops are perfectly safe; and that we need more, not less GMO food and biofuel crops..."
These are steps they will take to directly confront the initiative. But what steps will they be taking in Washington to get around the initiative with pre-emptive legislation and agency rule-making? And what, if anything, can be done about that?
If Global Warming is real, won't we need some kind of GMO's to cotinue to feed ourselves in a world with less water, and higher UV levels?? Or are we just supposed to lay down and die.
In places in Northern Africa GMOs are the only thing that will grow, and be insect resistent to get the crop to the humans.
>^^<
No.
And no.
And not so.
GMO's are not generally hardy, and bring on all sorts of starvation under many kinds of conditions. They are largely dependent on massive chemical bombing of the land: herbicides, pesticides, and synthetic fertilizers.
What has worked in the desert of Africa and other places where it has been tried is to actually help the land rebuild and return to heirloom crops that are closer ancestral strains that have broader genetic diversity and were cultivated with less mechanical irrigation and far, far less chemical. It requires some education and some labor, but far less than most of the useless work that people get wrapped up in almost all the time.
The point is not that someone could not conceivably make some GM crop that might be superior in some way. Of course that could happen. But if it did, that would not relieve the problem of the land itself. Furthermore, any GM crop would and does suffer from an extremely narrow bottleneck: there is little diversity in Green Revolution hybrids, but there is pretty much zero diversity in a GM crop. So there are inherent problems, and the GM crops are consequently extremely susceptible to changing conditions, including pests and climactic shifts.
Moreover, the companies that design these, by and large, are interested in making a profit: therefore they design plants and animals that profit them, not the farmer and not the consumer. Some of these predatory policies are extremely aggressive. Witness for instance Monsanto's suits of farmers whose crops it has ruined:
In Canada, Monsanto successfully sued the neighbors of its clients. Why? The "Roundup ready" canola from their clients' fields hybridized with that in the neighbors' fields, so the neighbors had Roundup Ready genes in their canola, all without paying. Of course, Monsanto had made their canola in such a way that the offspring would be sterile, so that farmers would have to purchase seed from Monsanto every year.
Of course, from the POV of Monsanto, the demise of those farmers constitutes a victory. Many, many farmers in India have already died from the conditions proposed and created in a great degree by Monsanto (Google Vandana Shiva and suicides for this).
The reality of global warming makes the total or at least general abandonment of the GM food project as it now exists more critical than it might otherwise be.
Not only all that but Monsanto crops do not produce viable, fertile seeds. Farmers have to go back to Monsanto every year to PURCHASE seeds instead of reserving (non GMO) seeds for next year planting.
Personally, I'm OK with an identification label on GM foods as long as Organic Foods get a label that says, "This product has been organically grown and will be sold at a higher price even though Science has shown that it has no greater nutritional or health value than conventionally grown agriculture."
Such a label will never be needed--until--all foods shun non-natural 'cides and fertilizers.
Such a label would be fraudulant since not all organic products are more expensive than non-organic products.
Many retailers post comparison unit prices of products, allowing even the most arithmetic-challenged shoppers to know which products cost more than others. Requiring all retailers to post such data makes more sense than erroneously telling consumers organic is always costlier.
I recently purchased a box of organic penne pasta that was less expensive than the non-organic brands and quite delicious. Until the 20th century, humanity's foods were all organic in that nothing synthetic was appiled, although organic poisons and fertilizers certainly were. Large scale mechanized farming is very recent, revolutionized with the introduction of the diesel tractor. and millions were driven from the land to the cities. Stepping back to look at the cause and effect of mechanized industrial agriculure and how it relates to our Dilemma ought to generate ideas regarding how a new paradigm should be structured and its goals.
Science continues to evolve in socio-environmental terms. You are cordially invited to live next to a CAFO, under the fly path of arial agrotoxin delivery systems; downstream from these; watch first hand the agrotoxin dependency of mass monoculture; the green desertification of the "green revolution" in the wake ongoing displacement of entire populations in the rest of the world. Sustainable? Hey, your choice, right?. Didn't know you owned all that land! But hey, don't mind me I'm just a 'commoner' - - food systems and the environment that supports them are the commons. Cancer anyone?
"Science has shown that it has no greater nutritional or health value than conventionally grown agriculture". What science? I beg to differ.
So what if girls as young as 7 are going into adolescence because of hormones in milk. So what if pesticides are found in and on much of our produce. Those chemicals are meant for insects and cannot have any effect on humans.
There is a lot of evidence that organic foods are better for you. Even mainstream doctors like Dr. Oz recommend organic greens, milk, and thin skinned fruit, for instance.
We are in agreement that the label "Organic" should be subject to verification and site inspection at the farms, as it is in Europe. And I would add that organic foods should be subsidized to lower their prices, just as commodities grown by large agribusiness enterprises are.
That's democratic? Organics for the rich, and GM for the rest of us? Soilent Green here we come! >^^<
When the market is strong for fresh organic food, the price is not higher and often the quality is better simply from tasting the produce. Here in Sacramento we have wonderful farmers' markets and some groceries that test their produce before sale not calling it organic, but giving assurances it is not covered with poisons. Monsanto is a corporate criminal. Europe has always been much stronger about GMO's because their agriculture is not massive like the US. More important than veggies are milk products. Organic fresh milk is readily available and should be used especially with children. I will vote for the proposition and hope it wins.
I just need food that'll sustain me, that I can afford.. like most people! >^^<
Eliminating Monsanto's monopolization of seed WILL make everybody's food more affordable.
I'd rather have sustainable food.
Monsanto's GMO seed has largely failed to deliver on its promise.
Another conservative liar. No surprise there. Conservatives are liars to the core. Every one of them.
And they have absolutely no shame.
Crazy Bastards like to eat too!! lol
>^^<
re: "even though Science has shown that it has no greater nutritional or health value"
The is a specious claim at best, but contradicts completely all scientific studies that I have looked into. And what is 'Science' with a big S? Is that some new corporate brand? Last time I checked, 'Science' doesn't go around making claims, scientists do.
Secondly, the low costs of our 'conventional' (big misnomer) agriculture have huge externalized costs to society elsewhere, so the entire idea you attempt to bring up is not only intrinsically flawed, it flies right in the face of all facts. The price to the biosphere that 'conventional' (misnomer) agriculture entails is impossible to measure, but grave indeed: Just ask Science.
And 'Irritator', if you actually give a damn, and aren't just another Monsanto shill, you should do some research, or watch a film such as Food Inc. which will explain in further detail the externalized costs of 'conventional' (misnomer) agriculture on society.
To give you a quick idea, its about soil depletion, increased toxins and disease, lower nutrition, deforestation, degradation of ecosystems, cruelty to animals, and corporate manipulation in pursuit of bigger and bigger profit.
Of course, I have little expectation that your purpose here is to learn. More likely, your purpose is to simply spread unfounded nonsense.
"The is a specious claim at best, but contradicts completely all scientific studies that I have looked into."
FYI: Something you can pretend not to notice:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/is-organic-food-more-healthful/
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080807082954.htm
http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/
"On the basis of a systematic review of studies of satisfactory quality, there is no evidence of a difference in nutrient quality between organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs. The small differences in nutrient content detected are biologically plausible and mostly relate to differences in production methods."
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/organic-food-quality/
I say corporations should label foods with genetically-modified ingredients voluntarily and proudly. It will go a long way toward dispelling the lies of the organics movement.
Unfortunately, such a program would not be that easy:
http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Mandatory_labeling_of_genetically_modified_foods
Another shill alert.
Do you want me to clog this page full of my own links that defend my position? I can find ample scientific evidence that will provide more than enough proof, that along with the externalities, the costs to our health, and our planet of conventional (misnomer) agriculture and genetically modified foods, are profoundly higher than that of Organics.
That not just science, its logic. Organic farming isn't perfect... we are talking about the complexities of the natural world here, there is still much investigation and learning we must do... but it sure as hell IS better for the body and the planet. I just don't have time at this exact moment to produce the links. Unless someone else wants to jump in before I get back, I'll do my best to qualify my remarks when I have the opportunity.
Not sure how we should label URL pollution by shills - shURL's or UR-ills.
Or???
Industry TROLL.
We tried this in Oregon in 2002 and so much money poured in from out of state to oppose us that we were defeated even though polls showed public support throughout most of the campaign.
The TRUTH is just as toxic, just as sinister a threat to Monsanto and its ilk, as their products are to our bodies, our immune systems, and Earth's biosphere.
They don't want the truth out there to poison, harm or adulterate their corporate brand identity, or their billions in profits.
Well, we don't want their laboratory monstrosities to poison, harm and adulterate our genetic and biological heritage and integrity!
This comes down to a simple question. Who's bottom line do we care more about? Monsanto's, or the rest of Life on Earth's?
.
On another note, if USDA Organic is not a perfect certification — we must work to improve it, not do away with it, or allow any further dilution of its value to the consumer. I also hope there is an effort to ensure that all labels include *place of origin* as much as possible!
Unfortunately, agribusiness will never allow a ballot initiative to succeed. Case in point: Missouri passed an anti-puppy mill law in 2010 by ballot initiative, only to have the Missouri overturn it before it even had a chance to be implemented. They'll do the same thing with a GMO labeling ballot. It's a virtual guarantee that they will NEVER allow such a ballot to become law, even if it passed by 90%. I won't happen.
People simply do not understand the nature of power in this country, nor what needs to be done to combat it.
I think they're going to find out failrly soon what's at stake and what's going to need to be done. Hunger and economic disparity is not going to go away. This is not some 'let's wait and see' scenario. How it is today is the best it's going to get unless we collectively agitate for real change. And when the powers that be say, 'No!', a passive, 'Uh, O.K.' response won't be an option.
Either we take the power back, whatever that entails, or we enter a stage of deep austerity and helplessness punctuated by servitude, disease and ecological decline. We either fight back, or we all lose, maybe everything.
If GMOs provide no benefits then how are they able to perpetuate? Doesn't the 'free market' weed out the non-beneficial elements? You have to ask yourself these questions if you want to direct your support where it does the most good.
Merkan elites seek to re-distribute the people's energy to themselves using any methods they can get away with. Their primary tool is funny munny, but also propaganda. They use propaganda to make Merkans believe in this system. Upon achieving that mass belief, elites them proceed to exploit it, by fabricating fake "value added" enterprises. GMOs are one of the many fake "value added" enterprises.
If you fabricate funny munny out of thin air and feed it into a fake enterprise then you can perpetuate the fake enterprise. You only have to make sure you don't fabricate too much. The propaganda mentioned above enables Merkan elites to fabricate/funnel a lot of funny munny into dead-end enterprises like GMOs. But something else allows them to funnel lots more: Fossil fuels. As long as Merka consumes 4 times the world average in fossil fuels per capita it can get away with lots and lots of waste of resources in dead-end enterprises like GMOs.
After the fossil fuels are gone, Merkan elites will try to find substitutes to keep their status quo rolling. They will ratchet up the propaganda, and will probably abuse a combo of nukular and renewable sources, under their control of course. But why would elites want to continue funneling all of these resources into dead-end enterprises like GMOs? In order to dominate people/planet, the elites need to control production. The propaganda keeps the people confused so they won't steal production from the elites, but the elites need some reinforcement to help the propaganda keep the people confused. Putting the people to work in dead-end useless enterprises, like GMOs, health insurance paperwork, etc, etc, elites are able to keep the people disconnected from the truth, from what's real, further confused, further dependent, further enslaved.
Luckily the people are breaking out of those chains. The California Ballot Initiative isn't a particularly effective means though. That process has long been hijacked by das kapital. You gotta have munny to get an initiative in Das Kalifornia. It's very tricky trying to 'do good' with munny. California may harbor a lot of health-conscious people, but they benefit from massive industries such as conventional industrial GMO farms all across the Central Valley, the military-industrial and transport-industrial complexes. Such an initiative will rub their fellow Californians the wrong way. We don't see California in too big a hurry to drop das kapital.
Are you kidding? We Americans will gobble down anything you put in front of us. Especially if it is sweet and fatty! And do you suppose they will put a label on my double cheese burger saying that the beef was fed GMO corn? Or on my bag of fries saying the potatoes are GMO. Why not also label all the crap that has been sprayed on our food too, or the particulates that fall from the sky everyday, like all the mercury that floats through the atmosphere from Chinese coal plants.
Organic? This world is so polluted that there is nothing organic. If organic doesn't use and chemicals, or pesticides, they don't have the additional costs, so why is organic nearly double in cost at the store? This sounds like an ballot initiative to scare people into paying more for their food. The people that are wealthy enough to have the choice to pay more for their food are already doing so. The rest of us are eating that GMO, aritficially fertilized, chemically sprayed, and atmospherically polluted crap, and doing just fine. These companies should have never been permitted to put all this crap in the food sources to begin with.
I don't want my government to label my food as being poisonous, I wanr them to protect me from it being poisoned in the first place! How absurd, labels on food! How about when they advertise it on TV, will it come with long list of possible side effects, this food may cause premature maturity in young women, or even premature death, and it may make you fat and obese, see a physician if you become short of breath, have blurry vision, or can no longer see or reach your private parts.
shill alert.
SS, I'm sorry to hear you're still suffering from hallucinations.
The writer above says: "If organic doesn't use and chemicals, or pesticides, they don't have the additional costs, so why is organic nearly double in cost at the store?"
Organic farmers use pesticides, period.
http://fatknowledge.blogspot.com/2006/08/organic-crops-can-use-pesticides.html
Of course organic farmers use pesticides--organic pesticides, not inorganic 100% carcinogenic poisons.
Watched a program in TV where they went all over the world to the most pristine water and tested it and found high amounts of phosphates, hormones and antibiotics. They just can't be filtered or distilled out and have contaminated our underground water supply. We shit where we eat. We're killing ourselves. Organic food aint gonna help.
Organic food IS going to help. But what also would help would be a complete rethinking on the way humans utilize water, especially in terms of how we dispose of wastes through our water systems. This is a type of unsustainable insanity which humanity must address before what you are bringing up produces irreversible and tragic consequences.
It's amazing to me that there isn't more frequent discussion regarding the outlawing of dumping and disposal of detergents, solvents, heavy metals and so many other toxins into our water supplies (regardless of how supposedly sequestered urban/suburban water supplies are from waste water systems... it all ends up in the same place eventually).
Same thing with soil. There is no 'safe' way of 're-naturalizing' so much of the synthetic chemistry coming out of our factories, and put into all our favorite products....once all this crap is manufactured, we can't just throw it away and think its not polluting the earth.
I do see what you're saying, at least I think so. But it seems to me what needs to happen is not to discard 'organic' rather what should occur is discard anything NOT organic. Organic also should not only apply to food, but to all aspects of manufacturing and recycling/re-naturalizing of the waste, byproducts and trash all companies' activities produce.
You are absolutely right on. I buy all my veggies local. I refuse to have a lawn, I got all my neighbors to refuse to let the mosquito truck down our street. I live in a swamp and usually have NO mosquitos because all the tadpoles and fish eat the mosquito larva. I live on a barrier island and recycle everything maybe have 1/2 bag of garbage in a week. Get my eggs from chickens that have names instead of genetic modifications. Use biodegradable soap. NO MEDS. Once you start taking meds you have to take more meds to balance everything. Good diet is essential. No one teaches preventative health care. THERE IS NO MONEY IN HEALTHY PEOPLE.
Human waste is a big problem. I have a septic tank and use a culture - pump it every 6 - 7 years. If everyone who had babies had to dispose of their waste personally on or in their own property, you'd see a lot less babies. There are too many unconscious people. May be just too many people. Mindless propagation is our worst threat for the future.
Stop buying crap. You can do it. You are conscious.
The lack of restrictions, or at a minimum labels so people could have a choice, has turned U.S. supermarkets into huge food safety test laboratories. Who knows what health impacts we'll see as today's youngest guinea pigs grow older?
How many shills will we see here on CD arguing that consumers shouldn't have a choice?
As long as we vote in the incumbents, nothing will change. Why would it? Vote for NO INCUMBENTS and scare the hell out of them. It's the ONLY way to win. End the eternal trough for the political pigs running our nation. NO INCUMBENTS is the only solution.