04-28-2014, 05:53 PM
For what it's worth: (*Snipped - Much more at link)
https://www.civilbeat.com/reg/articles/2...s-heat-up/
The Monsanto facility on Molokai, April 2014.
The fervor surrounding genetically engineered crops in Hawaii is expected to spill into this year's elections, as a number of candidates have already begun framing their campaigns around an anti-GMO sentiment.
It's also anticipated to lead to increased spending on particular races that will pit opponents of genetically modified organisms against those who believe that large agribusiness and chemical companies, such as Monsanto, Syngenta and BASF, are a boon to the local economy and global food production research.
Those companies, of course, grow genetically altered seed crops on many of Hawaii’s islands, and have a $250-million-a-year stake in making sure their business interests are protected.
But while the biotech firms, and in particular Monsanto, have long been financial players in local politics, the anti-GMO movement is ramping up its own firepower.
On the anti-GMO side, the Center for Food Safety, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit that has been battling industrial agricultural practices since the 1990s, just opened a new office in Honolulu.
The group has already registered a political action committee with the Hawaii Campaign Spending Commission to help elect like-minded politicians to state and local office.
“We’re fighting because people have a right to know what’s in their food,” said Ashley Lukens, program director for the Center for Food Safety’s Honolulu office. “Unfortunately, to get the respect you deserve you have to have equal weapons.”
Lukens said the PAC has about $50,000 that will be used for “targeted voter education and outreach” and is not intended to support individual candidates.
Lukens described the PAC, which has yet to file any financial disclosures with the commission, as a prototype for the Center for Food Safety that could be replicated elsewhere if successful.
The plan, she said, is to evaluate candidates based on their positions related to food issues, such as GMO labeling and pesticide use, and develop a public report card that voters can use to help make up their minds.
Historically, the anti-GMO faction hasn't been a big spender on political campaigns. In 2012, Judith Kern and Kent Whealy contributed $12,000 to Molokai activist Walter Ritte's campaign for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Kern and Whealy head the Ceres Trust, a private foundation based in Northfield, Minnesota, that gives money to support organic agriculture and research.
But that appears about to change, especially as more candidates motivated by the recent debates on Maui, Kauai and the Big Island jump in the races.
And while $50,000 is a good start, the Center for Food Safety and other GMO opponents still must contend against the money and influence of the biotech companies that have been giving to Hawaii’s political campaigns for years.
(*Note: Mr. Tucker, Please move to politics if not appropriate here. Thank you.)
https://www.civilbeat.com/reg/articles/2...s-heat-up/
The Monsanto facility on Molokai, April 2014.
The fervor surrounding genetically engineered crops in Hawaii is expected to spill into this year's elections, as a number of candidates have already begun framing their campaigns around an anti-GMO sentiment.
It's also anticipated to lead to increased spending on particular races that will pit opponents of genetically modified organisms against those who believe that large agribusiness and chemical companies, such as Monsanto, Syngenta and BASF, are a boon to the local economy and global food production research.
Those companies, of course, grow genetically altered seed crops on many of Hawaii’s islands, and have a $250-million-a-year stake in making sure their business interests are protected.
But while the biotech firms, and in particular Monsanto, have long been financial players in local politics, the anti-GMO movement is ramping up its own firepower.
On the anti-GMO side, the Center for Food Safety, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit that has been battling industrial agricultural practices since the 1990s, just opened a new office in Honolulu.
The group has already registered a political action committee with the Hawaii Campaign Spending Commission to help elect like-minded politicians to state and local office.
“We’re fighting because people have a right to know what’s in their food,” said Ashley Lukens, program director for the Center for Food Safety’s Honolulu office. “Unfortunately, to get the respect you deserve you have to have equal weapons.”
Lukens said the PAC has about $50,000 that will be used for “targeted voter education and outreach” and is not intended to support individual candidates.
Lukens described the PAC, which has yet to file any financial disclosures with the commission, as a prototype for the Center for Food Safety that could be replicated elsewhere if successful.
The plan, she said, is to evaluate candidates based on their positions related to food issues, such as GMO labeling and pesticide use, and develop a public report card that voters can use to help make up their minds.
Historically, the anti-GMO faction hasn't been a big spender on political campaigns. In 2012, Judith Kern and Kent Whealy contributed $12,000 to Molokai activist Walter Ritte's campaign for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Kern and Whealy head the Ceres Trust, a private foundation based in Northfield, Minnesota, that gives money to support organic agriculture and research.
But that appears about to change, especially as more candidates motivated by the recent debates on Maui, Kauai and the Big Island jump in the races.
And while $50,000 is a good start, the Center for Food Safety and other GMO opponents still must contend against the money and influence of the biotech companies that have been giving to Hawaii’s political campaigns for years.
(*Note: Mr. Tucker, Please move to politics if not appropriate here. Thank you.)