by Catherine Haug, Jan 15, 2012
Senators Baucus & Tester, and Representative Rehberg responded to recent comments from their constituency regarding GMOs. As you can see from the complete responses (below):
- Tester asserts that GMO foods should be labeled, and that there are unanswered questions regarding these foods that need to be addressed.
- Baucus supports GMO foods as being good for Montana’s Ag economy.
- Rehberg takes no stand either way, only saying that we need to be ready to make the right decisions based on sound evidence vs cost.
If you believe GMOs should be labeled; if you believe we should not approve any more GMO foods until we know more about the long-term affects on the health of our people, animals and the planet, you might address our legislators accordingly, and cast your votes for those who support your position.
On the other hand, if you believe that GMOs are no different (from a health and ecological perspective) than their non-GMO counterparts, then your address to our legislators or your vote may be different, but no less important.
If you are undecided on this important issue, you might want to read some of my earlier posts on GMOs; see the following link: Cat’s posts on GMOs.
For the complete responses from our legislators, read on.
“Thank you for taking the time to contact me with your concerns about genetically modified food.
I believe genetically engineered food should be labeled. Country of Origin Labeling, accurate nutrition facts, and information about whether or not their food has been genetically altered will help folks find out what they are buying and eating. I fully support these steps to keep consumers fully informed.
From a safety perspective, I think we need to gather more information about the effects of genetically modified food on our bodies and our ecosystem. Additionally, there are unresolved liability issues surrounding patented genetic crops that should be considered. As these issues come before the Senate, be assured that I will keep your views in mind.”
“Thank you for your comments regarding MON 87460, a “drought-tolerant” corn created by Monsanto. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.
Genetically modified organisms provide farmers with crops resistant to certain pests and tolerant to environmental stresses, such as drought, helping to alleviate the hazards of farming and secure a constant food supply.
I understand your concerns over the increased use of genetically modified seeds in growing our nation’s food. You raise important points in your letter, and I am taking these comments into careful consideration.”
“Thank you for contacting me regarding genetically modified foods. It’s good to hear from you.
We are living in an age where advances in biotechnology for agriculture production have become more prevalent, and recent news stories have brought the issue of genetically modified foods to the forefront. As we move forward with these new technologies we need to be ready to base both our policy and consumer decisions on sound science and the cost of expensive labeling programs.
I appreciate you taking the time to bring your concerns and suggestions to my attention. Please be assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind when any legislation regarding genetically modified foods comes across my desk.”