No on Prop. 37: Voters Reject Proposition 37

                 No on Prop. 37: Voters Reject Proposition 37

PR Newswire

SACRAMENTO, Calif., Nov. 7, 2012

SACRAMENTO, Calif., Nov. 7, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- While millions more votes are
still left to be counted, it appears voters rejected Proposition 37 in
California, the flawed and misguided food labeling measure. The No on 37
campaign, a coalition of family farmers, doctors, scientists, researchers,
Nobel Prize winners, retailers, food companies, business groups, taxpayer
groups and community groups, said Californians saw through Prop. 37 and
rejected the measure.

From the beginning, No on 37 allies argued that Prop. 37 was more than just a
simple labeling measure, pointing out that it was misleading, costly and
unnecessary based on the science of genetically engineered foods.  

"California voters clearly saw through Prop. 37 and rejected higher food
costs, more lawsuits and more bureaucracy," said Henry I. Miller, M.D., a
fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution and the founding director
of the FDA's Office of Biotechnology (1989-1993). "Food labeling policy should
be based on logic and science, not fear. Leading scientific organizations have
all agreed that foods containing genetically engineered ingredients are safe
and are not materially different from their traditional counterparts. We're
glad the voters rejected this misleading, costly and unnecessary measure."

Nearly every daily newspaper in California urged a "No" vote on Prop. 37. In
fact, more than 40 California newspapers recommended No on 37.

"Grocery retailers would have been hit the hardest by passage of Prop. 37,
through more lawsuits, more bureaucracy and higher costs," said Ronald Fong,
president and CEO of the California Grocers Association. "These costs would
have been passed on to consumers in the form of higher grocery bills."

"California family farmers can breathe a little easier today," said Jamie
Johansson, an Oroville farmer who grows olives to make olive oil. Mr.
Johansson is also second vice president of the California Farm Bureau
Federation. "Prop. 37 would have imposed costly new regulations on California
family farmers that no other state requires, putting us at a competitive
disadvantage. Thankfully voters understood this and rejected Prop. 37 and
voted instead to protect family farmers."

About Prop. 37
Proposition 37 would have banned the sale of tens of thousands of
perfectly-safe, common grocery products only in California unless they are
specially repackaged, relabeled or remade with higher cost ingredients. Prop.
37 was a deceptive, deeply flawed food labeling scheme that would have added
more government bureaucracy and taxpayer costs, created new frivolous
lawsuits, and increased food costs by billions — without providing any health
or safety benefits. That's why Prop. 37 was opposed by a broad coalition of
family farmers, scientists, doctors, business and labor groups, taxpayers and
consumers.

Paid for by No on 37: Coalition Against the Deceptive Food Labeling Scheme,
sponsored by Farmers, Food Producers, and Grocers.  Major funding by Monsanto
Company, E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA)
and more than 40 food company members.  For a full list of donors visit
www.NoProp37.com/donors. - 1-800-331-0850 - www.NoProp37.com

SOURCE No on Prop. 37

Website: http://www.NoProp37.com
Contact: Kathy Fairbanks, 1-800-331-0850, press@noprop37.com