BrattleboroCitizens'Breakfast June21,2013 GibsonAikenCenterBrattleboroVT GMORighttoKnow&WhatWeCanDo Presenter:TristanTolenoStateRepresentative (BrattleboroDistrict3) toleno@leg.state.vt.usttoleno@gmail.com http://www.tristantoleno.com/ BriefLegislativeHistory TheGMOLabelingBillwaslastconsideredbytheGeneralAssemblyinthesecondyearofthe biennium,sothatfirstbillwentaway,havingbeenassignedtoacommitteeandfailingtoseethe floorforavote. Therewastalkearlyinthesessionabouthowtogoforward,givenwhatappearedtobeanactive nationalenergyaboutthislegislation.SixweeksofworkintheHouseAgricultureCommittee beganwithadraft,thefinishedproductfromthelastbiennium.

TheCommitteelookedatboth sidesoftheissue,hearingfromVermonterswhowouldbeimpactedonewayortheother.For example,theVermontSpecialityFoodproducerssawbothsomeopportunityandsomeriskfrom thelegislation.ThisinformationwasusedwhenthebillwaspresentedtotheHouse.Itsnota blackandwhiteissueitcouldbechallengingforsomebusinesses.TheCommitteeheardfrom awiderangeofpeople,includingdairy,specialtyfoods,UVM,religiousandenvironmental groups.ConventionaldairyrepresentedapotentialforagroundswellofoppositiontoGMO labelingdairyisapowerfullobby. Afterhearingtestimony,theCommitteewentbacktothebilltofixweaknessesandstrippedout valueladenlanguagetoensurethatfindingswereveryfactbased.TheCommitteedidnotdraw definitiveconclusions,itacknowledgedthefactthatthescienceiscontested,butalsothe potentialriskfortheStateofVermont.[seeH.112aspassedbytheHouse,withmarkup] GoingForward TheBillpassedtheHousebyawidemargin[99to42].Therealchallengemaybethelegal challenge.Monsantoisoftenconsideredthemostwellknownopponent,butthereareothers likelytoraiseaFirstAmendmentchallenge.RighttoknowlegislationrequiringGMOlabelingis consideredtobearestrictiononcommercialspeech,protectedundertheFirstAmendmentand therefore,suchrestrictionsmustmeetcertainlegaltests.Brieflystated,thetestiswhetherthere isasubstantialstateinterestinrestrictingcommercialspeechbasedonpotentialriskto Vermonters,inhealth,environmentalandreligiousarenas.Thefindingsinthebill,groundedin thelegislativetestimony,demonstratewhyVermontshouldtakethisstep.

Thereisnoprotectionforconsumercuriosity,buttheSecondCircuitruledthattheFirst amendmentprotects[acorporations]rightnottospeakasstronglyastherighttospeak,when itstruckdownasunconstitutionalthe1994Vermontstatuterequiringthelabelingofmilk containingrBSThormone.[cf:LabelingofGeneticallyModifiedFoodintheUnitedStates:The RoadsnotTaken,MelndezJuarbe&RiveraTorres,February2002 http://leda.law.harvard.edu/leda/data/438/MelendezJuarbeRiveraTorres.html#fn1 AsthebillisconsideredintheSenate,itisexpectedthatlobbyingwillbevigorous,focusingon whetherthereisthestomachtolosealawsuitandarguingthatpassingalawthatwillbe challengedisamistake. Thetaskthenistoeducateandsupportaclarityofvisiononthisissue.Thebillmaywellbe challengedonlegalgrounds,butithasdefensiblearguments.TheSenatehasconvictionatthe samelevelastheHouse,butstillcompromisesmayslipin.Thecurrentbill,forexample, exemptsdairy,cheeseandmeat,orasdescribedinthebill: Thefollowingfoodsshallnotbesubjecttothelabelingrequirements... Foodconsistingentirelyoforderivedentirelyfromananimalwhichhasnotitself beenproducedwithgeneticengineering,regardlessofwhethertheanimalhas beenfedorinjectedwithanyfoodordrugproducedwithgeneticengineering. ThelinewasdrawnatthoseproductswhoseingredientsthemselvesareGMO. AnswerstoQuestions: EffectiveDateTriggers: TheVermontbillhasatriggerforanearlierimplementationdatebutalsoafirmdelayedeffective date[nolaterthanJuly1,2015].Thedatecertainwithadelayallowstimeforproducersto modifytheiringredients.AsthebillmovestotheSenate,thereisthesensethatnoonewantsto bethefirstinlineforalawsuit. TheConnecticutBillcontainsatrigger[fourotherstates,atleastoneofwhichsharesaborder withConnecticut]ConnecticutApprovesLabelingGeneticallyModifiedFoods,NewYork Times,June3,2013 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/04/business/connecticutapprovesqualifiedgeneticlabeling.ht ml?_r=0 AGMOLabelingwasrecentlypassedinMaine[Mainesbillwillnotgointoeffectunlessother statesfollowsuitandpasssimilarmeasures,includingNewHampshire]MaineLegislature easilypassesGMOfoodlabelingbill,ablowtoMonsanto,NYDailyNews,June12,2013 http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/mainelegislatureeasilypassesgmolabelingbillarti cle1.1370871#ixzz2WzcRaxapl

LawsuitCost: Asuggestionmadeduringthesessionbyalobbyistwasforfundraisingonanationalbasis,as muchas$1millioninoneday,tofinanceadefensefund,therebyremovingthefearofalawsuit fromtheequation.TheEntergylegalbattlesareillustrativeofthecoststhatneedtobecovered. AnotherwaytolookatthisisourAttorneyGeneralisintheprocessofbringinganddefending lawsuitsallthetimeandoneoneshouldlookattheaverageofwinsandlossestheState collectsabout$35millionayearastheresultofwinninglawsuits.Overall,howarewedoing? Wewinsome,welosesome.Itisbesttoaddresstheissuesinaconstructivewayandaskthe AttorneyGeneraltodohisjob.Itsthecostofdoingbusiness. UniformNationalStandards: Producershaveadaptedtodifferinglabelingrequirementsfordifferentjurisdictions.Thebill leavesittotheAttorneyGeneraltodesignthelabelingstandards.Thiscouldincludethe utilizationofstickerstoallowforatransitiontoauniquelabel,makingiteasierforproducersto comply. OtherStickingPoints: Duetopushbackfrombabyfoodmanufacturers,therewasasuggestiontoexempttheoil neededintheproductionprocess.SincemostlyallcanolaoilonthemarketisGM,thiscould openadoor.ThelobbyistpresencewasnotasstrongintheHouse,perhapsbecausetheyknow thebattlewillbeintheSenate. OtherMonsantoChallenges: Therehavebeenothercases,butthecommercialspeechchallengehasnotbeentestedinthe US.ThirtyonecountriesinEuropehavelabelinglaws.Keepinmindthatthetop100foodand beverageproducerscomprise1/60thoftheworldeconomyandthetoptenhavehugesliceof themarket. CommercialSpeechvs.TheRighttoKnow: TheFirstAmendmentwasappliedtocorporationsandupheldbytheSupremeCourt.The questioniswhenarelimitsonspeechjustifiedintheconsumersinterest?IftheStateorFederal governmentcanbesuccessfulinprovingthatreallegitimateharmwouldensure,thenlimitsare reasonable.Ifnot,thentheconsumersrightsaretrumpedbythecorporationsrights. GoingForward: Thelegalissuesaregoingtotakesometimetoplayout.Duringthistime,businesseswillsee anopportunitytoadvertiseproductsthatareGMOfree,encouragingconsumeractivityand choice.(ItwasnotedthattheCoOpwasadvertisingsomecerealsasGMOFree.)Politicalwill wouldbemutedbyalawsuit.Asanexample,theEntergysuitshavemutedthelegislators.Its hardtoworkonlawsimpactedbyalawsuit.TodatetheFDAhaschosennottoregulate GMOs.IffivelegislaturesarelookingseriouslyatGMOLabeling,andthecourtssupportthem, theGMindustrymightpushtheFDAforaruleandlobbytoensurethattheruleiswatereddown.