For connected articles and a lot more information, please visit OCA’s Genetic Engineering web page, Millions Against Monsanto page and our Washington News page.
A national fight over labeling of genetically engineered foods is touching down in Washington this fall, fueled by income from organic and food-safety advocates.
On the other side, huge agribusiness and food industry groups are giving mightily to efforts that oppose Initiative 522.
Like Proposition 37 that failed narrowly in California a year ago right after opponents spent $ 46 million to defeat it, I-522 would demand that meals goods with genetically modified or engineered contents be labeled.
Genetically engineered foods are those that come from plants that have had genes transferred from yet another organism.
Even though opponents of I-522 say there is no scientific proof that “GMOs” or “GE” foods pose dangers for buyers, the Yes on I-522 campaign says customers should know what they are getting.
“Individuals are speaking about this problem. They genuinely care. They want to know what is in their meals,” Yes on I-522 spokeswoman Elizabeth Larter stated. She described the appeal to consumers’ logic as: “It is my choice. It is my choice. It’s my right to know. We know the sodium levels, the sugar levels” in foods that currently are labeled.
I-522 was filed as an initiative to the Legislature, but Washington’s lawmakers ignored it in their just concluded marathon legislative session, sending the measure to the Nov. 5 ballot.
Legislators also took a pass on professional initiative promoter Tim Eyman’s Initiative 517, which proposes added protections for initiative campaigns. Eyman’s measure is headed to the exact same November ballot but does not appear to be attracting significantly income. His campaign has reported $ 305,000 in in-sort donations, even though the effort to block his measure has raised just $ eight,one hundred.
On the contrary, funds is pouring into the Evergreen State from across the country for and against I-522.
As of last week’s filings with the state Public Disclosure Commission, No on I-522 forces had collected practically $ 952,000 – with all but $ six,700 of it coming from 5 market groups. The largest amount was $ 472,500 from the Grocery Companies Association in Washington, D.C. Another $ 242,156 was from Monsanto in St. Louis, $ 171,281 from DuPont Pioneer in Johnson, Iowa, and $ 29,531 each was from Bayer Cropscience in North Carolina and Dow AgroSciences LLC in Indianapolis.
The backers of food labeling say their concern is attracting numerous small in-state donors – even even though more than $ 1.6 million of the Yes on I-522 campaign’s $ two.1 million in funds has come from out-of-state pockets.