GMO labeling on the Ballot in Oregon

[Deborah K]

so we should have more laws to hurt big guys?

How does labeling GMO foods hurt them exactly?

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Why are you okay with legalizing weed (which results in the regulation and taxation thereof)

Because it is an improvement from the complete prohibition thereof.

but you are not okay with the gov't showing some consistency with labeling in the food industry? Seems like a double-standard.

The state has no right to force companies to label their products.

I'm opposed to all existing labeling requirements and to the creation of new ones.

That's perfectly consistent.

 

[Jackie Moon]

Heck, if that's how you voted it's how you voted, Jackie Moon. People don't always agree on all of the issues. We're very diverse around here. Is what it is. Good points you make here as well and I think we all understand them as it is.

I'm of the opinion that synergy functions best among diverse people when we're honest with each other. Is why I don't sugar coat my views on any given issues that I choose to become involved with there and about.

Ok cool, thank you.

I agree that it's normal and good for us to respectfully disagree on some things.

But I usually stay out of these types of issues because I don't want to be divisive and have us fight with each other when we do agree on so much of the important stuff.

I'd hate for anyone to leave or hold personal grudges over these disagreements. We're still on the same team fighting the real enemies of liberty... and they'd love for us to divide ourselves in to abortion/religion/intellectual property type fights.

If you haven't watched this, please do. It gives the other side of the story. I've already made my view plain in this thread so I won't reiterate here, but please just find the time to learn what Monsanto has done to American Farmers via their GMO patents.

Thank you, I'll try to watch that when I get a chance.

Just to be clear though... I'm not defending GMO food or Monsanto at all. I think we all have the same goal, I just have a different opinion on how to get there.

 

[PRB]

How does labeling GMO foods hurt them exactly?

Costs of labeling, I thought your whole point was that we need to hurt the Monsantos to get even with them, did I misunderstand you?

 

[Natural Citizen]

Recount imminent. Heh...

Food labeling

93.7% Reporting

[TABLE="class: results-table"]
[TR="class: type-ballot"]
[TH="class: results-name"]No
[/TH]
[TD="class: results-percentage"]50.7%
[/TD]
[TD="class: results-popular"]691,794
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: type-ballot"]
[TH="class: results-name"] Yes
[/TH]
[TD="class: results-percentage"]49.3%
[/TD]
[TD="class: results-popular"]672,547
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[PRB]

Interesting...so you would eat rat turds if a box was labeled candy?

I eat what I want, I don't need labels to tell me what's good and bad

 

[PRB]

I talk with a good number of farmers in my work. My impression is that most of them really don't like the Monsantos, Pioneers, Syngentas of the world, but they sort of grin and bear it. It's their life. Some are in deep, but a lot have other jobs. A lot of them also don't like some of the intrusive technology. Don't know if I'd describe them as passive, but not sure how I'd describe them.

Anyway, just an observation. Nothing measured or scientific.

Intrusive technology? How so?

 

[Natural Citizen]

Ok cool, thank you.

I agree that it's normal and good for us to respectfully disagree on some things.

But I usually stay out of these types of issues because I don't want to be divisive and have us fight with each other when we do agree on so much of the important stuff.

Divisiveness is really the only phenomenon that stimulates these particular issues into discussion in a place like this. Without it people wouldn't ever know the issue exists. I mean you take a thread like March Against Monsanto. That hasn't been bumped in a while but it contains a wealth of information. Much has been shared there with regard to ballot initiatives that have actually passed as well as others coming up. I think it had around 50 thousand views the last time I looked at it. That happens because disagreement evolves into the flow of information and eventually forward momentum. So you shouldn't ever not speak yer peace. Of course, we prefer intelligent debate. And generally we do have that.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Don't know. I didn't ever see that.

Skip to 1:40 to see what I was referring to. The whole clip is probably good because it's a very outstanding movie.

Clip is a spoiler, by the way.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Intrusive...How so?

Kind of like your trolling on this forum. Except without the salivation.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Skip to 1:40 to see what I was referring to. The whole clip is probably good because it's a very outstanding movie.

Clip is a spoiler, by the way.

Heh. Dang. No, it wasn't anything like that. I just felt like tossing him out into right field or something. I don't usually get very mad about anything. He was just an annoying piggy more than anything.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

No, it wasn't anything like that.

I know; I was just kidding. Heh heh. That movie just popped in my head.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

NC, I was at game 6 of a baseball playoff and this couple next to us fell asleep in the 8th. Missed a great catch by the right fielder and a clinch of the pennant. There wasn't any annoying chewing, but they woke up and asked what was going on in the 9th. :-/

Also sat next to these opposing fans in a 16 inning game. They were annoying, so I was glad their team lost.

I sit in the Penguins section when going to a Hurricanes game. Yeah, I am chicken.

 

[PRB]

Why are you okay with legalizing weed (which results in the regulation and taxation thereof), but you are not okay with the gov't showing some consistency with labeling in the food industry? Seems like a double-standard.

I want government to be consistently pro-liberty, not more laws just to be consistent.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I want government to be consistently pro-liberty, not more laws just to be consistent.

Do you understand the concept of a citizen initiative? What about government? What does that mean to you? Can you define it, please? If you don't mind. Just so that we better understand each other. If you're looking to debate this ballot initiative, that is.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Of all of the counties left to report with only 79% and upward counted in these counties, they are voting yes to Prop 92 and have pulled within a ten thousand vote difference and some won't be reporting results until Friday.

Aside - Maui GMO ban passes after 3rd printout

Of course, Maui being the home to farms owned by these national companies like Monsanto and a Dow Chemical subsidiary, which produce new varieties of genetically engineered seeds and spend millions of dollars from out of state to try to thwart these citizens initiatives.

Certainly we'll see the effect of this across the nation combined with successful citizens initiatives that have previously come to pass in the U.S. as we continue to move forward.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Update: 4 counties remaining and 94.0% of est. votes counted state-wide. Final counts will be out on Friday for a couple of these counties. Lane county at 5pm on Friday. Not sure exactly on the others. Of course, regardless of what we're actually seeing happen here, the media is reporting that it failed but we know how they do. Right? Heh...

Anyhoo. Paper ballots only in Oregon, kiddies.


Ready? Lets go...

[TD="class: candname"]Yes
[/TD]
[TD="class: candbar"][/TD]
[TD="class: candvote"]682,104
[/TD]
[TD="class: candpct"]49.6%
[/TD]

[TD="class: candname win"]No
[/TD]
[TD="class: candbar"][/TD]
[TD="class: candvote"]693,070
[/TD]
[TD="class: candpct"]50.4%
[/TD]

Counties remaining...

Multnomah County - 83.3% Reporting

Yes - 61.7% 158,936
No - 38.3% 98,778

Clackamas County - 79.8% Reporting

No - 53.5% - 69,717
Yes - 46.5% 60,525

Benton County - 91.7% Reporting

Yes - 52.1% 19,431
No - 47.9% 17,862

Lane County - 92.6% Reporting

Yes - 57.3% 78,073
No - 42.7% 58,146

 

[2young2vote]

Any amount of regulation on businesses is bad regulation, for any reason, for any product, for any amount of time.

 

[donnay]

How Monsanto Keeps Halting GMO Labeling Despite Over 96% Approval
Monsanto's dirty tricks explained


by Anthony Gucciardi | Infowars.com | November 6, 2014


From the New York Times to Reuters and the Washington Post, all of the major publications agree: the general public is in full support of GMO labeling initiatives. Quite simply, they want to know what they’re giving to both themselves and their family. Time and time again, we see poll results demonstrating that more than 90% of the US population is in favor of GMO labeling. Yet time and time again, we see GMO labeling initiatives shot down across the country.

Are all of the major polling organizations in the country simply using incorrect statistical algorithms? Obviously, the answer instead lies in the dirty tricks (and even the mainstream media is now calling them out as such) used by mega biotech companies like Monsanto. In tandem with corporate food producers, these tricks are used to shove disinformation into the minds of voters who otherwise would fully support the concept of GMO labeling.

Specifically, we’re talking about pro-GMO lobby groups faking quotes from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that ‘support GMOs’ in the face of labeling initiatives, and even groups falsely claiming that Stanford is on the side of Monsanto amid the labeling debate (when they aren’t and haven’t even commented on the issue).

But before we get into these dirty guerrilla tactics and their use in the informational war over GMOs, let’s really look at the truly overwhelming support for GMO labeling in this country based upon the estimates of major polling groups.

The New York Times: 93% found to be in support of labeling GMOs

MSNBC: 96% in support

Reuters/NPR: 93% in support of full labeling

Washington Post: 95% in support of full labeling

Consumer Reports: 95% agree GM animals should be labeled

ABC News: 93% want federal GM labeling mandate

So with these stats being reported virtually unanimously, what could Monsanto possibly be doing to sway voters outside of blatantly manipulating the actual polling results? As it turns out, and as we wrote about back in 2012, Monsanto has actually been caught not only misusing an FDA logo — but blatantly fabricating an FDA quote in order to suppress California’s notorious Prop 37 GMO labeling bill. From the report back in November of 2012:

“Misuse of a United States government seal can lead to a $250,000 fine, twenty years in prison, and three years of supervised release — unless you’re a campaign organization funded by major corporations like Monsanto. In a move completely ignored by the mainstream media (many of which have financial ties to such corporations), the anti-GMO labeling No on 37 Committee paid for and disseminated a physical piece of direct mail that not only entirely misused the FDA logo but even sported a fabricated quote.

A quote that even the FDA has stated on record that was never stated. That is because it would actually be illegal to do so. You see federal agencies cannot take a stance on Proposition 37, which means that the Monsanto-funded No on 37 campaign literally created the quote and FDA support out of thin air. In other words, the organization leaders blatantly violated 8 U.S.C. §§ 506 and 1017 by misusing the FDA seal and writing a quote out of thin air to support their political campaign to keep Monsanto rolling in the billions.”

Continued...

 

[donnay]

GMO-labeling announced as defeated despite uncounted votes in counties favoring the measure
Wednesday, November 05, 2014 by: Julie Wilson staff writer

While some publications are reporting the death of Oregon's Measure 92, an initiative that would require the labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), the truth is that the race is still too close to call.

Vigilant reporting by The Oregonian reveals that, with 88 percent of the votes counted, the measure is trailing 49 to 51 percent; however, most of the votes yet to be counted are in Multnomah County, a region where 62 percent of the population favors GMO labeling.

Urban counties such as Multnomah, Lane, Benton and Jackson showed the most support for GMO labeling, while voters in rural areas were more opposed.

Announcing the measure's defeat before counting all the votes, especially in a race this close, is far too reminiscent of what happened in 2012 with California's Prop 37. Prop 37 was announced as being defeated by 6 percentage points, 53 to 47 percent, when more than 3 million votes were still left uncounted.

The alleged defeat seemed suspicious, especially with earlier polls showing an overwhelming support for the initiative, including 9 out 10 Californians supporting GMO labeling. Despite its defeat, the measure drew mass awareness that helped open the door for other states like Oregon to pass similar measures.

The passing of Measure 92 would make Oregon the first state to enact a voter-approved GMO-labeling law

The campaign surrounding Oregon's Measure 92 broke state records, as it was the most costly initiative on the ballot, blowing previous proposals out of the water in terms of spending. More than $20 million was funneled into the battle over GMO labeling, with the biotech industry dumping around $12 million into Oregon's initiative.

GMO-labeling proponents donated an estimated $8 million to the Yes on 92 campaign, arguing that the public has a right to know whether or not their food contains genetically modified ingredients.

While the Vermont legislature passed a GMO-labeling law last spring (which they are now being sued for), Oregon would be the first state to enact a similar law, except this one would be voter-approved.

Continued...