What is it?
Californians will cast their votes next month on Proposition 37, a ballot initiative that would require labeling on food made from genetically modified organisms.
In the past months, Proposition 37 has gained national media recognition. The Huffington Post called the measure “a closely watched test of consumer attitudes about the merits of genetically engineered crops.” If passed, the measure would make California the first state to require labeling for GMOs. This could send ripples through the country’s corn and soybean industries.
Pros/Cons
Genetically modified crops, particularly corn and soybean, have come under heated debate in California and across the country. The USDA has found the crops safe for consumption, however companies like Monsanto spend millions of dollars each year lobbying the USDA. That money has in essence guaranteed the company a perpetual green light. “We’re not banning anything, and we’re not talking about a warning label. It comes down to our democratic right to know what we are buying for ourselves and our families,” said Assistant media director for California Right to Know, Zach Kaldveer.
It ma-kes sense that Northern California would be at the forefront of the labeling debate. For residents of the Golden State, odds are that even if you don’t buy organic produce you know what it is. But what will the measure mean for students?
“This is much more than a simple labeling measure, so look beyond that,” said No on 37 spokeswoman Kathy Fairbanks. “If it passes, grocery bills are going to go up. Times are tough and if the cost for groceries go up, students will be left with less income for things like tuition, books and rent, costs we’ve all seen go up.” A study funded by the campaign estimates that if Prop 37 passes, the average family will see a $400 increase in yearly grocery costs.
When asked about the potential increase of costs, Kaldveer said, “At the very most the increase will be a dime a month,” citing the constant reprinting of labels by food companies and the gradual integration of the measure.
Student impact
When asked why students should vote Yes on 37, the response spanned economic, philosophical, political and environmental implications.
“Studies have shown that since the advent of GMO crops 400 billion pounds of pesticides have been introduced,” Kaldeer said. “What we’re beginning to see is a kind of “pesticides arms race” resulting in super weeds and super bugs resistant to pesticides.”
Who’s funding It?
Billion dollar oligopolies like Monsanto and PepsiCo have come out as primary investors for the No on 37 campaigns. So far, they have spent over $30 million to try and stop a measure that has struck a chord with state residents.
At the end of the day both sides proposed the same question: Who do you trust?