© 2024
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations
Global demand for food and fuel is rising, and competition for resources has widespread ramifications. We all eat, so we all have a stake in how our food is produced. Our goal is to provide in-depth and unbiased reporting on things like climate change, food safety, biofuel production, animal welfare, water quality and sustainability.

Colorado GMO Labeling Opponents Draw Millions In Donations

Luke Runyon
KUNC, Harvest Public Media
This sugar beet, plucked from a field in rural Weld County, Colo., has been genetically modified to withstand herbicide applications. The sugar derived from this beet would be subject to Proposition 105 if it passes.

Each campaign finance filing in the fight over whether some foods in Colorado should sport a label about genetically modified ingredients shows an increasingly lopsided race. In a two week period in September the committee working to get the measure passed raised about $120,000. Those opposed raised $8.1 million.

Right To Know Colorado GMO, the group that gathered the signatures to put Proposition 105 on the ballot, currently has $81,434 in cash on hand. The No On 105 Coalition, the group opposed to labels, has $4.2 million on hand.

Proponents of GMO labeling argue consumers have an indisputable right to know how certain foods are grown and prepared, and labels will shed light on the prevalence of genetically modified ingredients in processed food. Many oils and sugars in processed foods are derived from GM crops like corn, soybeans and sugar beets.

Those opposed to labeling say Proposition 105, with its bevy of exemptions for dairy, meat, beer, chewing gum and pet food, will only lead to more confusion at the grocery store, and could cause economic hardships for Colorado farmers who grow genetically modified crops. There’s no peer-reviewed scientific literature to suggest eating genetically modified foods causes any health problems in humans.

Recent labeling fights in other states like California and Washington have pulled in big dollar amounts. Colorado is no exception with the latest campaign finance filing showing large checks pouring in. Top donors this election cycle for the No On 105 Coalition include some of the largest food and biotech companies in the world:

  • Monsanto Corporation - $4.7 million
  • PepsiCo - $1.1 million
  • Kraft Foods - $1 million

Right To Know Colorado GMO has mostly subsisted on smaller checks from individuals, with a handful of larger donors. Those top donors include activist groups and prominent voices in the organic and natural products sector:

  • Food Democracy Action - $140,000
  • Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps - $25,000
  • John Foraker (CEO of food company Annie’s) - $10,000

With all that money being raised, voters should expect to see and hear a lot more about Proposition 105 in the coming weeks in the form of advertising. The No On 105 Coalition spent more than $4.7 million on advertising this filing period.

As KUNC’s managing editor and reporter covering the Colorado River Basin, I dig into stories that show how water issues can both unite and divide communities throughout the Western U.S. I edit and produce feature stories for KUNC and a network of public media stations in Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico, Arizona, California and Nevada.
Related Content