German's have long said beer is food: Comfort food?

That salar guy knows a thing or two about chemistry. No wonder he brews such a good ale.

In principle, I like the idea of people having the information they need to make decisions about what they eat. Like others, however, I strongly question the resolve of most people (myself sometimes included), even armed with that information, to factor it into their food purchase decisions. I spend most of my food money on whole foods, but I do enjoy some good, old-fashioned crap now and again, and knowing what's in that crap will only lead to guilt and stress I don't need. (BTW, I submit that the stress we subject ourselves to every day worrying about life $hit does far more to cause cancer and other diseases than the food we eat.)

Moreover, this can only result in increased food prices and more unnecessary, expensive regulation. Gas prices and other factors have already caused food costs to increase dramatically in recent years (ever notice that when the gas prices drop, food prices don't? Hmmmm....) Regardless of the quality (or lack thereof) going into what we eat, I think we can all agree that food is essential. As such, I think we should avoid anything that increases the cost of food unnecessarily, even if it seems like a good idea in principle. I think I'll vote no on this one.

Like several others, I hate corporations like Monsanto, and I am all for giving them hell and costing them money. I figure that just by putting this on the ballot, we have cost them a lot of money. If we really want to mess with them, why not vote this down and put a similar initiative on the next ballot, then another, then another.... I suppose the answer is that they will just turn around and make consumers pay the bill by raising their prices. I think we know by now the government won't step in to prevent it if they do.

We're screwed, either way. I say, let's not trip over a dime trying to pick up a nickel.

Tok

Nice to see there's still a shred of common sense around.

In McCleary we go to the polling place (VFW Hall), drop off our ballot, and get a sticker. No stamps needed.

Glad it is failing. The referrendum, while it had good intentions, was flawed as written, and this issue needs to be addressed on a national level, not a state or county level.

I couldn't agree more. I did vote FOR it though because I'm not sure it will ever get addressed at a national level. Federal-level politicians' decisions on this have been bought and I'm not sure they will ever represent their constituents on this issue. The fact it hasn't been addressed on a larger level is the whole reason for the initiative. Yes, it was a horrible initiative that would have increased costs, been absolutely messy, and left a ton of loopholes BUT it may have gotten us one step closer towards getting this fixed on a national level.

The demand for increased food labeling is another slow-building movement that is sweeping the country. Like equal rights or legal marijuana, these are issues that get traction in a state (or limited number of states) and then begin spreading. This is still the start and I really believe that, at some point, the labeling some people want will shift from being controversial to being common sense.

Like others here, I still think growing/killing/gathering your own food is the best individual choice you can make. Keep the ingredient list short.

Like so many other things in this country, the outcome is eventually inevitable...it will all be labelled. Those who benefit from hiding the information are hanging on tooth and nail to that disinformation campaign, but in the US, thankfully, those who support expansion of rights and information eventually win out over those who seek to keep you in the dark.

Fish on...

Todd

“Many companies hope to send an employee into a government agency to influence regulation. How much better if the employee can actually shape government regulation to promote and sell a specific product!...

Monsanto seems to have accomplished this — and much more…

Taylor’s story, however, is not just about milk, or even mainly about milk. During his second posting at the FDA, as Deputy Commissioner for Policy 1991–1994, Agency scientists were grappling with questions about the overall safety of genetically engineered foods (often labeled Genetically Modified Organisms).

As Jeffrey Smith notes,
[Internal] memo after memo described toxins, new diseases, nutritional deficiencies, and hard to detect allergens. [Staff scientists] were adamant that the technology carried “serious health hazards,” and required careful, long-term research, including human studies. …

The Agency, under Taylor’s and later under others’ leadership, simply ignored these findings…

No human studies were required. GMO foods were allowed to enter the food supply unregulated by the FDA and barely regulated by the USDA, which views them as an important US export product…”

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/11/hunter-lewis/dangerous-food-and-crony-capitalism