Regional Democrats urge FDA to label GMOs

Santa Cruz - Highlighting a growing issue in California and across the county, a group of 55 Democratic lawmakers on Monday urged the Food and Drug Administration to require the labeling of genetically modified foods.

A letter sent to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg endorses the approach taken by a group of environmentalists, food labeling advocates and organic food producers who are petitioning the agency to reverse a 20-year-old, hands-off policy toward alerting consumers to genetically altered foods.

"Two decades later, I think we've seen a shift in consumer dialogue. People want more information," said Colin O'Neil, a regulatory policy analyst at the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Food Safety, who praised the letter.

In 1992, the FDA declined to label genetically altered food, reasoning that if it looks, smells and tastes similar to non-modified foods, no label was needed. But later FDA rulings - including one dealing with irradiated food - have taken a stricter line and called for more disclosure.

"At issue is the fundamental right consumers have to make informed choices about the food they eat," the lawmakers' letter reads. "Labeling foods doesn't imply a product is unsafe or will be confusing to consumers as some may argue."

FDA officials could not be immediately reached for comment. More than four dozen countries require labels on genetically altered food.

The letter was signed by both California's U.S. Senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, and 14 Democratic members of Congress, including Reps. Anna Eshoo, of Palo Alto, and Sam Farr, of Carmel, the latter of whom represents the fertile Salinas and Pajaro valleys.

The federal petition is separate from a statewide initiative now circulating to put food labeling on the November ballot. The California effort would slap a general label on any genetically modified food, while the FDA petition aims to note which specific ingredients have been modified.

House Backs Debt Deal, but 95 'Conscience' Democrats Vote 'No'

By John Nichols
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi reportedly told members of the House Democratic Caucus to vote their "individual consciences" when they were asked to approve the debt-ceiling deal cobbled together by the Obama White House and Congressional Republicans.

Consciences divided evenly, with ninety-five Democrats opposing the compromise agreement while ninety-five supported it in a Monday evening vote that saw the measure pass primarily on the basis of Republican backing -despite the fact that this was a deal promoted aggressively by a Democratic White House.

The final tally was 269 in favor, 161 opposed.

Republicans generally backed the deal, with 174 voting "yes" while sixty-six voted "no."

Democrats were far more closely divided, with widespread opposition to what Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Keith Ellison, D-Minnesota, described as a violation of "core Democratic ideals."

While Pelosi cast her own viote in favor of the agreement, she did not "whip" her fellow Democrats to back the deal during a marathon caucus meeting Monday. The former speaker outlined the consequences of a default by the federal government if an agreement to raise the debt ceiling is not reached. But North Carolina Congressman G.K. Butterfield, who attended the caucus session said Pelosi avoided pressuring House Democrats to fall in line with the Democrats in the White House. "She told us to leave it to our individual consciences," Butterfield told reporters.

With the House vote done, the Senate will be vote Tuesday on the deal, which proposes radical cuts in federal programs-cuts that some fear will ultimately threaten Medicare and other Democratic "legacy" programs-in return for raising the nation's debt ceiling.