Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin
The big companies like Monsanto spent about $50 million to defeat Prop 37. They know that if people see products labeled as GMO, and there are alternative products that are not genetically modified, people will go with the alternative choice.
The campaign against 37 was a based on a bunch of lies. They outspent the Yes on 37 people by about 10x. In the end, all the lies fooled people into voting "no". I don't know how anyone in their right mind could vote "no". How could it be a bad thing to have products labeled?
|
Maybe it was due to the additional cost of regulating the labeling (estimated at a hundred grand to a million)? To quote you:
Quote:
|
These city and state agencies barely have the resources to do their jobs right now. Where are they going to get the resources to satisfy this new law?
|
I'm teasing you, Rupert, and I am sorry for CA that the prop was defeated. I didn't know much about it, and I read the SF Chronicle piece saying it was too broadly worded, but after looking into the prop more thoroughly I don't see what they were concerned about. It has some pretty broad exceptions, and as ready-to-eat food is excluded, I don't see how small stores would be affected, since it would be the responsibility of the food producer (Big Ag, in most cases) to label the food before it hit shelves, right?
I haven't been persuaded that GMOs are bad for a person, but I think people have the right to as much information about what they buy as possible, so I wish it had been passed. I really like the requirement here in NYC that stores selling ready-to-eat foods now post the calorie counts. It's really affected how I order food when I eat out.
Here's the full text of prop 37, if anyone wants to see it:
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.ph...(November_2012)