Why the Federal Government should not label GMOs

For those who have no idea what I'm talking about, in America our top 3 crops (soy, corn and wheat) are almost all genetically modified. Whether it's in the form of high fructose corn syrup, soy isolate, or gluten, virtually every processed food contains at least one of these GMO crops. The problem is that none of these products are labeled to inform the consumer that there are GMO ingredients present. The "Right to Know" movement is fighting the Federal Drug Administration in favor of labeling all genetically modified produce or any food that contains GMO's.Up until a few months ago I was convinced that the FDA should be required to label all genetically modified crops, ingredients and foods. I am very anti-Monsanto (corporation who owns GMO's) and anti-GMO. Monsanto created aspartame, and bovine growth hormone, supplied agent orange during the Vietnam war and has been sued repeatedly for polluting the environment. The idea that a corporation with that track record can create and supply a healthy and environmentally-friendly product is outrageous.That being said, the more I look into how the issues regarding genetically modified crops are solved in this country, the more questions arise. Should identifying the presence of GMO crops be the responsibility of the federal government, the states, or simply the consumer? While I understand the concept and agree whole-heartedly that we should be educated on where our food is coming from, I believe a mandate on the federal level will cause  more harm than good.Some of the assumptions made by those promoting GMO labeling on a federal level are: 1.They will be easier to identify- 90% of store-bought foods will have a “contains GMO” label. Everyone will become enlightened, and even those “healthy eaters” will notice that their favorite protein bar or milk replacement has GMO’s in it. Awareness is a good thing and everyone's happy. However, most everyone’s thoughts on the consequences of labeling GMO’s end here.Reality- Do you really think if we appoint the FDA to label genetically modified foods that they will actually put a label saying “contains GMOs”?My bet is that the FDA would use a term that Monsanto and politicians already use to market their products such as “drought-resistant”. Think about what would happen if we gave the FDA the authority to label GMOs and companies started putting “drought resistant” on their packaging. Of course, the small percentage of the informed population would see right through it. But can we assume that the majority of people would know what that drought-resistant is just a euphemism for GMO’s?If I didn't know any better and saw a label that said drought resistant, I would think that the company is environmentally-friendly and doing it’s part to help the drought situation in California. Talk about a massive backfire and increased revenue for Monsanto.This may sound like a stretch but history repeats itself. Toxic food additives such as MSG and Aspartame that are required to be labeled, can legally hide under names like “yeast protein” and “natural flavors” and the average consumer is completely unaware. It’s clear that the FDA loves to create loop holes and lower food standards when they can. 2. The general public will avoid the crops- This is the hope behind the labeling of GMO’s. That those who were unaware, will now switch from Kellogg's corn flakes to Ezekiel organic sprouted cereal.What is more likely to happen: We have to recognize the very real element that most Americans (not from California or Colorado) do not understand the harm that GMO crops cause. If they're not currently concerned with eating organic, why would they be bothered to spend more money to avoid GMOs?3. Large corporations that use GMO’s would loose power and organic companies will rise- In my mind, this would be the most important result of a labeling mandate. When people begin to recognize GMO’s and avoid them, companies like Monsanto lose money and power. Maybe GMO’s will stop being spread to other parts of the world, and farmers in those places will stop going bankrupt.What is more likely to happen: Well, we already have the Monsanto Protection Act protecting the corporation's ability to sell their products even if they are declared unsafe by the FDA in the future. The federal government is constantly protecting large corporations from bankruptcy. Many of Monsanto’s crops, like GMO corn are already subsidized by the government. I fear, giving the federal government more control with GMO labeling can do more harm than good. What we fail to consider about GMO labeling:An increased risk of small farmers losing their farmsIf you’re unfamiliar to the concept of GMO crops, you may be surprised to learn that GMO seed and plant residue is impossible to avoid completely. It spreads in the air freely contaminating other crops and farms. In your local, organic farm the amount of GMO residue is likely minimal, but if the FDA mandates GMO labeling, 2 things could (and likely will) happen to small farms:1. Farms that unknowingly have microscopic amounts of GMO contamination will face being shut down. This sounds extreme, but small organic farms are already under much scrutiny and severe regulation on their farming practices by the government due to the Food and Safety Modernization Act. This act that was meant to protect us, has made it difficult for small, sustainable farms to operate.2. Farms will be sued by Monsanto. When buying seeds from Monsanto, the farmer signs a contract saying they will not save and re-use seeds next year. They agree to buy from Monsanto as long as they intend to use their genetically modified crops. This is problematic for farmers because once they start using a Monsanto seed, their farm becomes GMO contaminated and they face a lawsuit for patent infringement if they do not pay Monsanto for seeds each year. This is not an uncommon occurrence, and there is no protection for small farms who have become contaminated through natural seed spread.*On another note, it's probably obvious that this kind of business model is not sustainable, nor is it ethical for a corporation who claims to be interested in feeding the world. Organic farmers already have to jump through hoops to become certified organic.I worked at the farmers market for years and I know many farmers who honestly could not afford to be certified organic. It costs a lot of money and takes years of organic practice to be certified. Organic certification also restrains the use of many sustainable and healthy farming practices. The farms who were certified organic always had higher prices in order to compensate for the money put toward certification.Although I admire certified organic farmers, if we want people to be able to afford non-GMO, pesticide-free produce, getting to know your local farmer and his/her practices is much more realistic. We already have the right to know. What we do with that right is our responsibility.Having the right to something and using that right are two different things. I would like to start a non-GMO campaign called “USE your right to know”. I don’t believe that the government stepping in and doing health research for us is the answer. After all, they used to tell us that tobacco and nicotine were safe. If you as a consumer care about your health it is YOUR responsibility to make an informed decision about where you get your food from. No one is prohibiting you from buying local, organic or sustainable food.In terms of food quality, the government has led us astray many times before. If we want to see change, and support healthy farming practices we should focus on educating ourselves, friends and family and encouraging them to learn about food production. That is how a movement starts. Not by giving your responsibility over to someone else.So where do we go from here?Well, I suggest we change our stance from demanding the FDA label GMO's to spreading awareness and encouraging food education. Attacking this on a local, and state level is not only more attainable, but it is safer for small farmers. Vermont has done a wonderful job leading the way, and I can only assume that other states will follow.Where do you stand with the labeling of Genetically Modified Crops? Do you think they should be labeled on a federal, state label or not at all? Do you avoid GMOs?