SACRAMENTO, Calif., Sept. 27, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- In editorials this week, the Merced Sun-Star, Modesto Bee and Redding Record Searchlight urged voters to oppose Proposition 37 on the November ballot. The overwhelming majority of daily newspapers in California have urged a No Vote on Prop. 37. Read all No on Prop. 37 editorials here.
"Our View: Prop. 37 should be rejected," Merced Sun Star, September 25, 2012
- Proposition 37 is a classic example of an initiative that shouldn't be on the ballot.
- It is an overreach, is ambiguous, and would open the way for countless lawsuits against retailers who sell food that might lack the proper labeling.
"No on Proposition 37," Modesto Bee, September 23, 2012
- There would be significant costs associated with the initiative… and they would fall on agriculture, food processors and ultimately on consumers.
- Even voters who worry about genetically modified food should reject Proposition 37.
"GMO labeling: more lawsuits, not more safety," Redding Record Searchlight, September 22, 2012
- … Proposition 37 would create a fertile new field of litigation.
- …private lawyers and activists would have the power to sue over alleged violations and collect their costs and fees — even if nobody's suffered any damages.
- …this labeling initiative will cause far more problems than it solves, and voters should say No to Proposition 37.
About Prop. 37
Proposition 37 would ban the sale of tens of thousands of perfectly-safe, common grocery products only in California unless they are specially repackaged, relabeled or made with higher cost ingredients. Prop. 37 is a deceptive, deeply flawed food labeling scheme that would add more government bureaucracy and taxpayer costs, create new frivolous lawsuits, and increase food costs by billions — without providing any health or safety benefits. That's why Prop. 37 is opposed by a broad coalition of family farmers, scientists, doctors, business, labor, taxpayers and consumers.
SOURCE No on Prop. 37