Washington votes against GMO labeling – preliminary results

The citizens of Washington State have voted against a bill that would have required the labeling of genetically altered foods, according to preliminary ballot results.

Tuesday’s ballots saw 35 counties out of 39 vote against the legislation backed by environmentalists. Counties Whatcom, King, Jefferson and San Juan were the only ones to vote for the labeling of GMO products.

Supporters of the bill were severely outgunned in the campaign faced by corporate opposition from the likes of Monsanto, Pepsi and Nestle.

The multinationals invested a total of $22 million in convincing the state’s constituents they should vote against the mandatory labeling of foods with genetically modified ingredients.

rt.com...


Obvious multinational corporation interference in the vote, and it will continue to be manipulated.

In this instance, I can see non labeling across the board (internationally). Regardless, I'd imagine even if compulsory labeling was brought into law, a majority of these companies wouldn't disclose anyway.

Along with the Fukishima situation, radioactive seafood etc, the futures a worrying thought.

Organic all the way - even if you have to grow it yourself.

reply to post by llBll


Sorry to hear this.

It's millions of dollars spent by Big Business in the last weeks, and if it's like here in California, full of outright lies.

Money has to be taken out of politics and policy and I just don't see how.

A sad day.

Didn't the Bush Supreme court cause this by saying you have to let anyone spend on any campaign anywhere? This court has done a lot of evil and is the worst supreme court in history IMO.

Sad to see how voting is manipulated by those that controls the government, the corporate dictatorship is in full power in the nation.


Money talks and BS walks.

Scary if you tell me, in the name of profits this GMO companies are poisoning the population and getting away with it because the money they pass around.

Y'all do know that had this issue passed, a lot of small farmers would have been forced out of business?

Two sides to every story.

Yes, many of the large corps were against it. So, too, were many small farmers, some of whom I've known all my life. ...and are no more gullible than you lot.

ETA: I voted against it, too.

reply to post by llBll


On the spending in Washington re Proposition 522:

Washington state fight over GMO labeling is expensive and polarizing

www.washingtonpost.com... 0c4-11e3-a624-41d661b0bb78_story.html

Proponents of labeling genetically modified food have raised more than $7 million. Some of that money has come from advocacy groups such as the Center for Food Safety and companies such as Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, which has given more than $2 million. But the rest has come from thousands of individual donors.

vs

Meanwhile, the No on 522 campaign has raised more than $22 million from a far smaller pool of donors, records show. They include biotech and agricultural giants such as Monsanto, DuPont Pioneer, Bayer CropScience and BASF Plant Science, which play key roles in developing and selling seeds for genetically engineered crops. By far, the largest backer of the anti-labeling campaign has been the GMA, which, after being sued by the Washington attorney general for allegedly violating state disclosure laws, agreed last month to release the names of donors funding the effort. They include Coca-Cola, Kellogg and NestleUSA.

reply to post by llBll

Zero confidence in the moral fiber of politicians to do the right thing.

Regardless, if this is a test vote, its not too late to call those scum bags who are voting against labeling.

Refuse to give your name but provide the name of a town in their district.

We need to being mass non-compliance with the entire system and it begins with not filing and paying taxes.

Unfortunately, too many people are already forced into the withholding system, so unless you file, you dont get a "refund". Choose the least amount of withholding.

Vote with your dollars. Make sure to buy non-GMO food.

reply to post by llBll


You know who is supportive of Monsanto and has mega shares in the stock...Bill Gates; I'm just saying.

I just have a HUGE problem believing this vote, unless these people have NO IDEA what they are even voting on. My guess the elderly vote was totally manipulated and conned. Since they are about the only ones to get off their butts and go and vote.

All the voting in this country is fixed! No one wants your GMO or your florinated water!!!!!

reply to post by seagull


Sorry for that but guess what, we the consumers my friend deserve to know what is in our food, what is poisoning us and it goes beyond small farmers, you know that.

I can no longer shop with confident as a consumer when I go to the local supermarket, so I do support my local farmers here in my neck of the woods as I shop in their small markets.

I can travel 4 hours back and forward to the earth fair and leave market in Florida to get organic foods, I can afford that, but many people the only choice they got is their local big groceries stores and they can no even chose food that is safe and free of GMOs.

Is not fair for the consumer, seagull after all we are the ones spending our money and is our right to know how and on what we spend it.

reply to post by FyreByrd


I am a proud supporter of GMO labeling and I donate to their cause all the time, sadly the big corporate monopoly of GMOs giants have more money to spend and do not need us the consumer to support them, one of this days we will be mandated to buy their products as a TAX.

This sucks, but when companies like Monsanto shell out millions for their campaign, it's not difficult to see how the votes can be swung one direction or the other. I can only assume people didn't fully understand the monster they could have kept out of our bodies/lives.


I'm just thankful I live close to a handful of Farmers Markets.

llBll
Organic all the way - even if you have to grow it yourself.

Even organic does not guarantee safe food. I'd rather have conventially grown crops from many places over organic produce from China.

Bottom line: If you're not growing your own food (or know the farmer growing your food), you have no idea what you are consuming.

reply to post by marg6043


Of course we do. That, I'm not arguing against, though it may seem I am. But not at the cost of farmers, and small merchants, who are the one's who will ultimately pay the price for this. Assuming, of course, the price is as expensive as it seems it's going to be. That much is not yet clear. It won't be Monsanto, or the large corporate farms, who are going to.

Small farmers. Smaller merchants. ...and, of course, those consumers we're talking about.

The historical trends repeating here are amazing...

Upton Sinclair would be amused...and horrified, too, I suppose.

The Jungle, by Upton Sinclair

OK..now i'm confused.

Are the ingredients that go in to the food i'm buying a secret?

Why do food producers list additives, E numbers, preservatives, fat, salt and fibre content and sweeteners on the package?

And if all of that information about our food is included, why on Earth would including information about whether or not the food was grown using gentically modified seed stock or not be such an absolute secret in the producers eyes?

If GMO's are so bloody world changingly fantastic, as the pro-GMO lobby maintain, why then are the same corporations so apparently ashamed of telling consumers that?

It's obviously because GMO's are poison, they know it and most rational people know it too, and the corps know FULL WELL that the consumers would NOT buy GMO crap over conventional foods.

It's obscene these criminals get away with this. It's not like the vote is about banning GMO's, but just simply allowing consumers to make an informed choice over what we are feeding our families.

This vote essentially is taking away your ability to choose or reject buying GMO...that is almost as disgusting as the GMO's themselves.

And some of you actually voted to keep GMO's secret? In order to prop up a few small farmers?

Are you effing insane?

reply to post by MysterX

Are you effing insane?

Really?

Just so you know? No, I'm not. What I'm seeing is the other side of this issue. That's the farmers who don't use GMO products, and there are more of them then you might think. ...and the consumers such as myself who are fully capable of doing the research necessary, and don't need a nanny/babysitter. Who do you think is going to ultimately pay the price for the increase in prices of food? Two guesses, and the first one doesn't count.

I suspect that if this doesn't pass, the legislature here, in a fit of self righteousness, will pass some sort of law to do it anyway. Totally contrary to the wishes of the people of the state...but whatever, right?

I don't buy it... Go to any news source and look at the comments. Go to the twitter feeds. Go to the facebook pages... The number of comments and attitudes just don't add up. Every person I have talked to voted yes. I voted yes. This was rigged. There is no doubt in my mind... Monsanto and Dow own this country... Sad but true.
I fear for my kids and the things this will do to, not only their bodies and immune systems, but what it will do to their children. When you mess with the genetic sequence of our food there is no doubt in my mind it's going to mess with our own genetic sequences. I don't care what these so called "scientific studies" say about there not being any adverse effects. The fact is, there is NO WAY they can know what this will do. This is why other countries ban GMO's.
I hear Monsanto won't serve GMO's in their own cafeteria in their lunches. Wouldn't surprise me.

reply to post by Piper96


May I ask where in Washington you live? You needn't be precise, 'cause after all you don't know me.

Everyone, or most everyone, I know voted against it.

seagull
reply to post by MysterX

 

Are you effing insane?

Really?

Just so you know? No, I'm not. What I'm seeing is the other side of this issue. That's the farmers who don't use GMO products, and there are more of them then you might think. ...and the consumers such as myself who are fully capable of doing the research necessary, and don't need a nanny/babysitter. Who do you think is going to ultimately pay the price for the increase in prices of food? Two guesses, and the first one doesn't count.

I suspect that if this doesn't pass, the legislature here, in a fit of self righteousness, will pass some sort of law to do it anyway. Totally contrary to the wishes of the people of the state...but whatever, right?

This is getting more and more obscure by the minute..perhaps i'm being especially dense about this, perhaps not..but from what i can tell from your post, you're saying you support keeping consumers in the dark about where their food is derived?

How the hell is stating on a package whether the food is 'GMO' or 'NO GMO' going to harm small farmers who don't produce GMO's???

Surely, that will help not hinder them!

How hard would it be for a small farmer to ask his or her packaging manufacturer to print the bag destined to contain sweetcorn let's say, with 'Farmer giles tasty fresh sweetcorn - (NO GMO's inside)' You think that's too difficult or is going to cost small farmers an arm and a leg for the bag to printed with the words 'no GMO's'?

That's nuts mate, sorry but it is.

And a busy parent snatching time between work and home to go and do the food shopping has time to check what is and isn't in the food or whether it was conventional or GMO derived?

Come off it...people buy their regular brands and throw it in the trolley or basket, they'll rush around grabbing the packet off the shelves..what do you think the majority of people are going to do, get on their Itabs or phones to research each and every item they are shopping for? While it might be something relatively simple for intelligent or conscientious people like you to do, not everyone is as intelligent or as conscientious as you are they.

Never going to happen in the huge majority of cases, a simple label on the package will tell them immediately whether there happens to be an ingredient or additive (or origin) in the food that they don't want themselves or their families exposed to.

I read every label on everything that goes into my trolley and ultimately into my family...that's not being babysitted by anyone, that is called being informed and making choices for the health of my family...it's simple.

I say again, how will a law compelling food producers to indicate in a simple way to consumers, right there on the package label whether their produce is GMO or not GMO, going to (in your opinion) ruin small farmers or somehow increase the cost of food to the consumer? Especially when you seem to be talking about non-GMO farmers opposing labelling their produce as non-GMO...are you saying these non-GMO farmers think their conventional food is inferior, or that the consumer will imagine their non-GMO food is?

That again is nuts...hugely more people will avoid GMO produce if they knew the non-GMO food was available...and the easiest way to inform the consumer is to tell them on the label of the product they are about to put into their trolley.

How will your small farmers lose in your opinion?