Tuesday, June 18, 2013
Environmentalists push for GMO labeling in Hawaii
Associated Press
POSTED: 01:34 p.m. HST, Feb 04, 2013
LAST UPDATED: 01:37 p.m. HST, Feb 04, 2013
Environmental groups are urging Hawaii lawmakers to require all genetically modified food to carry boldface labeling.
House lawmakers were debating the bill Monday, which proposes mandatory labeling of any genetically modified agricultural commodity sold in Hawaii.
Advocates say people deserve to know whether their food is genetically modified so they can make informed choices about what to buy and eat.
"I and many mothers deserve the right to know what we are feeding our children," said Jessica Mitchell, one of several parents who testified in favor of the bill.
Opponents argue the labels will drive up food costs and that there are no nutritional differences between food grown naturally and food that has been modified.
Alicia Maluafiti from the Hawaii Crop Improvement Association says requiring labeling is unfair to Hawaii residents, particularly small farmers who would be forced to comply and shoulder higher costs.
"If you pass a mandated labeling bill, you're going to force a mandatory regulatory process and a tax on consumers for 80 percent of the food that's in the supermarket," Maluafiti said. "It's not fair for every family in Hawaii that's struggling every day to put food on the table."
Community members presented conflicting scientific research supporting their opposing positions.
Labeling for genetically modified food has stirred controversy in states nationwide. A ballot measure to require labeling of genetically modified food in California was defeated last November after opponents spent $46 million in negative advertising.
Bill on genetically modified food labels debated
GMO food bills rejected
State lawmakers move forward with anti-GMO bill
State House resolution supports GMO food labeling
State finance committees approve dozens of bills
Anti-GMO advocates win battle, likely will lose war
The GM businesses want to deprive consumers of the right to make an informed decision by hiding from us knowledge whether the products we buy might contain GM material or not. They argue we are too ignorant to make such decisions and should rely instead upon decisions made by the food corporations who stand to profit from having us believe there are no possible ill-effects from these products.
Many of hte politicians voting on these bills receive significant campaign contributions from the GMO companies. Again, we are supposed to believe their views are not impacted by the fact they are being paid to think there are no ill-effects. The entire process is corrupt. The right of consumers to make informed decisions is a core principle in an honest marketplace. And the liability of food-producers for dangers they might subject consumers to is another key element necessary for an honest marketplace. Should GM foods eventually be shown to have ill-effects, how can consumers know their problems stem from those foods and how can the producers be held accountable?
Too many politicians will bend the rules in order to do the bidding of Monsanto and the other giant corporations. We demand transparency, fairness and an end to these conflicts of interest behind campaign contributions.
from hb174: "Genetically engineered material" means material derived from any part of a genetically engineered organism, without regard to whether the altered molecular or cellular characteristics of the organism are detectable in the material.
(f) The director of health shall adopt rules, pursuant to chapter 91, necessary for the purposes of this section, including rules for the testing of foods and raw agricultural commodities to determine the presence and content of genetically engineered material."
the first section states that an item may be considered gmo even with no detectable gmo material in it. then the bill makes the health dept responsible for detecting the presence of gmo.
sounds like chasing ghosts.
‘Soul Sessions’ feat. Taimane
