Prop 37 GMO labeling in California

[RemyG1971]

Are you supporting Prop 37 the mandatory labeling of GMO related products in California? 

[tednlou2]

Could you explain or provide a link of what this is, for those of us not from California? 

[RemyG1971]

Could you explain or provide a link of what this is, for those of us not from California?

Here you go.

http://www.carighttoknow.org/

[mitch777]

well,

i have yet to meet willywump in person, but, from what i have read i don't think you should count on his vote.
 

[GSOgymrat]

I hate the California Prop system and Prop 37 is a perfect example of the flaw of this legislative process. I know very little about GMO foods so I started researching the subject online because I find it interesting and if I lived in California I would want to educate myself before I voted. I looked online and found that both sides are using dubious studies, questionable science and obvious deception and scare tactics to promote their agendas. There is big money fueling both sides, especially on the "no" campaign, and this has a direct effect on voter's perceptions. The bottom line is I can't make a decision because the subject is too complicated and there is too much conflicting information.

Average people like myself are not sufficiently educated on this topic to make the best possible decision. The implications of Prop 37 go beyond just food labeling, are expensive and could have unforeseen and unintended consequences. These decisions should be made by a committee of people who are knowledgeable in agricultural science, food safety, public policy, etc. Food science and safety should not be decided popular vote, just like basic human rights (Prop 8 ) should not be decided by popular vote.

Prop 666: State tax revenue will not be be provided for treatment of expensive and avoidable medical conditions such as HIV.

Yes, let's put that to a popular vote.

[tednlou2]

I was pretty sure you were making a point with prop 666, but I Googled it anyway.  I wouldn't put it past CA to have that on the ballot. 

[RemyG1971]

I hate the California Prop system and Prop 37 is a perfect example of the flaw of this legislative process. I know very little about GMO foods so I started researching the subject online because I find it interesting and if I lived in California I would want to educate myself before I voted. I looked online and found that both sides are using dubious studies, questionable science and obvious deception and scare tactics to promote their agendas. There is big money fueling both sides, especially on the "no" campaign, and this has a direct effect on voter's perceptions. The bottom line is I can't make a decision because the subject is too complicated and there is too much conflicting information.

Average people like myself are not sufficiently educated on this topic to make the best possible decision. The implications of Prop 37 go beyond just food labeling, are expensive and could have unforeseen and unintended consequences. These decisions should be made by a committee of people who are knowledgeable in agricultural science, food safety, public policy, etc. Food science and safety should not be decided popular vote, just like basic human rights (Prop 8 ) should not be decided by popular vote.

Prop 666: State tax revenue will not be be provided for treatment of expensive and avoidable medical conditions such as HIV.

Yes, let's put that to a popular vote.

I could not disagree more. Usually the committees that would decide this for us are already in the pockets of MonSanto which is at the heart of the problem. This will require packaging just to indicate if products contain GMO’s chances are you are eating them today and the only reason you think it is food is because it looks like food. I would have to disagree again on Prop 8, I believe the Federal Government should keep their hands out of everything and leave it up to the people. If the people vote one way or the other so be it. I am for less Government not more.

[leatherman]

I would have to disagree again on Prop 8, I believe the Federal Government should keep their hands out of everything and leave it up to the people. If the people vote one way or the other so be it.

shouldn't the federal gov't be there to assure that all citizens have the rights guaranteed in the Constitution? Or would you leave civil rights up to the people in each separate state? I know many people here in the rural South that would love to be able to discriminate against blacks and gays with impunity.

Oh! Don't forget that a lot of people were clamoring to put HIV-infected people into special camps back in the early 90s. That was such a popular opinion that a Presidential candidate (Mike Huckabee) was calling for that. Are you really sure that the general population ought to be deciding things like that based on emotions and religion instead of scientific facts?

I am for less Government not more.

I'm all for "less government" too; but I sure don't want the anarchy of "no government".

besides you are making a pretty odd discussion point there anyway. it's not like the "government" is some evil entity out to do wrong to the "people" of the States. Again, according to the Constitution, we the people ARE the government; and really WE should have our hands on everything to make sure we're not poisoned by our air, water or food and that everyone has the same rights.

[GSOgymrat]

I am for less Government not more.

If you want less government then why do you want to create a bureaucracy to force private companies to label their food products?

[thunter34]

I would have to disagree again on Prop 8, I believe the Federal Government should keep their hands out of everything and leave it up to the people. If the people vote one way or the other so be it. I am for less Government not more.

Way to insult about 75% of the people on this board.  "Hey...if the majority (and heterosexuals WILL be the majority - just a fact of life) votes that you can't get married, so be it."  <----says someone who isn't subject to such a vote, or just doesn't personally care to get married. 

And as has been mentioned just above, if the federal government hadn't interceded on behalf of a minority, where would we be?  Are you in favor of having women's rights being voted on state by state?  Or the rights of racial minorities?  How about the rights of people with developmental disabilities who are a small minority and often unable to advocate for themselves?  Just put that on the ballot box state by state?  And what about other disabled populations?

I mean why should they get al the choice parking spots at Christmas?  I want a vote!

[RemyG1971]

I am simply speaking my mind honestly. I do not want to offend anyone but that is the way I feel. I believe anyone should have the right to marry who they love but I do not believe it is something that should be determined by the Federal Government. Individual States should have the right to determine that and not the Federal Government. When it comes to the Military the Federal Government has every right to make that decision. The ADA, Women’s rights & the rights of various racial minorities were passed by the Federal Government those issues were passed via legislation and never came up for a vote for by the people, I agree the mentioned were good things but that was taken out of the States hands by the Federal Government.

As for food labeling please do a little bit of research on MonSanto and their efforts to prevent Propositions like Prop 37 in California from ever coming to a popular vote in your State.

[RemyG1971]

If you want less government then why do you want to create a bureaucracy to force private companies to label their food products?

Where do you think a majority of your food comes from? It comes from MonSanto and MonSanto is basically performing science experiments with our food. Have you ever heard of the Roundup crop? Or the terminator gene? If you are a meat eater MonSanto provides the feed for that animal, if you are a vegetarian MonSanto is probably providing the seed to grow that vegetables and you have no right to know what is in it. Should we leave that up to the FDA? Michael Taylor the head of the FDA is an ex Lobbyist & VP for MonSanto, do you not look at this as a conflict of interest? I sure as heck do.

[Miss Philicia]

teabagging in process