Monsanto’s DARK Act Defeated in Senate – Only 2 Dems voting with Monsanto and against thier constituents

Filed in National by on March 17, 2016

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

Carper

About the Author ()

Jason330 is a deep cover double agent working for the GOP. Don't tell anybody.

Comments (25)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Brian says:
    March 17, 2016 at 10:12 am

    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!

  2. Mikem2784 says:
    March 17, 2016 at 10:12 am

    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.

  3. Mikem2784 says:
    March 17, 2016 at 10:13 am

    The stigma is the problem…labels imply that there is something wrong or dangerous about it.

  4. cassandra_m says:
    March 17, 2016 at 10:27 am

    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.

  5. jason330 says:
    March 17, 2016 at 10:35 am

    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.

  6. liberalgeek says:
    March 17, 2016 at 10:43 am

    Honestly, linking to Natural News is a big red flag for me. I might have to side with Carper just because of that BS.

  7. puck says:
    March 17, 2016 at 10:44 am

    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.

  8. jason330 says:
    March 17, 2016 at 10:48 am

    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

  9. liberalgeek says:
    March 17, 2016 at 10:56 am

    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.

  10. jason330 says:
    March 17, 2016 at 11:02 am

    Thanks for that info. I will link more thoughtfully going forward.

  11. Mikem2784 says:
    March 17, 2016 at 11:09 am

    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.

  12. jason330 says:
    March 17, 2016 at 12:08 pm

    Are you guys really this uninformed? The problem with GMOs isn’t allergies.

  13. Mikem2784 says:
    March 17, 2016 at 12:11 pm

    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.

  14. cassandra_m says:
    March 17, 2016 at 12:19 pm

    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.

  15. jason330 says:
    March 17, 2016 at 12:22 pm

    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.

    Monsanto, DuPont/Dow and Syngenta – control 53 percent of the global commercial seed market. They have pressured farmers to replace diverse, nutritional seeds, seeds that are resilient because they’ve been bred by small-scale farmers to adapt to local climates and soil conditions, with monocultures of genetically engineered seeds.

    Since farmers first began buying into Monsanto’s scheme in 1995, the average cost to plant one acre of soybeans has risen 325 percent, according to the Center for Food Safety’s report. Corn seed prices are up by 259 percent. Those increases don’t include the cost of the lawsuits Monsanto has aggressively filed against farmers the company claims have violated patent agreements.

    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

  16. Mikem2784 says:
    March 17, 2016 at 12:30 pm

    It sounds to me like the problem isn’t with GMOs, but with a failed regulatory system to limit the abuse of monopolistic entities.

  17. kavips says:
    March 17, 2016 at 12:42 pm

    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.

  18. liberalgeek says:
    March 17, 2016 at 12:47 pm

    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.

  19. puck says:
    March 17, 2016 at 12:54 pm

    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.

  20. cassandra_m says:
    March 17, 2016 at 12:57 pm

    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.

  21. Ben says:
    March 17, 2016 at 1:04 pm

    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.

  22. mouse says:
    March 17, 2016 at 3:14 pm

    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.

  23. fightingbluehen says:
    March 17, 2016 at 10:27 pm

    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.

  24. fightingbluehen says:
    March 17, 2016 at 10:42 pm

    ……you have to buy Roundup Ready® seed from them each year… and then the Roundup® to go with it.

  25. puck says:
    March 18, 2016 at 12:47 am

    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.

«
»