Tsunami of Money Floods Oregon GMO Labeling Campaign
In California in 2012, a proposal to label foods containing GMOs was defeated after opponents, headed by Monsanto, spent $46 million to supporters' $9 million. Last year, opponents of labeling narrowly defeated a similar measure in Washington state, with supporters raising around $6 million and opponents ponying up more than $35 million million in a state with only about a quarter the population of California. Again, Monsanto was the largest single donor.
Now the issue—and the tsunami of money—is pouring into Oregon, where Measure 92, sponsored by Oregon GMO Right to Know, will be on the ballot this November. So far the spending hasn't been as outsized as that in California and Washington, with supporters raising more than $4 million and opponents raising more than $7 million to date with the promise to spend more. And—surprise!—so far, Monsanto has been the biggest single donor, although the Grocery Manufacturers Association, which represents multiple donors, has given more.
But there are signs that this time might be different. Earlier this year, voters in a pair of rural Oregon counties considered to be fairly conservative banned GMO crops due to farmers' concerns about non-GMO crops becoming contaminated by wind-borne GMOs. And both the Republican and Democratic candidates for governor support the labeling initiative.
The labeling campaign got a couple of boosts last week. It was endorsed by the Eugene Register-Guard, one of the state's most influential newspapers, which opposed a similar measure 12 years ago, in an op-ed titled "Approve Mandatory Labeling." It said that whether or not GMOs are safe as big industrial food companies claim, if consumers think there's a problem, they deserve to know what's in their food, adding, "One of opponents’ most curious arguments is that labels would stigmatize GMO products—but why would that be the case if they’re safe and already accepted by the general public?"
On a lighter note, Vermont-based Ben & Jerry's ice cream announced it would rename its fudge brownie ice cream "Food Fight Fudge Brownie" in its five Oregon shops to call attention to the labeling initiative. Company co-founder Jerry Greenfield toured Oregon this week, visiting all five of the company's locations there.
"It's about the consumers right to know," said Greenfield at a stop at their store in Bend, Oregon."It's not about do you like GMOs or don't like GMOs. It's simply about telling consumers what is the food they're buying and eating so they can make a choice. I think any food company ought to be proud of they ingredient they use and they ought to be thrilled to tell people about them."
The arguments of opponents have been recycled from the previous campaigns. They say there would be an increased cost to labeling that would increase the cost of food products astronomically. But many large food companies already label foods for export to the 64 countries—including all EU countries and Japan—that require it. Supporters point out that cost increases haven't occurred in any of these other countries and that companies routinely change their labels for marketing reasons. They've also said that labeling would "confusing" for shoppers and unfairly stigmatizes products that contain GMO ingredients, despite the plethora of other information already required on labels and the fact that no warning language would be required—just information.
Colorado also has a GMO labeling issue, proposition 105, on the ballot this November, although it's gotten less attention and is considered less competitive. Supporters are being drastically outspent. According to Colorado Public Radio, Monsanto alone has pitched in $4.7 million, while supporters of labeling have raised only $323,ooo. And while Denver-based Chipotle has come out in support of the proposition, the state's largest newspaper the Denver Post has editorialized against it.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
- Most Meat Will Be Plant-Based or Lab-Grown in 20 Years, Analysts ... ›
- Lab-Grown Meat Debate Overlooks Cows' Range of Use Worldwide ... ›
- Will Plant-Based Meat Become the New Fast Food? - EcoWatch ›
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
One city in New Zealand knows what its priorities are.
Dunedin, the second largest city on New Zealand's South Island, has closed a popular road to protect a mother sea lion and her pup, The Guardian reported.
piyaset / iStock / Getty Images Plus
- No Country Is Protecting Children's Health, Major Study Finds ... ›
- 'Every Child Born Today Will Be Profoundly Affected by Climate ... ›
By Jeff Masters, Ph.D.
Earth had its second-warmest year on record in 2020, just 0.02 degrees Celsius (0.04°F) behind the record set in 2016, and 0.98 degrees Celsius (1.76°F) above the 20th-century average, NOAA reported January 14.
Figure 1. Departure of temperature from average for 2020, the second-warmest year the globe has seen since record-keeping began in 1880, according to NOAA. Record-high annual temperatures over land and ocean surfaces were measured across parts of Europe, Asia, southern North America, South America, and across parts of the Atlantic, Indian, and Pacific oceans. No land or ocean areas were record cold for the year. NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information
Figure 2. Total ocean heat content (OHC) in the top 2000 meters from 1958-2020. Cheng et al., Upper Ocean Temperatures Hit Record High in 2020, Advances in Atmospheric Sciences
Figure 3. Departure of sea surface temperature from average in the benchmark Niño 3.4 region of the eastern tropical Pacific (5°N-5°S, 170°W-120°W). Sea surface temperature were approximately one degree Celsius below average over the past month, characteristic of moderate La Niña conditions. Tropical Tidbits
- NASA and NOAA: Last Decade Was the Hottest on Record - EcoWatch ›
- Earth Just Had Its Hottest September Ever Recorded, NOAA Says ... ›
In December of 1924, the heads of all the major lightbulb manufacturers across the world met in Geneva to concoct a sinister plan. Their talks outlined limits on how long all of their lightbulbs would last. The idea is that if their bulbs failed quickly customers would have to buy more of their product. In this video, we're going to unpack this idea of purposefully creating inferior products to drive sales, a symptom of late-stage capitalism that has since been coined planned obsolescence. And as we'll see, this obsolescence can have drastic consequences on our wallets, waste streams, and even our climate.
- Consumer Society No Longer Serves Our Needs - EcoWatch ›
- Electronic Waste: New EU Rules Target Throwaway Culture ... ›