Minnesota's sizable food and agriculture industry can rest easier this week
after California voters rejected a controversial referendum that would have
required labels on genetically modified foods.
The food industry's victory came after pouring tens of millions of
dollars into advertisements -- primarily on TV -- against the mandate.
Labeling opponents raised about $46 million, or five times as much money as
pro-labeling forces.
"Forty-six million buys an awful lot of confusion and misunderstanding,"
said Mark Kastel, co-director of the Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based
organic industry watchdog. "There was a very well-funded misinformation
campaign."
But Reid MacDonald, CEO of Faribault Foods Inc., said that while lots of
money was, indeed, spent on advertising, it provided consumers with correct
information on labeling's drawbacks.
"The advertising was quite well done," MacDonald said. "Food companies
are very good at advertising, and that's what happened here."
Faribault Foods, known for its Kuner's beans and Butter Kernel
vegetables, was one of five Minnesota companies that contributed to the
anti-labeling initiative.
General Mills Inc. was the largest Minnesota contributor, giving $1.23
million, according to MapLight, a nonpartisan research outfit. Hormel Foods
Corp. was next at $467,900, then Cargill Inc. at $238,888, Land O'Lakes Inc.
at $153,300 and Faribault Foods at $76,000.
St. Louis-based Monsanto Co. was the biggest financial force against
Proposition 37, contributing about $8 million, MapLight said.
When the votes were counted, 53 percent of Californians were against
Proposition 37, which would have required companies to label many foods
derived from genetically engineered (GE) crops. Forty-seven percent voted for
labeling.
Proposition 37 would have made California the first U.S. state to require
GE labeling. The vote was closely watched by agribusiness and the food
industry, as California is often a bellwether for the rest of the nation.
"The strategy of the food companies was 'if you could have a pretty solid
win in California, you could discourage [GE labeling initiatives] elsewhere,'"
MacDonald said.
Proposition 37's proponents say consumers have the right to know if
GE-derived ingredients are in their food. The food industry claims the measure
would be costly and unnecessary.
Genetically engineered crops have been around since the 1990s and are now
commonplace. Around 90 percent of the nation's corn, soybeans and sugar beats
are grown from GE seeds.
But GE-derived foods remain a lightning rod for some consumer groups and
scientists who say that research is lacking on their long-term health effects.
The food and ag industries counter that most scientists back the safety of
GE-derived foods, as do regulators.
"We, among others, worried that labels would have misled consumers into
believing genetically modified foods were unsafe," said Lori Johnson, a
Cargill spokeswoman.
Change of opinion
California's labeling initiative at first had strong support.
A Sept. 17 USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll found that 61 percent of
Californians favored Proposition 37 and 25 percent opposed it. By Oct. 25, the
proponents' edge had shrunk to 44 percent to 42 percent. A different poll at
October's end showed labeling opponents with the upper hand.
In between those polls came an ad barrage from the agriculture and food
industry.
Ronnie Cummins, head of the Organic Consumers Association, said a
"labeling raises costs" message from industry had an effect. Polling done by
Prop 37 supporters just prior to the vote continued to show that consumers
highly favor labeling -- some just didn't want to pay for it, he said.
The Finland, Minn.-based Organic Consumers Association was one of the
biggest monetary supporters of the labeling initiative, raising about $1
million, mostly in $50 to $100 donations from its members. Cummins said the
labeling fight will go on, with Washington state the target for a 2013
referendum.
Both Cummins and Kastel said the California battle could have a lasting
effect on General Mills, Kellogg, Coca-Cola and other food companies that own
organic brands, but that financially backed a "no" vote on Proposition 37.
General Mills owns the Cascadian Farms and Muir Glen organic brands, and
organic consumers tend to be big proponents of all sorts of labeling. "I think
they have endangered their [organic] brands' value," said Cornucopia's Kastel
of General Mills and other firms.
General Mills declined to comment for this article.
