In recent years, both California and Washington state have been unable to pass legislation that calls for labeling genetically modified organisms (GMOs) on food labels. Many GMOs are in our food supply, despite the American public’s reluctance to eat them when given the choice, according to gmofreeoregon.org.
Many nations already have labeling laws, including 15 nations in the European Union, Japan, Australia, Brazil, Russia and China. U.S. food producers already label their GMO food in 64 countries!
This November 4, those following the GMO debate will be watching Colorado and Oregon closely. Colorado’s Proposition 105 and Oregon’s Measure 92 are on the ballot this week; both measures stipulate that food manufacturers mark their GMO products as such, with a label reading: “produced with genetic engineering.”
Those in favor of the measures say that consumers have a right to know what they’re eating. Those opposed believe the labels will confuse the general public and will result in costs that will be passed on from manufacturers and retailers to the end consumer.
How will the voting be different this year? Are the campaigns different? Smarter? Employing different strategies?
Unfortunately, some wonderful, grassroots campaign efforts can only go so far when deep pockets are present on the opposing side.
The Colorado campaign totals approximately $900,000 in contributions, mainly from organic groups. Compare this to the 16 million contributed by food companies in opposition of the measure. Oregon’s supporters have contributed 7 million, compared to the 18.7 million produced by opponents (Reuters).
Big spending from opponents aside, a second issue that looms large in opposition of the GMO measure is lack of knowledge on the subject matter.
A 2013 survey by Rutgers found that 54 percent of Americans say they know “very little or nothing at all” about GMOs, and 25 percent have never even heard of them. Only approximately one quarter of Americans are aware that GMO labeling is not currently required. This can lead to an unfortunate tendency – when we don’t fully understand something on the ballot, the majority of us tend to vote against it.
For those that were cheering on California and Washington, one wonders what Oregon and Colorado are doing differently this time around. California boasts the largest number of certified-organic farming operations in the country, and yet was unable to pass its measure.
Oregon created a Citizens’ Initiative Review; a random sample of 20 citizens learns both sides of a measure from outside experts, and then reports pros and cons, which are then included in the state’s voter guide. One review was conducted for Measure 92, and the panel’s assessment was split fairly evenly, with nine panelists in favor and 11 against. The review is a smart way to provide a balanced look at the issue for the voters.
Those in favor of Measure 92 note that they expect younger, urban voters to flood the polls this week, given additional issues on the ballot, including a marijuana legalization measure. If urbanites come out in droves to vote in Oregon, then the GMO legislation stands a passing chance, experts believe. The outlook is less clear in Colorado, where the GMO labeling measure was approved for inclusion on the ballot quite late in the game – in August.
Will you be watching the Oregon and Colorado poll results on Tuesday? Have you noticed anything unique about the OR and CO campaigns? Please share your comments below.