Monsanto threatens to sue states who require labeling GMOs

[Guest guest]

" someone or some state has to challenge the use of the Bill of

Rights, designed to protect we individuals, from using it to thwart the

sharing of information and the subjugation of a whole industry "

" We know that Monsanto and their minions will do everything in their

power to spread lies and confuse voters. They have proven this time and

again and most recently in Vermont and Connecticut where citizens in

those states overwhelmingly supported bills to require labeling of

genetically engineered foods.

Only a few days after voters in California qualified the historic

initiative to label GMOs, Monsanto and biotech lobbyists were working

behind closed doors in Connecticut to kill the bill that would have made

it possible for the residents in that state to know what's in their

food.1 In the final hours of the 2012 legislative session, the biotech

industry succeeded in getting Connecticut's governor and House

leaders to strip the bill of its labeling requirement as it was on the

verge of passing with bipartisan support. Now, this year alone,

governors in Vermont and Connecticut have both caved under the biotech

industry's threats to sue them if they pass a bill to label GMOs.

While these backroom shenanigans can't happen in California, since

the ballot initiative will be put to a vote of the people, we know that

Monsanto's minions will be up to their usual dirty tricks. Already,

a powerful biotech front group is starting to spread misleading stories

in the media and distorting the real facts about the California Right to

Know Genetically Engineered Food Act of 2012. "

http://fooddemocracynow.org <http://fooddemocracynow.org/>

The G.E. foods bill in Connecticut has been stripped of its labeling

requirement due to industry pressure and threats of a law suit.

Connecticut tried and failed to have GMOs labeled.

Rep. Roy <http://www.housedems.ct.gov/Roy/> of Milford, CT. is

co-chair of the Environment Committee and the original sponsor of the

bill HB 5117, An Act Concerning Genetically Engineered Foods, which was

discussed in legislature today.

The bill had been overwhelmingly backed by the Legislative committee in

March this year. Both political sides were in agreement over measures

giving consumers more information about what they are eating.

Right to Know CT rallied on Friday, May 4, 2012 in support of Rep. Roy's

bill and handed over the Right to Know signed petition

<http://www.change.org/petitions/the-governor-of-ct-support-right-to-kno\

w-ct-and-gmo-labeling-enact-hb-5117-into-law> to the legislature. The

petition had just under 10,000 signatures.

However, today turned out to be a disappointment as the legislature

states that the labeling requirement for the G.E. foods bill has been

removed. Apparently this is due to " industry pressure " and threats of a

law suit.

Last month Digital Journal

<http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/322545> reported that Vermont

had to drop the idea of labeling GMOs, or be sued by the agricultural

giant Monsanto. Now it seems Connecticut is in the same boat.

When reached for comment today, Rep Roy said, " I feel very strongly

that someone or some state has to challenge the use of the Bill of

Rights, designed to protect we individuals, from using it to thwart the

sharing of information and the subjugation of a whole industry.

Residents of more than 50 other countries get simple information saying

that GMOs are present in a product. The freest society in the world

cannot get that simple sentence. "

Analiese Paik of Fairfield Green Food Guide

<http://fairfieldgreenfoodguide.com/2012/05/05/connecticuts-ge-foods-bil\

l/> asked Rep. Roy why the labeling provision was removed from his bill,

the Act Concerning Genetically Engineered Foods.

Roy replied that " The labeling provision was eliminated from the

bill due to fears that it opened the state up to a lawsuit. The

attorneys for the leadership and Governor's office felt that the

Constitutional Rights of Monsanto gave them the power to successfully

sue the state. Their main duty was to protect the welfare of the

state. "

Paik's partner in leader Right to Know CT <http://righttoknowct.org/> ,

Tara Cook-Littman, stated, " The constitutional argument is absurd,

and everyone knows it. As long as Connecticut law makers had a

legitimate state interest that was reasonably related to the labeling of

products produced from the process of genetic engineering, the GMO

labeling bill would be considered constitutional by any court of

law. "

She added, " It appears that the biotech industry's influence was

in place all along, waiting for this tactic to be deployed at the last

minute, with no time to argue before the vote. "

Right to Know CT have announced that they will no longer endorse or

support HB 5117.

Members stated to Rep. Roy this morning, " You are our hero and we

supported your bill, but this is no longer a bill that reflects your

intent to label and we must register our discontent by withdrawing our

support. "

And so the fight continues.

It can only be hoped that California

<http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/324312> has more success than

Vermont and Connecticut.

Read more:

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/324345?utm_source=GMO%20%27Right%2\

0to%20Know%27%20campaign%20in%20CT%20fails%20--%20law%20suit%20threatene\

d & utm_campaign=gmo & utm_medium=email#ixzz1v346OA2M

<http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/324345?utm_source=GMO%20%27Right%\

20to%20Know%27%20campaign%20in%20CT%20fails%20--%20law%20suit%20threaten\

ed & utm_campaign=gmo & utm_medium=email#ixzz1v346OA2M>