The U.S. Senate wisely voted down a bad amendment to the farm bill last week, meaning that consumers won’t see their food bills skyrocket for no worthwhile reason.
So that’s good news. Yet this is Washington, D.C., where the threat of harmful legislation remains alive and well–and we the people must remain on guard.
As the House of Representatives begins to consider its own version of the farm bill, it too must oppose efforts by anti-biotech activists to encourage a patchwork of confusing regulations that would make food much more expensive without improving it even a tiny bit.
In the United States and around the world, we’re fighting a war over food. Most people don’t even know that it’s going on, but it affects all of us. The conflict pits ordinary consumers and farmers like you and me against radical activists and professional protestors.
We all want a plentiful supply of wholesome and safe food at a reasonable price. Their scheme is to devastate modern means of crop production for the sake of an anti-scientific agenda that will make it harder for families to feed themselves.
The war has many fronts, from international agencies to state capitols. The latest assault took place in the U.S. Senate. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont–an “independent” who calls himself a socialist--offered an amendment to the farm bill.
On the face of it, the Sanders amendment sounded reasonable: It would have granted states the right to establish their own rules for labeling food that contains biotech ingredients. In the last year, legislators in 19 states have offered three dozen bills on this matter, according to Packaging Digest. This November, California voters will weigh a ballot initiative to require labels on food that may contain GM ingredients.
Yet think about where state-by-state labeling could lead: 50 states with 50 different sets of rules about what information must appear on consumer products. Special-interest groups would have a field day. A dairy state might stop companies from printing the saturated-fat content on cartons of ice cream. Georgia could require peaches from South Carolina to carry labels urging people not to buy them. Just imagine what the busybodies in New York City might try to do. The mayor already is on a crusade to ban soda pop.
Before long, food companies would have to package the same food in a variety of ways. For most of us, Coke cans and Pepsi bottles probably would continue to look much as they do now. In New York, however, perhaps they’d carry skull-and-crossbones images.
That may sound extreme, but something like it is already going on: A group called “Label It Yourself” encourages activists to print their own warning stickers, visit grocery stores, and slap them on items that may contain biotech ingredients.
Few states would go this far. Yet incompatible rules could proliferate from state to state–and our food would start to cost more.
When an assembly line has to stop and reconfigure, production slows down and prices go up. If food companies have to change the look of their products, just to comply with an array of crazy-quilt regulations, consumers will pay more for food.
The labels wouldn’t make food safer because biotech ingredients are already 100-percent safe, as the federal government and groups ranging from the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization to the American Medical Association have determined. The labels simply would convey information that consumers don’t need, while also making our grocery-store bills rise.
Moreover, there’s a simple solution already in place. People who want to avoid biotech food already can do so by purchasing organic food. If the label says the food is organic, then it doesn’t have biotech ingredients.
For those who accept modern science and technology, and wish to continue to have access to a plentiful supply of wholesome and inexpensive food, a mandatory label is unnecessary and will only raise costs.
In the Senate, the Sanders amendment lost by a wide margin: 26 in favor, 73 opposed. If a new version comes up in the House, let’s hope that it loses again.
It would show that even in Congress, common sense can prevail.
Terry Wanzek is a wheat, corn and soybean farmer in North Dakota. He serves as a ND State Senator and volunteers as a board member for Truth About Trade & Technology. www.truthabouttrade.org
Loading ...
Common Sense Labeling http://t.co/DI8KnWEX
The Senate Vote was paid for by a Subsidies PAC, the same one that pushed the Sugar Subsidies back into place-you remember, as they were, they would have restored $4.8 Billion to SNAP and reduced the guaranteed profit from $.14 down to a lack-luster $.12. We look forward to November and beyond to rectify all this. SCOTUS has opened the door for all this to get worse, as Big Corporations throw their Financial weight around. Us “Radical Activists” will have to be content with Protests, Boycotts, Petitions, and putting our own labels on poisonous GM products. Take a deep breath and get over it-it’s the American way.
Shades of the EU – where every country and even some counties have their own labeling laws! All it does is drive up the cost of the product and transaction costs by limiting economies of scale. And for what purpose? So a bunch of Nutnicks can shoot their mouths off?
Common Sense Labeling-the Bull and the Whining by GM Companies. http://t.co/QmtcjAMd
Pingback: Biotech Food Labeling: Can Common Sense Prevail in Congress? | BIOtechNow
Pingback: The Council for Biotechnology Information » House of Representatives must consider benefits to consumers in Farm Bill 2012 discussions
I am absolutely against GMO farming. The food is not tested to see if it is carcinogenic- and clearly the gene in corn works to kill cut worms. What long term effects does it have on human systems? We dont know, because no testing has ever been done. Cancer, diabeties, food allergies all are increasing at astronomical rates that oddly coincide with the ammount of GMOs in our food system, and NOW there is legislation being considered that will protect companies that produce these foods from Judicial review. NOT OK- no one, no company should be beyond the checks and balances our forefathers set up to keep the american people from the same types of repression their former government had. I want food labeling NOW so I can make my own educated choices. Others can eat how they wish, I am just asking for a choice in what I put into my body.
I would also like to point out that wind cross polinates most crops, especially corn and wheat. Organic farmers end up with genetic materials in their formerly pristine heirloom vegetables, then are told they are “stealing” seed and made to pay huge fees for having “stolen” the genetic material. There is A LOT more to this issue than meets the eye.
I find your statement, ” The conflict pits ordinary consumers and farmers like you and me against radical activists and professional protestors.” completely offensive!
I did not give you permission to speak for me. I am an ordinary consumer, just working to make a living and take care of my family, which includes what food we put in our mouths.
I do not agree with the “science” behind GMO crops, I do not have any reason to trust large companies that are not interested in anything besides making a profit.
I want the choice. Just choosing “organic” isn’t going to cut it. That does not refer to what seeds are planted; just how the plants are treated and raised and the lack of using pesticides and artificial fertilizers. Buying organic corn does not guarantee that what I buy is non-GMO.
The only way I can insure that what I consume is non-GMO is by buying seeds from a company that is willing to certify their seeds are not genetically modified and raising all the produce myself. How many average consumers can do that? Most of them do not have any ability to raise their own food….and have to buy from a local store or farmer’s market.
You and your family have a vested interest in raising large crops; it is obviously how you make a living. So don’t tell me you are the “average farmer”. Running an agri-business doesn’t make you a “farmer”. And do NOT presume to speak for the average consumer…the average consumer are folks like me trying to take care of our families on dwindling income…and finding out that the cheapest food is often not to be trusted anymore. That’s the reality that the average consumer lives with. All we want is to be able to make our own choices about what we feed our families. That’s all. By refusing to put labels on the GMO-foods, you take our choices away from us.