Posted November 6, 2013
Early results of Washington state’s food labeling initiative,
which would have required labels for foods and seeds made with genetically
modified (GMO) ingredients, show defeat, according to a Politico article
available here.
The current numbers on Ballot Initiative 522 show those
opposed leading by about 536,000 (54.8 percent) to 442,000 (45.2 percent). These numbers represent a quarter of the
state’s 3.9 million registered voters, so there are more votes to be counted. Additional voting results are available here.
The delay in final numbers is due to Washington’s mail-in
only ballot system. All ballots
postmarked by November 5 will be counted.
According to Brian Zylstra, a spokesman for Washington’s Office of the
Secretary of State, the election night results often only reflect about 60
percent of the votes that will be received.
Elizabeth Larter, spokeswoman for the “Yes on I-522”
campaign said that she is optimistic that the final results will support the
measure, pointing out that voters in King County – “the state’s most populous and
home to Seattle – who have supported the measure in polling, tend to mail their
ballots at the last minute, and so election results often “take a couple of
days to catch up.”
“This is a clear victory for Washington consumers,
taxpayers, and family farmers across our state,” said Dana Bieber, spokeswoman
for the “No on 522” campaign, according to a Reuters article available here.
A group of food and biotech companies including General
Mills, Nestle USA, PepsiCo, Monsanto, DuPont and others were key contributors
to the campaign against I-522 which raised about $22 million. In contrast, roughly $7.9 million was raised
by supporters of the labeling initiative.
A similar labeling measure narrowly failed in
California’s 2012 election by a vote of 51.4 percent against to 48.6 percent in
favor.
A recent article on “Non-GMO Labeling” by Staff
Attorneys for the National Agricultural Law Center is available here. For more information on food labeling, please
visit the National Agricultural Law Center’s website here.
