News Oct 23, 2013 at 4:00 am

The Donor Lists for the GMO Initiative Say Everything


Thanks for letting me know who doesn't want me to know their food products may change my DNA. If people wnt another reason to V
ot e YES on I-522 go to…
Cascadian Beek
Any representative receiving gifts from corporations,
no LONGER QUALIFIES to be a Senator/Congress person and
loses their seat, without benefits/retirement,
minus each year of corporate "buy-outs"..

All representatives must be evaluated on facts,
as educators experience, every four years. When failed,
position is replaced with alternate.

Endorse and share:

What was the most highly-financed campaign in Washington state history? I'm looking and showing Costco's liquor privatization was only $20 million, but I don't think that is combined.
It actually doesn't say much of anything, except that there are dumb people on both sides. The GMO labels won't provide "more information" any more than the signs all over California that say "this building contains chemicals known to cause cancer".

How much does it contain? Which parts? Should you avoid the area altogether? Hold your breath, or just not touch anything?

Sometimes vague information is worse than no information at all.
Rich corporations hate for the Serfs to have choices
The most expensive initiative in WA state history was the Yes on 1183 - the Costco liquor initiative with $20,115,326 spent. And look how low liquor prices are! Proof on how trustworthy big corporations can be.

Saul Of-Hearts, I can't agree that "Sometimes vague information is worse than no information at all". While the NO 522 campaign pitches the idea that the initiative is flawed and confusing it's actually written pretty clearly, and with an eye towards not stepping on anything covered in federal law that might overturn it. But since as many people will read this initiative as read the POS i-1183 it doesn't matter.

What's clear is that the bio-chem backers of NO 522 have been blocking and refusing to release information on the impacts of their products for decades. The USDA and FDA refuse to ask for it, because if they had the research in their hands they would have to intervene. And the public and consumer groups are shut down by claims of trade secrets and proprietary information.

These corporations are like the tobacco companies of decades ago. Hiding research that proves negative health impact caused by their products until someone inside leaks it all out and the government is forced to step in and do what they should have been doing all along - acting in the public's best interests.

I don't know who's worse. The bio-chem companies that do things that knowingly make people ill (through exposing them to toxic agricultural chemicals, herbicides, in particular, where the applications on GMO plants is far higher that with conventional agriculture) or the government shills that run interference for them to keep information bottled up and to keep reforms or controls from being enacted. What I do know is that they are both some of the worse kinds of human filth.

If you're going to repost the same article Minard, you might want to actually double check the sources and see that No on 522 is up to $21.4 million, 5 itemized individuals in WA state (and 3 or more small contributions).

And, for what it's worth, California has put more into Yes on 522 than WA has.
After this vote is over, those 10 Yes on 522 donors are going to be right there on your kitchen table every day, deciding what you eat. The 13,000 people in the No campaign aren't going to have any special role in your life after this. You might not trust the intentions or wisdom of those 13,000, but what's it to you? What matters is what those 10 donors are going to do next.

So do you want those 10 to have free reign going forward? Or give them one little boundary, one small hurdle, this food label?
Lol. Cthulhu has changed his mind and wants everyone to embrace the wisdom of the crowd and vote No on 522. Welcome to our team.
their food products may change my DNA.

Care to explain how that works exactly? Reptilian technology?

Yeah, well my fuckups before I've had my first cup of coffee are better than your best shit on your best day.
Apparently @1 is confusing retroviruses with GMO products and @11 rolls out of bed at 11:30 AM.
This makes me want to contribute $25 to No on 522 but I'm not going to because they have plenty of money (I hope). @1 clearly doesn't understand how genetically modified organisms/food works. If we label for genes introduced into a plant in some lab, then we ABSOLUTELY need to label for all the breeding that went into the plants we are eating as well. Name parental strains several generations back so we *might* know what has made it into the food that we are already eating. Provide genetic analyses on every package of food so we are aware of ... of what? Labeling food in this way is a bad idea and is just going to make food more expensive when the point of GMO is to make it cheaper. People in America are so stupid when it comes to science. Passing an initiative that regulates that increased profits coming from GMO plants get passed down to the consumer. That's the kind of legislation we need (not that it will work).
@13, according to the PDC website voteNoon522 has Total Raised: $21,411,785.05 Total Spent: $13,530,110.33 but you can donate. However, if you're a smaller donor of $25 or less the author of this post doesn't think you're an "actual donor" and won't count you.
Monsanto just gave money to this YMCA science program:…

But I doubt that fact tells us anything about the quality of the program.
If someone doesn't want to eat GMO food for whatever reason (rational or irrational), they can purchase food that says "organic" or "no GMO." If there's no label, assume it contains GMO. What does this law accomplish then?
If this is a health issue, which it is, it should be handled at the federal level. What is the expectation? That each state would follow suit with its own initiative? That is so criminally inefficient to affect commerce with such randomization. Instead, work with the FDA, USDA, and our congressional representatives.
I myself, anecdotally, am fully invested with the importance of this issue, knowing that avoiding processed foods cleared up several things in my own health - it only stands to reason that this should too.
This is a health issue beyond states rights, it's a federal issue.
Just one question for all of the Yes on 522 crowd:

What is your solution to the looming overpopulation, environmental concerns, and global warming?

Complain all that you want about the scientifically and economically and healthfully proven solutions that have dominated improvements in crop science, but when you don't have any alternatives to a proven success story, your complaints are worthless.

Complain all you want about science, but when the primary goal of this Yes of 522 campaign is quite literally a smear campaign devoid of any facts (case in point, ""These are the same people who gave us DDT, PCBs, Agent Orange, and napalm," says PCC Natural Markets spokeswoman Trudy Bialic."). And complaining about the monopoly of 5 companies but don't seem to find any of the purchasers (true farmers) from these companies complaining with them just rings hollow.

So now what has the Yes of 522 crowd resorted to??? "Look at who is donating! The horror! They must be evil!" If Yes on 522 actually had a case or a point to their rhetoric, perhaps they should make it.

I'm Pro Science and educated! I like facts! So I'm No on 522.
@13, 18 Fuckin' A!
So is it the median contribution or the average contribution?

Makes a difference.
Its pretty simple to me. I want to know what is in my food. similar to MSG, nuts, wheat, and soy. Some people still claim that people are not effected by those ingredients; evidence and personal experience reveal otherwise.

Corporate interests and those friendly to them have opposed every truth in labeling initiative since the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906. If you don't recall that, then read Upton Sinclair's muckraking novel, the Jungle. There is a 21st century muckraking novel that will probably be written. The challenge will be short of a presidential commission (as in the Holmes commission under Teddy Roosevelt that led to the Pure Food And Drug Act) we're not likely to see any cooperation. Prior to that act becoming law,the Coca Cola company had cocaine in their cola product without a label indicating it so. We'd think that to be reprehensible today. 100 years from now we'll think the same of GMO labeling. That is why I did vote YES to support initiative I-522 along with other kitchen and health conscious voters. Peace!
@15 not to be rude, but what is your point?

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.