Prop 37
Read our Prop 37 Cheat Sheet
Who's Funding Prop 37? Check the Databases
More Articles About Prop 37
The commercial, produced by the Yes on Proposition 37 California Right to Know Campaign, compares GMOs -- and the argument that they're safe -- to tobacco, DDT and Agent Orange.
No on 37, the organization fighting to maintain current food labeling, has the deeper pockets in this fight. By a lot: according to MediaNews Group, their supporters have donated almost $25 million, while Yes on Prop 37 has raised only $2.8 million.
However, the Yes campaign has strength in numbers, if social media is any indication. As of this writing they have over 50,00 Twitter followers and over 35,000 Facebook fans, while No on 37 has only 164 Twitter followers and 319 Facebook fans.
Let us know in the comments what you think of the ad, and take the poll: how do you think you'll vote?
[Photo courtesy Flickr user Daquella manera]
Eat better by following KCET Food on Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr.
About the Author
4 Comments
In order to be fair, what Karl says above is not accurate regarding Prop 37. This is not about conventional versus organic farming. That is a farmers choice. If using non GMO seeds then the comparison between Organic and Conventional is relevant and the jury is still out on that.
However, this is about using GMO seeds, hormones in cows (rBST), and the labeling of such in our foods. Peer reviewed science IS showing evidence of problems with GMO foods both in growing and in the human body ( as well as animals used for testing, etc.) It is simple enough to find good research to back these statements. You have a right to educate yourself and to know what is in your food.
I've been debating this with friends who just do not understand why labeling should be mandatory. One friend I had to give a little and acknowledge that the only thing Prop 37 does is provide labels that information and that is it. But I added that I would never tell anyone how to live their life or what to eat, for me I want to know so that I can decide for myself. Just as I would never force my beliefs on them, I request that the businesses give me the same courtesy. This made the connection he was looking for and agreed that if it is about choices then why not...it wasn't for him but not for him to say if it should be for me.
I've been debating this with friends who just do not understand why labeling should be mandatory. One friend I had to give a little and acknowledge that the only thing Prop 37 does is provide labels that information and that is it. But I added that I would never tell anyone how to live their life or what to eat, for me I want to know so that I can decide for myself. Just as I would never force my beliefs on them, I request that the businesses give me the same courtesy. This made the connection he was looking for and agreed that if it is about choices then why not...it wasn't for him but not for him to say if it should be for me.
No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://www.kcet.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/15143
Karl says :
The supporters of this proposition would have one believe that organic produce is safer, healthier, more nutritious and pesticide free compared to conventional produce. Unfortunately, none of those assertions are supported by peer-reviewed science.
Want to eat exclusively organic food? Fine - vote with your pocket book, support organic farmers, and tell manufacturers that they should cater to your concerns. Mandatory labeling needs to be reserved for health and nutrition.