No on Prop. 37

Prop 37 would increase grocery bills for families by $400 per year and increase taxpayer costs by millions.

Dog food with meat requires a label, but meat for human consumption does not. It makes no sense.

Creates a whole new category of lawsuits allowing trial lawyers to sue family farmers and grocers without proof.

American Medical Association, National Academy of Sciences, FDA, and more than 400 scientific studies agree these foods are safe.

November 5, 2012 San Gabriel Valley Tribune Our View: Some props not what they seem
November 2, 2012 U-T San Diego Editorial, The long list of reasons to oppose Prop. 37
November 2, 2012 CSU Long Beach Daily 49er Editorial, Our View: Genetically engineered food doesn’t need labels in California
October 25, 2012 Stockton Record Editorial: No on Prop. 37 label initiative
October 24, 2012 Los Angeles Times Scientists defend safety of genetically modified foods

November 7, 2012 Voters Reject Proposition 37
November 3, 2012 IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: Associated Press Story Stretching the truth? Misrepresenting the truth? Or was Yes on 37 just flat out lying?
November 2, 2012 IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: Stretching the truth? Misrepresenting the truth? Or was Yes on 37 just flat out lying?
October 25, 2012 IN CASE YOU MISSED IT Most respected U.S. scientific organization and publisher of Science magazine says mandated labels for GE foods “can only serve to mislead and falsely alarm consumers.”
October 24, 2012 IN CASE YOU MISSED IT U-T San Diego writes second No on 37 editorial, calls it a “scam” because of enforcement provisions allowing shakedown lawsuits.