Yes On Proposition 37
YES ON PROPOSITION 37—because you should have the
right to know what is in your food.
Voting Yes on Prop. 37 means three things
• YOU WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT’S
IN YOUR FOOD, and whether your food is produced using
• FOOD WILL BE LABELED ACCURATELY. Food labels
will have to disclose if the product was produced through
• PROTECTING YOUR FAMILY’S HEALTH WILL BE
EASIER. You’ll have the information you need about foods
that some physicians and scientists say are linked to allergies
and other significant health risks.
The food we buy already has nutritional information on the
labels. With Proposition 37, we will have information, in plain
language, if the food was genetically engineered, which means the
food has DNA that was artificially altered in a laboratory using
genes from viruses, bacteria, or other plants or animals.
Because genetically engineered foods are controversial, over 40
countries around the world require labels for genetically engineered
foods, including most of Europe, Japan, and even China and
India. Shouldn’t American companies give Americans the same
information they give foreigners?
There are no long-term health studies that have proven that
genetically engineered food is safe for humans. Whether you buy
genetically engineered food or not, you have a right to know what
you are buying and not gamble on your family’s health. Labeling
lets us know what’s in our food so we can decide for ourselves.
PROPOSITION 37 IS A SIMPLE, COMMON SENSE
MEASURE. It doesn’t cost anything to include information on a
label, and it’s phased in, giving manufacturers time to print new
labels telling you what’s in the food, or change their products if
they do not want to sell food produced using genetic engineering.
Proposition 37 also prevents the misleading use of the word
“natural” on products that are genetically engineered.
Big food manufacturers and agrichemical companies and
their lobbyists oppose this measure. Many of these are the same
companies that lied to us about the effects of pesticides or fought
to keep other information off food labels, such as the number of
calories, or how much fat or salt is in their products. Now they
want to keep us in the dark about their genetic engineering of our
Whether you want to eat genetically engineered foods or not,
PROPOSITION 37 GIVES YOU THE POWER to choose what
foods to feed your family. The big chemical companies should not
make the decision for you.
Consumers, family farmers, doctors, nurses, nutritionists,
and small business people and NEARLY ONE MILLION
CALIFORNIANS ALREADY STEPPED UP TO SIGN THE
PETITIONS GIVING YOU THE RIGHT TO KNOW
WHAT’S IN OUR FOOD. WILL YOU JOIN THEM?
Find out more or join us now at www.CARightToKnow.org.
When you vote on Prop. 37, please ask yourself just one
question: DO I HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT IS IN
THE FOOD I EAT AND FEED MY FAMILY? The answer is
Yes on Proposition 37.
DR. MICHELLE PERRO, Pediatrician
REBECCA SPECTOR, West Coast Director
Center for Food Safety
GRANT LUNDBERG, Chief Executive Officer
Lundberg Family Farms
Rebuttal by No on Proposition 37
- October 03, 2012 12:56 PM
37’s so-called “right to know” regulations are really a deceptive
scheme, full of special-interest exemptions and hidden costs for
consumers and taxpayers.
37 exempts milk, cheese and meat from its labeling
requirements. It exempts beer, wine, liquor, food sold at
restaurants and other foods containing genetically engineered
In fact, IT EXEMPTS TWO-THIRDS OF THE FOODS
CALIFORNIANS CONSUME—including products made by
corporations funding the 37 campaign.
CREATES NEW SHAKEDOWN LAWSUITS
37 was written by a trial lawyer who specializes in filing lawsuits
against businesses. It creates a new category of shakedown lawsuits
allowing lawyers to sue farmers, grocers, and food companies—
without any proof of violation or damage.
CONSUMERS WOULD GET MISLEADING
More than 400 scientific studies have shown foods made with
GE ingredients are safe. Leading health organizations like the
American Medical Association, World Health Organization,
National Academy of Sciences, 24 Nobel Prize winning scientists,
and US Food and Drug Administration agree.
“There is no scientific justification for special labeling of
bioengineered foods.”—American Medical Association
HIGHER COSTS FOR CONSUMERS AND TAXPAYERS
Studies show that, by forcing many common food products
to be repackaged or remade with higher-priced ingredients, 37
would cost the average California family hundreds of dollars more
per year for groceries.
The official state fiscal impact analysis concludes that
administering 37’s red tape and lawsuits would cost taxpayers
Even 37’s largest funder admits it “would be an expensive
37 IS A DECEPTIVE AND COSTLY SCHEME. Vote NO!
California Farm Bureau Federation
DR. HENRY I. MILLER, Founding Director
Office of Biotechnology of the Food & Drug Administration
TOM HUDSON, Executive Director
California Taxpayer Protection Committee
No on Proposition 37
Prop. 37 isn’t a simple measure, like promoters claim. It’s a
deceptive, deeply flawed food labeling scheme that would add
more government bureaucracy and taxpayer costs, create new
frivolous lawsuits, and increase food costs by billions—without
providing any health or safety benefits. And, it’s full of specialinterest exemptions.
PROP. 37 CONFLICTS WITH SCIENCE
Biotechnology, also called genetic engineering (GE), has been
used for nearly two decades to grow varieties of corn, soybeans
and other crops that resist diseases and insects and require
fewer pesticides. Thousands of common foods are made with
ingredients from biotech crops.
Prop. 37 bans these perfectly safe foods in California unless
they’re specially relabeled or remade with higher cost ingredients.
The US Food and Drug Administration says such a labeling
policy would “be inherently misleading.”
Respected scientific and medical organizations have concluded
that biotech foods are safe, including:
• National Academy of Sciences
• American Council on Science and Health
• Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
• World Health Organization
“There is no scientific justification for special labeling of
bioengineered foods.”—American Medical Association, June 2012
PROP. 37: FULL OF SPECIAL-INTEREST EXEMPTIONS
“Prop. 37’s arbitrary regulations and exemptions would benefit
certain special interests, but not consumers.”—Dr. Christine Bruhn,
Department of Food Science and Technology, UC Davis
37 is full of absurd, politically motivated exemptions. It
requires special labels on soy milk, but exempts cow’s milk and
dairy products. Fruit juice requires a label, but alcohol is exempt.
Pet foods containing meat require labels, but meats for human
consumption are exempt.
Food imported from China and other foreign countries are
exempt if sellers simply claim their products are “GE free.”
Unscrupulous foreign companies could game the system.
PROP. 37 AUTHORIZES SHAKEDOWN LAWSUITS
It was written by a trial lawyer to benefit trial lawyers. It creates
a new class of “headhunter lawsuits,” allowing lawyers to sue
family farmers and grocers without any proof of harm.
“37 lets trial lawyers use shakedown lawsuits to squeeze money from
family farmers and grocers—costing California courts, businesses and
taxpayers millions.”—California Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse
PROP. 37: MORE BUREAUCRACY AND TAXPAYER COSTS
37 requires state bureaucrats to administer its complex
requirements by monitoring tens of thousands of food labels.
It sets no limit on how many millions would be spent on
bureaucracy, red tape and lawsuits.
It’s a blank check . . . paid by taxpayers.
PROP. 37 MEANS HIGHER FOOD COSTS
37 forces farmers and food companies to implement costly
new operations or switch to higher-priced, non-GE or organic
ingredients to sell food in California.
Economic studies show this would increase food costs for the
average family by hundreds of dollars annually—a HIDDEN
FOOD TAX that would especially hurt seniors and low-income
families who can least afford it.
“37 would unfairly hurt family farmers and consumers. It must
be stopped.”—California Farm Bureau Federation, representing
Join scientists, medical experts, family farmers, taxpayer
advocates, small businesses.
VOTE NO ON 37.
STOP THIS DECEPTIVE, COSTLY FOOD LABELING
DR. BOB GOLDBERG, Member
National Academy of Sciences
California Family Farmer
BETTY JO TOCCOLI, President
California Small Business Association
Rebuttal by Yes On Proposition 37
- October 03, 2012 12:56 PM
Proposition 37—Say “Yes” to know what’s in your food.
Proposition 37 simply means you’ve the right to know what’s in
your food. The way to do that is to make sure food labels are
Proposition 37 puts you in charge. No government bureaucracy,
politician or agrichemical company will be able to hide whether
your food is genetically engineered. Enforcement is only an
issue if companies disobey the law! All they must do is tell you
what’s in your food, as they already do in over 40 other nations
throughout Europe, Australia, Japan and even China and Russia.
Proposition 37 doesn’t ban genetically engineered food. Big
agribusiness and agrichemical companies and their lobbyists
want to scare you. Under Proposition 37, you can keep buying
your current foods, or you can select foods that aren’t genetically
engineered. It’s your choice.
Proposition 37 doesn’t raise food costs or taxes. Because food
companies regularly re-print labels and there’s a reasonable phase
in period, Proposition 37 won’t raise prices.
Proposition 37 will help protect your family’s health. The
FDA says “providing more information to consumers about
bioengineered foods would be useful.” Without accurate food
labeling, you risk eating foods you are allergic to. Why don’t
the big food companies want you to know what’s in your food?
With conflicting, uncertain science about the health effects of
genetically engineered foods, labeling is an important tool to
protect your family’s health.
WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT’S IN OUR
FOOD. Yes on 37.
JAMIE COURT, President
JIM COCHRAN, General Manager
Swanton Berry Farm
DR. MARCIA ISHII-EITEMAN, Senior Scientist
Pesticide Action Network