Farmers, chambers opposing GMO-labeling proposal

It’s not just concerned farmers, like me, and other food producers opposing Proposition 105.

Opposition to the GMO-labeling proposal has poured in from the Northern Colorado Legislative Alliance, the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce and other various organizations, along with scientists at the University of Colorado in Boulder and elsewhere.

And for good reason. 

SPONSORED CONTENT

How dispatchable resources enable the clean energy transition

Platte River must prepare for the retirement of 431 megawatts (MW) of dispatchable, coal-fired generation by the end of the decade and address more frequent extreme weather events that can bring dark calms (periods when there is no sun or wind).

Proposition 105 is inconsistent and misleading. It would impose huge costs on food producers, increase grocery bills and not give consumers any reliable information.

Many have spoken out against GMO-labeling in general. As the New York Times editorial board put it last year, the FDA says it has no basis for concluding foods containing GMOs present greater safety concerns than others, so there seems little reason to make labeling compulsory. And, consumers can already find products free of GMOs, with voluntarily placed labels.

We couldn’t agree more.

Please join me in voting “no” on Proposition 105.

— Dave Eckhardt, LaSalle, Colo.