4 questions voters should ask about Proposition 37

Zack Kaldveer, Assistant Media Director of the Yes on 37 Ca Right to Know campaign, had a 45 minute interview the other day about GMOs and labeling. The director immediately cut a 2 minute segment and put it up on YouTube, as it asks the right questions.

On Tuesday, November 6, Californians can make the decision to vote yes or no on Proposition 37 - the initiative to make labeling of GMO products mandatory.

Here are four questions that Kaldveer asks you, before you cast your vote:

1. Since when have the pesticide and junk food corporations ever spent $45 million to save you money, improve your health or protect the environment?

2. When it comes to your health and the health of your family, who do you trust? The pesticide and junk food corporations, bank-rolling the No on 37 campaign?

Or groups like the California Nurses Association, The Breast Cancer Action Fund and the American Public Health Association?

3. Who do you trust to protect the environment? Companies like Monsanto and Dupont, who brought us DDT and Agent Orange?

Or do you trust Prop 37 supporters, like the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the California League of Conservation Voters.

4. Who do you trust when it comes to whether you have the right to know what's in the food that you eat? Companies like Monsanto and Dupont and the pesticide and junk food corporations, bank-rolling the No on 37 campaign?

Or Prop 37 supporters, like Consumers Union, the Consumer Federation of America and Public Citizen.

What we are being asked is to trust, in all of these areas, corporations that have a long history of deceiving the public, polluting the environment, and endangering public health, and disregarding the support that the Prop 37 has from organizations that have dedicated their lives and decades to improving our health and fighting for peoples' rights over corporate profit.

All Proposition 37 is asking for is a simple label, as is currently required for 3,000 other ingredients. This would come at no cost to the consumer, but would inform the purchaser of the content of the food, so that they can make an informed choice of what to feed their families.

Prop 37 was put on the ballot by a million Californians, just like you

No on 37, embodied by Big Pesticide and the junk food companies, has spent a whopping $45 million to try to prevent you knowing what is in your food.

On the other hand, the California Nurses Association says: "Nurses see people suffering from serious diet-related diseases every day. The potential danger of genetically modified foods is why CNA supports Prop 37."

The Los Angeles Times says: "Such labeling wouldn’t result in significant increases in food costs, no matter what the industry tries to tell you. After all, food companies regularly change their labels in one way or another."

Ken Cook, president of Environmental Working Group and a Californian resident said, “Makers of sugar-laden cereal and soda companies once tried to label their products as beneficial to children’s well-being."

"Federal regulators forced them to drop their bogus health claims. Now these same companies are pouring millions into defeating Prop 37, even though the label would actually be true and useful to consumers who want more information about their food. If their products were made with genetically engineered ingredients, then they’d be labeled as such. No more, no less.”

For more information visit: www.carighttoknow.org/ and read more by Zack Kaldveer here.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/336206#ixzz2BLJY8yZy

Consumer groups document $45 million deception against Prop 37

Amid allegations of fraud by the No on 37 campaign, the US Department of Justice refers a complaint to the FDA about alleged fraudulent use of its seal in No on 37 campaign fliers, opposing GMO labeling in California.

Digital Journal reported on October 18 about the latest in a line of misrepresentations and possible fraud, and that California Right to Know was calling for a criminal investigation of No on 37 for misuse of the FDA Seal and a fabricated FDA quote, all in opposition to the labeling of GMOs.

An agent from the FBI Sacramento field office contacted Yes on Proposition 37 legal representative Joe Sandler on Thursday to follow up on the formal complaint about the potentially criminal use of the FDA’s name, official seal and authority by opponents of Prop 37... read more.

Halloween: GMOs are a Trick and not a Treat

We could all become Genetically Modified Zombies and Halloween would be 365 days a year. Vote Yes on Proposition 37...

For more information visit http://www.carighttoknow.org/

LA City Council unanimously endorses 'Yes on 37' for GMO labeling

Citing concerns over pesticides and contamination of organic fields, the Los Angeles City Council has unanimously endorsed Proposition 37, the California ballot initiative for labeling of genetically modified food.

Supporters rallied in front of the Los Angeles City Hall on Wednesday, as the LA City Council unanimously passed a resolution supporting Proposition 37, the California Right to Know ballot measure that would call for labeling of genetically engineered foods in California.

This measure would allow California to join 61 countries where labeling of genetically modified food is mandatory. It would also ensure that foods containing GMOs or genetically engineered ingredients will be prohibited from being marketed as "natural." ... read more.

Ca Right to Know calls for criminal investigation of 'No on 37''

In the latest in a line of misrepresentations and possible fraud, California Right to Know is calling for a criminal investigation of "No on 37" for misuse of the FDA Seal and a fabricated FDA quote, all in opposition to the labeling of GMOs.

Proposition 37 would require labeling of genetically engineered food in California. The opposition to Prop 37 is spending a whopping $35 million to discredit it. And they are doing this using misrepresentations and possibly even fraud.

Letters were sent to the US Department of Justice on Thursday by the California Right to Know "Yes on 37" campaign, requesting a criminal investigation into the "No on 37" campaign. The reason for this? "No on 37" affixed the FDA's seal to one of the campaign's mailers... read more.

Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: 'No on 37' misleading public

The "No on 37" campaign, opposing the proposition to label GMOs in California, has once again hit trouble for misleading the public. This time from the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

The latest critique to the "No on 37" campaign comes in the form of a press release from the world's largest organization for food and nutrition professionals, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

This press release states that the "No on 37" campaign "misled" the public in its ballot argument, printed in the Secretary of State's Official California Voter Information Guide...  read more.

'No on 37' forced to pull TV ad misrepresenting Stanford University

The group opposing Proposition 37, California's GMO labeling measure, had to pull their first TV ad, after millions of Californians saw it, and do a reshoot.

The reason why the ad was pulled? According to the LA Times, the ad identified one Henry Miller as a doctor at Stanford University. However, the ad did not disclose that Miller merely serves as a researcher at the Hoover Institute, which is a right-wing think tank at Stanford.

Further, the ad violated Stanford's policy that prohibits consultants from using the university's name for political purposes and officials from Stanford insisted that the ad be re-shot to remove the university buildings in the background... read more.

Monsanto and Co push $5.5 million more against GMO labeling

Monsanto and 'Big Pesticide' are paying plenty to try and defeat Proposition 37, requiring the labeling of genetically engineered food in California.

Digital Journal reported in August that opponents to Proposition 37, for the labeling of foods with GMO content, had some very deep pockets. The very next day, Monsanto dropped another $4.2 million into the 'No to 37' pot.

Now, according to campaign finance disclosure records filed with the California Secretary of State, Monsanto has just paid in an additional $2.89 million in their fight against Proposition 37. This bring's Monsanto's total contribution against Proposition 37 to a grand $7.1 million... read more.

'Yes to Prop 37' campaign produces television advert (video)

California Right to Know has now produced a hard-hitting TV advert to make people aware of their cause - the labeling of products containing genetically modified ingredients.

According to the media, the CA Right to Know battle for the labeling of GMO products is the "Davids" against "Goliaths", with the latter being Monsanto and Dow Chemical... read more and find out how you can help.

Monsanto puts $4.2 million into the anti-GMO labeling pot

According to the latest campaign finance reports, Monsanto has just contributed $4.2 million in opposition of Proposition 37 for GMO labeling in California, which comes up for voting in the November elections.

Digital Journal reported yesterday on the $10 million in donations by food makers and pesticide companies, to oppose Proposition 37. Prop 37 would require all foods with genetically engineered contents to be labeled.... read more.

USA’s top food makers & agrichemical co's oppose GMO labeling

Some of the biggest food manufacturers and agrichemical companies in the U.S.A. are opposing honest food labeling and are against Prop 37.

Among these companies are PepsiCo, Nestlé, Coca Cola and Kellogg. All are working to defeat California’s GMO labeling measure.... read more.

CA Right to Know GMO labeling measure is Prop. 37 on Nov. ballot

Due to overwhelming support for the historic GMO labeling initiative, the California Right to Know Labeling Measure will be Proposition 37 on the November Ballot.

Digital Journal reported that on the evening of June 11, the California Secretary of State's office announced that the Right to Know initiative to label genetically engineered foods would be on the state's November ballot... read more.