Proposition 37: Mandatory Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods
33
Proposi’on 37: Mandatory Labeling of Gene’cally Engineered Foods A California Ballot Measure
-
Upload
minnesota-agrigrowth-council -
Category
News & Politics
-
view
935 -
download
2
Transcript of Proposition 37: Mandatory Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods
Proposi'on 37: Mandatory Labeling of Gene'cally Engineered
Foods
A California Ballot Measure
Requires Front of Package label for GMO: “Gene%cally Engineered” “Par%ally Produced with Gene%c Engineering” “May be Par%ally Produced with Gene%c Engineering”
Prohibits Natural labeling: “Natural” “Naturally made” “Naturally grown” “All natural” For all GMO products For all processed foods, including canned, smoked, pressed,
cooked, frozen, dehydrated, fermented, milled, etc.
Proposi'on 37: California Right to Know Gene'cally Engineered Food Act
Foods cer%fied as organic Foods consis%ng of or derived en%rely from animals Alcoholic beverages Foods eaten away from home Foods made using GE processing aids or enzymes
Proposi'on 37: California Right to Know Exemp'ons
Effec've date for label changes: July 1, 2014 Exemp'on for processed foods un'l July 1, 2019:
Contain 10 or fewer GMO ingredients; and No single GMO ingredient accounts for more than 0.5% of the
food’s total weight
ASer July 1, 2019 Threshold drops to 0%
Proposi'on 37: Timing and Thresholds
State, local or private par'es Injunc%ve relief No need to show:
Inadequate remedy at law Irreparable harm Individual injury ONLY need to show failure to label product containing GE materials
No requirement to give no%ce to aUorney general or alleged violator no%ce
Plain%ff can recover aUorneys’ fees and costs California Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA)
Damages – actual, res%tu%onary and puni%ve Must give alleged violator 30 days no%ce and
opportunity to cure
Proposi'on 37: Enforcement
Real Intent? Ban Ag Biotechnology
“label would be the equivalent of a skull and crossbones”
-Joseph Mercola, mercola.com
“If we pass this initiative… we will be on our way to getting GE-tainted foods out of our nation's food supply for good.”
-Organic Consumers Association
Ini'al Polling
Most voters have heard something about GMOs, but few are well-‐informed
Q3.
Total Yes 72%
Have you seen, heard, or read anything about genetically engineered foods, also called genetically modified organisms, or GMOs?
Yes, a great deal
Yes, a liUle
No, have not seen/heard anything
Conceptually, California voters overwhelmingly support a labeling law
Q6.
Total Favor 83%
Total Oppose 11%
In general, do you favor or oppose requiring labels on genetically-engineered foods or foods containing genetically-engineered ingredients?
Ini'al Support for the Measure was Strong (Feb 2012)
Q6.
Total Yes 64%
Total No 29%
25%
21%
4%
3%
18%
21%
8%
0% 20% 40% 60%
Definitely yes
Probably yes
Undecided, lean yes
Undecided, lean no
Probably no
Definitely no
Undecided
Total Yes 50%
Total No 42%
22%
11%
4%
4%
22%
30%
8%
0% 20% 40% 60%
Flaws of the Measure Benefits of G.E Foods
Total Yes 36%
Total No 56%
Focusing on “flaws” provoke greater opposi'on than a frame about the benefits of G.E. foods
The Strategy
Focus on provisions and flaws of Proposi%on 37
Safety of Biotech foods: Reinforcement message, but not key to winning
The Campaign
Broad, Ac've Coali'on Engaged
More than 160 organiza%ons opposed to Proposi%on 37
Micro-‐coali%on of 500 scien%sts, doctors, academics and Nobel Prize winners
Online Campaign: Ads, Infographics
Targeted Mail
Television and Online Video
Yes on 37 Ad
Public Polling
California Business Roundtable and Pepperdine University Poll
9/26: 67% yes; 22% no
10/30: 39.1% yes; 50.5% no
Final Vote: 47%Y, 53%N
Television Advertising
“Net net, we believe consumers con%nue to voice their concerns about GMOs and think this debate will persist regardless of the Prop 37 outcome . . . . “
Efforts underway in Washington, Oregon, Connec%cut & Vermont
Is it Over?
Pressure against FDA
“I think we’re going to get some victories in the next 12 months, and this will put addi%onal pressure on the federal government.”
88% of corn 94% of soybeans 40-‐70% of all food sold in grocery stores 34% of all food expenditures, adjusted for
exemp%ons
GMO Ingredients: • Corn flour, oil, starch & syrup
• Fructose, dextrose, glucose, beet sugar
• Soy flour & protein
• Vegetable protein and oil
• Canola oil
Compliance: What Foods Would Have Been Affected?
1. Label 2. Comply Non-‐GMO counterpart ingredients Organic counterpart ingredients Subs%tute ingredients
3. Sue
Compliance Op'ons
1. Label 2. Comply Non-‐GMO counterpart ingredients Organic counterpart ingredients Subs%tute ingredients
3. Sue
Compliance Op'ons
1. Free Speech 2. Express Preemp%on – USDA Products 3. Implied Preemp%on – FDA Products Field preemp%on Implied conflict preemp%on – frustra%on
of purpose Implied conflict preemp%on -‐
impossibility
Legal Challenges
1. Free Speech 2. Express Preemp%on – USDA Products 3. Implied Preemp%on – FDA Products Field preemp%on Implied conflict preemp%on – frustra%on
of purpose Implied conflict preemp%on -‐
impossibility
Legal Challenges
1. Free Speech 2. Express Preemp%on – USDA Products 3. Implied Preemp%on – FDA Products Field preemp%on Implied conflict preemp%on – frustra%on
of purpose Implied conflict preemp%on -‐
impossibility
Legal Challenges
“If we pass this initiative… we will be on our way to getting GE-tainted foods out of our nation's food supply for good.”
1 Billion people are undernourished By 2050, we will have two more
Chinas to feed Only about 12% more land, most of it
marginal, is available to put into produc%on globally
Each year, lack of food kills more people worldwide than war, AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis combined
