Pages tagged "Yes on 37"
Proposition 37 is not a referendum on whether or not genetically engineered foods are safe. It's about our right to know what it’s in our food.
“The question of whether to label genetically engineered (GE) foods, as Proposition 37 would require, is not about science. Prop 37 is about people having the right to know what's in their food and how it was produced. It's about making competition in a free market - the hallmark of capitalism - more transparent," wrote Dr. Belinda Martineau, a molecular geneticist who was principal scientist at Calgene, Inc. when they introduced the first genetically engineered food, the “Flavr Savr” tomato, in 1994. The tomato was labeled and was initially so popular that one store had to limit customers to two tomatoes per day -- proving that transparency can be a good thing all around.
Yet no genetically engineered product has been labeled in the United States since then. And today, Monsanto and the other major pesticide and junk food companies are spending $45 million to defeat a citizen's initiative for our right to labels. Why? It’s pretty simple: They believe their optimal business model depends upon secrecy and a lack of transparency. They don’t want to provide consumers a choice.
Ted Sheely grows cotton in the San Joaquin Valley on his 8,700-acre farm. Food companies aren’t required to tell us if the cotton is genetically engineered, even if it winds up in our food as cottonseed oil.
Ted appears in one of the many TV ads deliberately lying to California voters about Proposition 37. This particular ad asserts that Prop 37 will raise food costs by “billions of dollars”. There is no independent evidence---nor coherent logic---supporting that claim, of course. Prop 37 simply requires a label on genetically engineered foods, which will cost consumers, well, nothing. Food companies change their labels every 6-12 months on average; Prop 37 gives them 18 months.
Ted Sheely doesn’t speak for most farmers, more than 2,000 of whom have endorsed Proposition 37. Why do farmers support Proposition 37? For the same reasons most of us support it: because they believe we have the right to know what’s in the food they’re growing for us.
“When the CA Right to Know ballot initiative started to develop and the movement progressed, we thought it was a great idea: to label the product, to let the consumer make a choice about what they want to eat,” said Jessica Lundberg of Lundberg Family Farms.
For Immediate Release: October 16, 2012
Palo Alto: Stanford University is investigating the continued misuse of the university’s name to push a political agenda to oppose Proposition 37. Today, new evidence was presented to Stanford documenting how the No on 37 campaign has repeatedly misrepresented the affiliation of their lead spokesperson, Dr. Henry Miller, in campaign ads, in violation of Stanford University policy.
The world’s largest pesticide companies are spending One Million Dollars a Day to confuse California voters about Proposition 37 -- a simple label that will give us the right to know what's in our food.
A Million Dollars a Day in TV ads can buy lots of confusion, but it can't buy facts. Here are the facts about Prop 37:
No cost to consumers: Adding a few words to labels costs nothing. Labeling didn’t raise costs in 50 other countries and won’t raise costs here. It won’t add red tape or bureaucracy either, and the only independent study on Prop 37 confirms these facts. Read the Truth about Cost.
No incentives for lawsuits: With no incentives for lawyers to sue, the opposition's stories about "shakedown lawsuits" make no sense whatsoever. Prop 37 is straightforward and easy for businesses to follow; there will be no need for lawsuits. Companies will label for genetic engineering just like they label calories and fat. Retailers have special protections under the law. Read the Truth about Lawsuits.
Exemptions are common sense: Prop 37 exempts products that have no ingredient labels, such as restaurant food and alcohol. But it will cover meat from genetically engineered animals. The opposition is trying to confuse voters about exemptions -- and to do it, they are running ads featuring a fringe radical scientist who think nuclear radiation is good for our health -- all because they don’t want to label genetically engineered foods. Read the Truth about Exemptions.
California farmers are FOR Prop 37: Thousands of California farmers, all the leading businesses in the natural and sustainable food sector, and all the leading labor groups -- United Farm Workers, United Food and Commercial Workers, and California Labor Federation -- are saying YES ON 37.
We have the right to know what’s in our food. That’s the simple premise of Proposition 37, which would require labeling of food that is made with genetic engineering. But instead of taking issue with that fundamental right, opponents of the measure – the largest chemical and processed food companies – are claiming the new law would lead to a wave of costly litigation, exposing food retailers to abusive lawsuits by rapacious trial lawyers. Nothing could be further from the truth.
See below for the facts to counter their false claims.
The whole world is watching what's happening in California! JOIN US TODAY.
Prop 37 is a simple label for genetically engineered foods. Also called GMOs, these are plants or animals that have had their DNA artificially altered by genes from other plants, animals, viruses or bacteria, in ways that can’t occur in nature. Here are 3 reasons why we need to label genetically engineered foods.
1. We have a right to know what we're eating and feeding our families. The right to know and the right to choose are fundamental American values; and 90% of Americans want to know if their food is genetically engineered. More than 50 other countries already require labels on genetially engineered food. California consumers have a right to this information too. If you think we have a right to know what's in our food, vote yes on Prop 37.
For Immediate Release: October 11, 2012
Contact: Stacy Malkan, 510-542-9224, firstname.lastname@example.org
Oakland, Oct. 11, 2012 -- Today’s new Pepperdine Poll shows Proposition 37 still leading in the polls but with a significant decline in support after ten days of the chemical companies pounding Californians with lies and deception.
“The companies that told us Agent Orange and DDT are safe are lying again and trying to buy this election by putting the full weight of their propaganda wizardry behind a campaign to confuse and deceive voters,” said Yes on 37 campaign manager Gary Ruskin.
“Ten days of incessant pounding lies have taken their effect, but in the end Californians will not be fooled by these tactics. We're confident that California voters will want to know what's in their food and will vote yes on Proposition 37.”
LOS ANGELES TIMES, by Daniel Imhoff & Michael R. Dimock, October 11, 2012
The initiative is rooted in a simple premise: Consumers have the right to know if their food is produced using genetic engineering.
In America we hold a consumer's power of choice at the checkout line nearly as sacred as that of a voter at the ballot box. In November, California voters will be asked to protect the right of food buyers to make informed purchases.
Passing Proposition 37 could change the future of food in this country. The initiative is rooted in a simple premise: Consumers have the right to know if their food is produced using genetic engineering, which manipulates DNA or transfers it from one organism to another. Any plant or animal food product with genes that have been engineered would be so labeled.
This isn't a radical new idea. It's been standard practice in all member countries of the European Union for years. The latest published research shows that 61 countries have some form of mandatory labeling for foods containing genetically modified crop ingredients.
The companies that sell genetically modified seeds and manufactured foods argue that American consumers don't need such detailed labels. They say, "Just trust us."
Damning New Study: GMOs Cause Massive Overuse of Pesticides; Data Sheds Light on Why Pesticide Companies Lead Opposition to Prop 37
As Californians prepare to vote on a proposition to label genetically engineered foods, a new peer-reviewed study reveals that genetically engineered crops have increased pesticide use by hundreds of millions of pounds. The problem will intensify if the new round of GMO crops is approved, as Reuters reported today.
“This study raises serious questions about whether we want to drown our crops in pesticides and feed them to our children,” said Yes on 37 campaign manager Gary Ruskin. “As we see from the data, GMOs are a fantastic boon for the pesticide industry. That’s why the world’s largest pesticide companies have spent nearly $20 million to defeat Proposition 37 and our right to know what’s in our food.”
Spotted: awesome chalk art project at Frank Ogawa Plaza in Oakland. Who's handiwork is this? Whoever you are, you rock! We don't know quite what's going on with that tomato in the second photo, but then isn't that the whole point about GMOs?