When It Comes to Labels, WSJ Gets It Right

In Biotechnology by Cathryn

Today, The Wall Street Journal took a bold stance against the pro-labeling lobbies in Oregon and Colorado. Calling upon voters to exercise both common sense and rely upon scientific knowledge, “The Organic Food Protectionists” reveals the reasoning behind state-level GMO-labeling bills – and it isn’t as Populist as proponents would purport.

Opening with the brilliant summation “if you can’t beat them, ask the government to stigmatize them,” the article probes the true motivation behind the organic-farming interests that champion these bills. Explaining the issues involved, from protectionism to a lack of scientific basis for their claims, the WSJ takes on bills, and the big money covertly spent to back them, which would force labels meant to market organics at the expense of consumers.

Scrutinizing what is truly at stake in this debate, the article examines how labeling is both already available in the form of USDA-certified organic status to the long-term goals of labeling proponents, mainly a permanent moratorium on a safe, effective technology.

Arguing for a move away from “scare tactics,” the author urges support for sensible, scientific standards – something that would actually benefit anyone who eats.

The message is clear. Much of the pro-labeling, pro-organic hype depends upon consumer fear to drive exorbitant profits.

The answer is clear as well. Vote against Oregon Measure 92 and Colorado Proposition 105.