Judicially Ripe, CT Weighs GMO Food Package Laws

May 23, 2013

6/25 Update: Test Tube Tomato, NY TImes

After a stunningly close albeit expected defeat, California voter proposition 37's fate suggested that the whole non-GMO food movement was in fact, 'Running Against the Wind (See Seger, Bob, "Against the Wind.")

But... recent legislative developments suggest that the prop. opponents' permanent solace would require that a surging, worldwide horde of proponents, "didn't know now what they didn't know then."

What is this knowledge, you ask? Interestingly, voters and politicians across the U.S. (lagging behind their international counterparts) have since Prop 37's defeat grown more cognizant of how little we actually do know!

Wait... what? Confusing, admittedly, but poignant. The fact is that without sufficient research into, and evidence of the long-term impact from consuming genetically modified organisms or GMO's (an unappetizing way of describing the food we eat, normally) people are beginning to think twice about throwing caution against this mighty wind.

Hungry for more? Get this: as of Tuesday evening, May 21st, this rising ship has found its anchor in none other than the Nutmeg State (Connecticut).

To quote the Hartford Courant, "A bill that would require food made with genetically modified organisms to carry labels cleared the state Senate late Tuesday night. The Senate's approval, on a 35-1 vote, gives new energy to a measure that had strong grassroots backing but appeared stalled at the Capitol this year."

The article continues on to recognize the issue's "murky" outlook in the House of Representatives. Nonetheless, the momentum created by this Connecticutean initiative, already commonplace in trade ally countries like Japan and a little place called EUROPE (yes, all of it), calls to attention to a question for which the answer might already be a matter of fate and inevitability... is the mandatory labeling of GMO's finally upon us?

What does this mean to you, esquire sirs and mademoiselles? Simply that you can expect a growing number of legal inquiries regarding alleged or suspected violations of this and other similarly possible state statutes. How often, outside of Oregon, Colorado, California, Washington and the like, do we see laws that are good for public health and good for private business? Chances are that this "Young and strong (ID., Seger)," movement is a sign of this unwholesome theme's pending reversal, and perhaps marks an end to the whole-food movement's Running against the Wind.

Want to find out more? Check out Lawline Program Attorney David Cykiert's course "Origin and Future of the Prop 37 Question".

Share

Author Bio

Written by Lawline Staff

A collection of Lawline Alumni who have contributed to writing great content for Lawline!

Comments