Monsanto’s DARK Act Defeated in Senate – Only 2 Dems voting with Monsanto and against thier constituents
One of the Dems voting with Monsanto was Joe Donnelly (D-IN), can you guess the other?
Read all about it at the New York Times
Connect
Connect with us on the following social media platforms.
This bill baffled me from the start. I mean, I KNOW why it was created and it’s purpose but from the practical side, WTH is the big deal with a GMO label? I know the stigma attached to GMOs and how ridiculous it is, but seriously. Just put the damn stamp on the products.
I’m looking forward to eating my sandwich on GMO wheat flour bread for lunch, just like everyone else, and maybe cooking up some GMO sweet corn for a side at dinner tonight. Thanks science!
Personally, I think they should focus more on identifying the antibiotics and pesticides used on foods rather than the engineering that has taken place, which the scientific consensus currently labels safe.
The stigma is the problem…labels imply that there is something wrong or dangerous about it.
No they don’t actually. A label that says gluten-free makes no claims about the gluten. It just tells a consumer that there is no gluten if that is an important thing for the consumer.
Brian, I wouldn’t lump the opposition to GMOs in with the opposition to science. Monsanto is basically using their grip on genetically engineered seeds to create a monopoly. Is goes far beyond drought tolerance.
Honestly, linking to Natural News is a big red flag for me. I might have to side with Carper just because of that BS.
Why not just assume unlabeled products contain GMOs? No one is stopping producers from putting “GMO FREE!” on their packaging. If GMO-free really is better, let the market decide. Personally I would like to be able to compare the price and quality of GMO vs. non-GMO products.
Of course, then there has to be an accepted definition of GMO and non-GMO.
Fine. Read all about it in the New York Times, or is that too pinko for you High Dems?
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/17/business/bill-to-stop-states-requiring-labeling-of-gmo-foods-fails.html?_r=0
You’re the one sending traffic to a conspiracy site that preys on the sick and paranoid. I’m just a schmo trying to keep the intellect up around here.
Thanks for that info. I will link more thoughtfully going forward.
Gluten can cause people to be sick if not properly labeled. I’m yet to hear of a GMO allergy, though the gluten-free label has also caused a bit of hysteria over an allergy that is not really all that common.
Are you guys really this uninformed? The problem with GMOs isn’t allergies.
I’m aware…someone made the comparison to gluten labeling….that’s the only reason I mentioned what I did.
But while I’m at it, I’ll bite…then what is the problem? I’m yet to see any legitimate science showing that there are any negative effects.
Whether or not it causes allergies is not the point. The point is information. Putting Gluten-Free on a label communicates something that is important to a set of consumers (but makes no claim about those glutens)– and some of those consumers have real medical need of that info and some of them do not, yet they care about being able to make that choice. The same is true for GMOs. A GMO-Free label makes no claims about the GMOs, but does communicate something to a consumer who cares about this info. Consumers who don’t care will still make the choices they make.
Being able to opt out of buying GMO food by having it labled, is about about fighting patent abuse, monoculture commodity crops, and being aware of who controls the world’s food supply.
http://www.marketplace.org/2013/05/13/sustainability/monsanto-behemoth-controls-90-percent-soybean-production
http://www.alternet.org/food/what-it-means-monsanto-holds-patents-life
It sounds to me like the problem isn’t with GMOs, but with a failed regulatory system to limit the abuse of monopolistic entities.
And then there are those people often called environmentalists, who through some type of unexplained altruistic influence, actually care about the planet on which they live.. One contingent being butterfly enthusiasts. (I’ll throw Allan Loudell into that mix, though he prefers moths. 🙂 )
Are you not aware that Monsanto’s Roundup and their seeds genetically engineered to be immune to Roundup, have almost wiped out the entire milkweed plant from Texas to Canada? Which is why the Monarch butterfly is aimed for complete extinction in 4 years? Very likely you may not be aware. I wouldn’t have been if it weren’t for following Allan Loudell.
But IF you wanted to boycott Monsanto and oppose those who like Brian gleefully rejoice in the elimination of species by reveling in GMO products… (lol j/k; ha 🙂 ) then labels are necessary….
Personally I don’t know how many people give a damn today about one species of butterfly that has survived longer than human beings… but… I do support putting any “stigma” on GMO’s for that selfish reason that one can…
(Now if they discover GMOs cure cancer… everyone will RUSH to put that on their label…)
Of course, with the new TPP, Monsanto can personally sue each US Senators who defeated that bill for the “potential” loss towards their”potential” profits…
One more reason why the TPP bill is insane and needs killed.
By Jason’s reasoning, it is indeed to scare consumers into making decisions.
I get Cassandra’s point, but I wonder about the impact and constitutionality (interstate commerce) of having potentially 50 different standards for labeling in the country.
If Roundup is extinguishing the butterflies, then restrict the Roundup. If Monsanto’s business model depends on Roundup-ready GMO crops, well then too bad; they’ll have to use those big brains to think of something else. There are more beneficial possibilities for GMOs, including drought resistance and increased yield or nutritional value.
I’m with you, LG — I’m not crazy about 50 different standards, either. And I suspect that it just takes a big state or two to change the standards for everyone. But this legislation would just block any labeling requirements, meaning that there would be none. If Congress won’t act, they shouldn’t get in the way of the states who do. Still — there are food manufacturers who get the marketing power of a GMO-Free label already. Just don’t know if there is truth in that claim or if they have to be true.
It’s like the “All Natural” label…. or making the packaging green. It means absolutely nothing. I know claiming to be “Organic” requires some truth to the claim.
I go back and forth on this. one the one hand, Monsanto is doing some serious damage to food sources, species of animals, and basically anyone that isnt them. On the OTHER hand, simply being against GMOS is a naive stance. I definitely want to know what is in products I buy that go into my body. If a company doesnt want to tell me, I have to assume they are trying to hide something.
We’re Monsanto, we own the food supply, the seeds to grow it and the intellectual property rights to the seed DNA. If you grow you’re own food, we will sue you.
I’ve read that you can’t be assured that any corn you buy now is GMO free because of cross pollination.
I kind of thought that consumers were trending away from GMO’s, but apparently the DuPont-Dow Chemical merger thinks just the opposite.
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2015/12/dupont-dow-merger-spwans-new-pesticidegmo-seed-behemoth
mouse is correct; Monsanto doesn’t allow farmers to retain seed for replanting.
……you have to buy Roundup Ready® seed from them each year… and then the Roundup® to go with it.
I’ve read that you can’t be assured that any corn you buy now is GMO free because of cross pollination.”
I don’t care what kind of corn I put into my gas tank.