Page 14 - the NOISE August 2015

newsbriefs By cindycole
house passes “dark” act
On July 23, the Us House of Representatives passed HR 1599, the Safe & Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015. The vote was 275-150 and was supported by both Republicans and Democrats. The stated intention of the legislation is to put an end to the “confusing patchwork” of state and local laws that address the production and labeling of GMO (genetically modified organism) foods. Anti-GMO activists have labeled the bill the “DARK” Act: Deny Americans the Right to Know. The legislation has also been called the “Monsanto Protection Act” by its detractors.
If the legislation becomes law, it would negate all labeling requirements that states like Vermont have enacted over the last few years. It prohibits any regulation on the use of the label “natural” on GMO containing foods. It could also prevent states and local governments from banning or limiting the growth of GMO crops as has been done in several counties in California and Hawaii. The bill even prohibits the nation’s Food & Drug Administration (FDA) from creating a mandatory labeling program requiring them to continue the “volunteer” labeling policy that has been in place for the last 14 years — a program which has failed to provide consumers with information about whether or not products contain GMO ingredients because companies have
not stepped up to voluntarily label their GMO products. The bill would even turn “non-GMO” labeling initiatives over to the pro-GMO Us Department of Agriculture (UsDA). It could require independent non-GMO verifiers like the non-GMO Project to follow the UsDA’s newly developed labeling program instead of their own, more stringent certification guidelines.
“It’s outrageous that some House lawmakers voted to ignore the wishes of nine out of 10 Americans,”said Scott Faber, senior vice president of government affairs for the Environmental Working Group (ewG), a consumer advocacy organization that supports mandatory GMO labeling. “Today’s vote to deny Americans the right to know what’s in their food and how it’s grown was a foregone conclusion. This House was bought and paid for by corporate interests, so it’s no surprise that it passed a bill to block states and the FDA from giving consumers basic information about their food.”
In a poll conducted by ABC News in June, 93% of those surveyed stated that the federal government should require labeling of GMO and “bio-engineered” foods. while some industry studies have shown GMOs to be safe, 64 other countries around the world have mandatory labeling laws. Twenty-six countries have banned them completely. But Monsanto says, “we oppose current initiatives to mandate labeling of ingredients developed from GM seeds in the absence of any demonstrated risks. such mandatory labeling could imply that food products containing these ingredients are somehow inferior to their conventional or organic counterparts.”
The next step for the HR 1599 is the Us senate. The senate could consider the legislation as passed by the House or it could offer up its own version. Reportedly, senator John Hoeven (R-nD) is preparing his own bill for introduction. On the same day the House voted on the HR
1599, Mr. Hoeven introduced s. 1844, “a bill to amend the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 to provide for voluntary country of origin labeling for beef, pork, and chicken,” another agro- chemical industry effort that is not supported by food safety advocates.
“we’re confident the senate will defeat the DARK Act,” said Mr. Faber. “we continue to hope that thoughtful food companies who listen to their customers will work with consumer groups to craft a non-judgmental GMO disclosure to put on the back of food packaging. Americans should have the same right as citizens of 64 other countries to know what’s in their food and how it’s grown.”
14 • august 2015 • the NOISE arts & news • thenoise.us
PHOTO By callie luedeker acc lawsuit filed in superior court,
whistleblower probe re-ignited
After unsuccessful attempts to get the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) to reconsider its decisions regarding Arizona Public Service (APs) and the implementation of so-called “smart” meters (automated wireless electric meters), local activist Warren Woodward has filed his appeal in Arizona superior Court.
Mr. woodward initially filed his appeal directly to the ACC. By not replying within the 20- day time period provided by law, the commissioners effectively denied his appeal. next, Mr. woodward took his case to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office but his cries of foul fell on deaf ears. Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich is the same individual who, according to IRs records, received $425,000 in campaign funds from Pinnacle West (APs’ parent company) through an independent campaign run by the Republican Attorneys General Association last year. Mr. woodward calls his appeal to superior Court his “only recourse” in light of the inaction and disinterest he has encountered on his path to this higher authority.
Mr. Brnovich’s office has been tasked with the investigation of complaints filed by an ACC whistleblower earlier this year. Mr. Brnovich recused himself from the probe when information about his election support from APs appeared in the media.
It had looked like the whistleblower’s complaints were going to be dismissed until July 21 when the Checks & Balances Project learned that investigators from the Attorney General’s Office had taken possession of former ACC Chairman & current Commissioner Bob Stump’s iPhone which had been stored in an ACC safe. The Checks & Balances Project is an independent government and industry watchdog group.
Checks & Balances published a report in May stating that the timing and recipients of text messages sent to and received by Mr. stump supported the allegations of the ACC whistleblower. The group’s executive Director Scott Peterson said, “we hope that’s the motivation” for the Attorney General’s recent move.
“whether the seizure of Bob stump’s phone and the incriminating text messages it may contain from the Commission’s safe is a good or bad thing will be determined by which Attorney General Brnovich shows up,” Mr. Peterson said. “will it be the one who got elected with huge campaign contributions from Arizona Public service, so beholden that he recused himself from the investigation of the whistleblower because of those contributions? If so, then probe of the Corporation Commission and Bob stump will likely be slow walked or downplayed, and Arizonans will never learn the truth about Bob stump’s activities.”
“But,” he continued, “if the one who shows up is an Attorney General who wants to have his career prosecutors go after the truth, then that’s a good thing. Right now, it’s up to Attorney General Brnovich to decide which version of him shows up to handle this seizure and who he serves — APs or the people of Arizona.”
| Cindy Cole keeps her eye on the events.
news@thenoise.us