Yes, you are reading it correctly and it is not an oxymoron statement!
When I was preparing to vote for Prop 37, my immediate reaction was (very likely as yours) to vote Yes, with a notion that yes, they must be held responsible to let the world know that they feed the world GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms) and GE (Genetically Engineered) products, which in turn harms humans.
But then as I was debating this with my wife, who brought a different perspective, who also was thinking of voting Yes, to start with .... collectively we reached a different conclusion and that is to vote NO. If you wonder why, please read on ....
The goal of Prop 37, per my understanding, is to promote healthy food habits. This in turn can be defined as Non-GMO, Non-GE, natural food. Correct ? If that is correct the best way to do so would be:
- To promote availability and affordability of natural, healthy, non GMO, non GE food.
- Label natural food - For example promote Non GMO Project:
- We do not label produce which is not organic - we label organic one's.
- Publicity of anything legitimizes it (creates an acceptance of it) and you can apply this to anything ranging from celebrity behavior to terrorism.
Now let's evaluate if Prop 37 is passed - what will we achieve?
Labeling requirement for GMO, GE food will require:
1. Almost every food to be labeled, as most food being sold today is GMO and GE.
2. This in turn will result in a need to consume more toxic material in the form of ink, as much of the produce today is minimally labeled which will require labeling.
3. This will result in massive costs to the existing food companies or at least a good excuse for them to increase food costs.
4. In current economic situation this will mean more cost to a families, food pantries, shelters, food banks and in turn more costs for the tax payers.
5. A lawyer community now has an additional reason to promote law suites.
6. In turn we have only expanded the legislated living we all endure today.
By passing Prop 37, we would have succeeded to let the whole world know that we are eating bad food. But the question is, will this change anything on the front of 'availability and affordability' of healthy, natural food? Not by labeling it for sure!
Now one may say - I am just seeking my right to know which is a fair requirement.
But I think I live in a free country and I already have that right and actually have access to that information if I really want to know about it.
Finally a humble disclaimer: I am not a Republican nor a Democrat, not even Independent. I am an American and I think voting No is good for California and America.
When I was preparing to vote for Prop 37, my immediate reaction was (very likely as yours) to vote Yes, with a notion that yes, they must be held responsible to let the world know that they feed the world GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms) and GE (Genetically Engineered) products, which in turn harms humans.
But then as I was debating this with my wife, who brought a different perspective, who also was thinking of voting Yes, to start with .... collectively we reached a different conclusion and that is to vote NO. If you wonder why, please read on ....
The goal of Prop 37, per my understanding, is to promote healthy food habits. This in turn can be defined as Non-GMO, Non-GE, natural food. Correct ? If that is correct the best way to do so would be:
- To promote availability and affordability of natural, healthy, non GMO, non GE food.
- Label natural food - For example promote Non GMO Project:
- We do not label produce which is not organic - we label organic one's.
- Publicity of anything legitimizes it (creates an acceptance of it) and you can apply this to anything ranging from celebrity behavior to terrorism.
Now let's evaluate if Prop 37 is passed - what will we achieve?
Labeling requirement for GMO, GE food will require:
1. Almost every food to be labeled, as most food being sold today is GMO and GE.
2. This in turn will result in a need to consume more toxic material in the form of ink, as much of the produce today is minimally labeled which will require labeling.
3. This will result in massive costs to the existing food companies or at least a good excuse for them to increase food costs.
4. In current economic situation this will mean more cost to a families, food pantries, shelters, food banks and in turn more costs for the tax payers.
5. A lawyer community now has an additional reason to promote law suites.
6. In turn we have only expanded the legislated living we all endure today.
By passing Prop 37, we would have succeeded to let the whole world know that we are eating bad food. But the question is, will this change anything on the front of 'availability and affordability' of healthy, natural food? Not by labeling it for sure!
Now one may say - I am just seeking my right to know which is a fair requirement.
But I think I live in a free country and I already have that right and actually have access to that information if I really want to know about it.
Finally a humble disclaimer: I am not a Republican nor a Democrat, not even Independent. I am an American and I think voting No is good for California and America.
