1.Three California Democrats Team Up with Monsanto
2.Prop 37 Cash: Which Companies Are Supporting Genetically Modified Food
3.Who's opposing Prop 37? Contributors and amounts

NOTE: A number of images and embedded links in the original article for item 1 are not reproduced here.
–-
–-
1.Three California Democrats Team Up with Monsanto
Rebekah Wilce
PR Watch, August 2 2012
http://www.prwatch.org/news/2012/08/11688/three-california-democrats-team-monsanto

In California, the battle over Proposition 37, which would require the labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food products, is heating up. In late July, pro-labeling groups obtained a flier sent out by a group opposed to the proposition containing the endorsements of three Democratic California Assemblymembers, even though the Democratic Party of California (and 90 percent of consumers) support GMO labelling.

The group that ran the flier is "No on 37: Coalition Against the Deceptive Food Labeling Scheme, Sponsored by Farmers and Food Producers," formerly known as "Coalition Against the Costly Food Labeling Proposition." "No on 37" receives major funding from the Council for Biotechnology Information (CBI) and Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), both front groups for the "Big 6" pesticide and genetic engineering companies: Monsanto, Dow Chemical, Syngenta, Bayer, Dupont, and BASF. The flier proudly bears the endorsements of Assemblymembers Henry Perea, Manuel Perez, and Alexandra Rooker, the Vice-Chair of the California Democratic Party. This despite the California Democratic Party announcing its endorsement for Prop 37 on Monday.

[image: "No on 37" Flier Paid for by "No on 37: Coalition Against the Deceptive Food Labeling Scheme"]

A search of Monsanto's website reveals that the corporation contributed $1,500 to Assemblymember Perea's reelection fund in April of this year. Perea is running unopposed. The contribution was discovered by Label GMOs Hollywood, an activist group that supports the labeling measure.
[Image: Monsanto Contribution to Henry Perea's Campaign Fund – Who's Who In Shillsville: Facebook link:  http://on.fb.me/MlMJ1n ] 

 
Big 6 Spend Big in California

The "Big 6" front groups CBI and GMA, as well as Pepsi, Coca-Cola, Nestle, Cargill, Conagra, and other big food corporations, have collectively donated more than a million dollars to efforts to oppose the California GMO labeling proposition. As CMD guest contributor Michele Simon reported, fighting GMO labeling is the food lobby's "highest priority." Talk about "special interests."
http://bit.ly/MlN3Nz

[image: "No on Prop 37" Flier"No on Prop 37" flier distributed at the California Democratic Party 7/29/12]

The largest contributions to "No on 37" came from several of the "Big 6": Pioneer Hi Bred, a subsidiary of Dupont, gave $310,000; BASF Plant Science gave $126,000; Syngenta gave $63,300; their Washington-based lobbying powerhouse Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) gave $250,000 (BIO is funded by a long list of agrichemical companies including Monsanto); and GMA gave $125,000.

Responding to the release of these numbers by the California Secretary of State on Tuesday, Marcia Ishii-Eiteman, PhD, senior scientist at PANNA, said, "Much of the rest of the world including Japan, Australia, the European Union and China already requires genetically engineered foods to be clearly labeled. But in the U.S., pesticide corporations like Monsanto continue to enjoy unfettered and unlabeled access to the market, and a consumer population that is left largely in the dark."

Stacy Malkan, a spokeswoman for the "Yes on 37 Right to Know Campaign," asked, "Why are these giant food companies spending so much money to hide the truth about what’s in our food? These same companies are already informing foreign consumers about genetically engineered food in 49 other countries. . . Californians have a right to know what’s in our food, too."

Over 90 percent of Americans believe they have a "right to know" and support the labeling of GMO foods. In the face of that kind of broad-based popular support, the "Big 6" and their front groups may have their work cut out for them, even if a handful of assemblymembers do team up with Monsanto and endorse the opposition.

For more on the "Big 6" lobbying agenda, see CMD guest contributor Jill Richardson's article on "Monsanto's quiet coup":  http://bit.ly/MlNck9
–-
–-
2.Prop 37 Cash: Which Companies Are Supporting Genetically Modified Food
Katherine Spiers
KCet, August 1 2012
http://www.kcet.org/socal/food/prop-37/prop-37-cash-which-companies-are-supporting-genetically-modified-food.html

Proposition funding information has been published by the California Secretary of State today, revealing a new slew of companies putting their money into the fight to defeat Prop 37, the Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act.

More popularly known as the GMO Prop, the November ballot item seeks to require labels on most foods made of or with genetically modified ingredients. Early on, companies such as Amy's Kitchen (maker of vegetarian convenience foods) and Dr. Bronner's Magic All-One (organic soaps and other hygiene and beauty products) publicly lent their financial support to the cause. On Wednesday, the companies opposed to Prop 37 were made public.

Thus far, the organizations donating the most money against the labeling of GMO products are conglomerations of the nation's biggest GMO producers, namely Monsanto, Dow, and DuPont. The Grocery Manufacturers Association is also a leading opponent of the cause, in terms of money given and stated purpose: the president of GMA called defeating Prop 37 "the single highest priority for GMA this year."

We know these companies are huge and powerful and influence our lives in untold ways. But we're not intimately familiar with them the way we are with food companies. And sadly, the maker of some of America's favorite snacks are throwing money into the anti-37 pot. The companies include both Pepsi and Coca-Cola (professional rivals coming together for one cause, like The Avengers of Frankenfood), Nestle, Kellogg, Hormel, Bimbo, General Mills, and ConAgra, the company behind Gulden's, Jiffy Pop, Swiss Miss, and dozens more. Smucker's has given money as well, which very much contradicts their ad campaign about what simple, rural farm folk who just love fruit they are.

For those who do want more transparency and labeling when it comes to the food they eat, this news is disappointing, but perhaps not surprising. These food companies have their eyes firmly on the bottom line, and using GMO foods is a good way of keeping products cheap. Come November, it's up to the consumer to decide what's most important about the food they eat. 
–-
–-
3.Who's opposing Prop 37?
http://www.kcet.org/news/ballotbrief/elections2012/propositions/prop-37-funding-genetically-engineered-food.html

OPPONENTS

NAME OF CONTRIBUTOR / AMOUNT”ƒ

COUNCIL FOR BIOTECHNOLOGY INFORMATION – $375,000.00
GROCERY MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION – $375,000.00
PIONEER HI-BRED INTERNATIONAL (DUPONT)- $310,100.00
BIOTECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY ORGANIZATION – $252,000.00
BASF PLANT SCIENCE – $126,600.00
PEPSICO, INC. – $90,220.06
SYNGENTA CORPORATION – $63,300.00
NESTLE USA, INC. – $61,471.39
COCA-COLA NORTH AMERICA – $61,208.55
CONAGRA FOODS – $56,598.46
KELLOGG COMPANY – $33,248.37
THE J.M. SMUCKER COMPANY – $20,395.84
HORMEL FOODS CORPORATION – $19,675.68
GENERAL MILLS, INC. – $19,401.17
BIMBO BAKERIES USA – $17,783.28