Originally published September 21 2012
Monsanto, pesticide companies have now spent more than $19 million to kill Prop. 37
by Ethan A. Huff, staff writer
(NaturalNews) The latest campaign finance disclosure records released by California's Secretary of State reveal that the most evil corporation in the world, Monsanto, has forked over another $2.89 million to kill Proposition 37, the historic bill that, if passed, will require genetically-modified (GM) foods and food ingredients to be labeled at the retail level in California.
Combined with its other recent contributions of more than $4.2 million (http://www.naturalnews.com), Monsanto has now officially shelled out a total of more than $7.1 million to prevent consumers from knowing the truth about what is really contained in the foods they buy.
Along with Monsanto's latest contributions were similar contributions by the other five of the "Big Six" pesticide firms -- DuPont, Bayer, Dow, BASF, and Syngenta -- which together gave more than $2.6 million to the No on 37 campaign as part of their most recent contributions. To date, the "Big Six" have collectively contributed nearly $20 million to keep Californians in the dark about GMOs.
"Monsanto wants to buy this election so they can keep hiding what's really in our food," said Gary Ruskin, campaign manager for Yes on Prop. 37, about Monsanto's efforts to stamp out the potential for mandating food transparency. "(But) they are on the losing side of history. Californians want the right to know what's in our food, and we will win it."
Most of the funding for 'No on 37' is coming from GMO companies not even located in CaliforniaInterestingly, none of the "Big Six" pesticide companies are even located in California, which just goes to show how far-reaching the scope of Prop. 37 will be once it is passed. Only one of the top ten antagonists in the fight for honesty in food labeling, Nestle USA, is based out of California, and even this company has its roots overseas in Switzerland.
Below is a list of the top ten contributors to the No on 37 campaign, which is trying to stop GMO labeling in California:
1) Monsanto Company, St. Louis, MO, $7,100,500
2) E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co., Washington, DC, $4,900,000
3) BASF Plant Science, Research Triangle Park, NC, $2,000,000
4) Bayer CropScience, Research Triangle Park, NC, $2,000,000
5) Dow Agrosciences LLC, Indianapolis, IN, $2,000,000
6) PepsiCo, Inc., Purchase, NY, $1,716,300
7) Nestle USA, Inc., Glendale, CA, $1,169,400
8) Coca-Cola North America, Atlanta, GA, $1,164,400
9) ConAgra Foods, Omaha, NE, $1,076,700
10) Syngenta Corporation, Washington, DC, $1,000,000
As you will notice, every single one of these companies has a critical stake in making sure that you do not know what is in the food you eat, because every single one of these companies either produces GMOs or uses GMOs in their product formulations.
If GMO labeling is mandated in California, the "Big Six" will lose significant market share as many large food companies like Coca-Cola and Pepsi will have to either reformulate their products to exclude GMOs, or risk losing much of their customer base by labeling GMOs, which Monsanto admitted many years ago is akin to putting "a skull and crossbones" on the food label. (http://www.naturalnews.com/035578_Monsanto_petition_biotechnology.html)
And since large food conglomerates distribute their offerings nationwide, mandatory labeling in California, the world's eighth largest economy, will cause sweeping changes across the country as well. This is why it is crucial for Californians get out to the polls on November 6 and vote YES on Prop. 37.
You can learn more about the Yes on Prop. 37 campaign by visiting:
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml