Reports claim GMO labeling fails in Washington

 Resize text         Printer-friendly version of this article Printer-friendly version of this article

Opponents of Initiative 522 (I-522), which would require GMO labeling, are claiming a victory, but those supporting the measure are refusing to concede until every vote is counted, which could be days from now because the voting was a mail-in ballot that had to be postmarked as of Nov. 5.

The Seattle Times, USA Today and the Grocery Manufacturers Association all indicated that the measure was defeated. The measure was trailing 45 percent to 55 percent as of Wednesday afternoon.

It was reported that the measure led in only four counties: King, Whatcom, Jefferson and San Juan.

The Seattle Times reported last night that the Pro-Initiative 522 group was not ready to concede and said the vote was still too close to call. When the final numbers of the ballot count will be released is unknown.

Whether the measure passes or not, pro-GMO labeling supporters have already announced plans to bring an initiative to a vote in Oregon in 2014.

To view the article from The Seattle Times, click here.  

To view the article from USA Today, click here.



Comments (6) Leave a comment 

Name
e-Mail (required)
Location

Comment:

characters left

Les Stephens    
Vancouver, WA  |  November, 07, 2013 at 08:15 AM

It would seem to me that if the non-GMO producers are so proud of their products that they would note it on their labels. Much simpler and a choice rather than a regulation.

Mark    
IL  |  November, 07, 2013 at 09:05 AM

If I'm right, 98% of all foods are GMO, So lets try to knock them down. Sorry you the general public will not pay the full price for Non GMO. So you want us, The Growers, Food processors, Retailers to help NON GMO to even the price field. Am I Correct ? There not enough land to produce non GMO and feed a Starving world

Jill hill    
Seattle  |  November, 07, 2013 at 12:27 PM

Hi Mark - I have read that gmo crops are not out performing non-gmo crops as was expected. We are using massive amounts of herbicides to produce Roundup ready corn, thus poisoning the environment around the crops. How is that a sustainable practice?

Craig A. Moore    
Billings, MT  |  November, 07, 2013 at 02:29 PM

Jill You need to back up your emotional response with scientific reports instead of "I heard". And why would Roundup ready corn need more herbicides over non-GMO corn? I have more questions for you but I will wait until you understand and can answer my last question. And don't hand me any "I heard" or "Buy this book on E-bay" to understand your spin.

Cyndi    
Arizona  |  November, 07, 2013 at 02:59 PM

Is it possible to discuss GMO vs Non-GMO in a civil, objective way or do people find it too compelling to engage in polarizing, negative conversations? My biggest concern is that we face a potential peril of being able to feed the world while possibly also compromising their long-term health. AT this point, there's a lot we do and do not know about GMOs, pesticides, etc. so can we keep the conversation open and informative?

Nachur Boy    
Ohio  |  November, 08, 2013 at 08:00 PM

Here are a couple of facts with no rhetoric: GMO crops have dramatically reduced the need and use of pesticides for crop protection, especially soil applied herbicides and insecticides. This is a good thing for us humans and our livestock, not to mention wildlife. We started using GMO seed over 17 years ago and there has been no confirmed case of human illness directly or indirectly tied to those GMOs. I trust the FDA to test food technology before it is released. Try not to let paranoia get in the way of sound science.


Brutus®

Brutus is the first side-by-side utility vehicle in the market to deliver front-end power take-off capability. Each Brutus model is ... Read More

View all Products in this segment

View All Buyers Guides

Feedback Form
Leads to Insight