In her June 25 keynote address to the BIO International Convention in San Diego, Calif., Hillary Clinton voiced strong support for genetic engineering and genetically engineered crops. She earned a standing ovation that day by stating that the biotech industry suffers from a public perception problem and that it just needs “a better vocabulary” in order to persuade GMO skeptics who don’t understand “the facts” about genetic engineering.

And then Hillary proceeded to get the facts wrong.

Why does it matter what Hillary, who holds no public office and has not (yet) declared her candidacy for president, says or believes about genetic engineering and genetically modified crops and foods?

It doesn’t—unless she throws her hat in the ring for the Democratic nomination. And then it matters not just what her position is on GMOs, not just how deep her financial ties to the biotech industry run, not just how much she distorts the facts about the “promise” of biotech crops.

It matters, deeply, to more than 90 percent of Americans, what her position is on laws requiring mandatory labeling of GMOs in food and food products.

If elected, will Hillary support consumers’ right to know? Or will she support the DARK (Deny Americans the Right to Know) Act, a bill introduced in Congress earlier this year, which if passed, will preempt state GMO labeling laws?


8 thoughts on “Hillary Clinton is Just Plain Wrong on GMOs

  1. And this is exactly how you demoralize your base of would-be supporters and open yourself up from attacks both left and right. The only thing corporate ideological nonsense has going for it is money, which is one reason why she got raked over the coals by Obama.


    • I’m hip… and she’s also been sounding rather hawkish lately on foreign policy. It would be ironic if the 2016 election pits the interventionist Clinton versus the isolationist Rand Paul. Such a dreary scenario could split the Democratic Party as it did in 1968.


  2. Informed consent, a core principle of classical liberalism since John Stuart Mill, requires people to have all relevant information before they can make a valid choice. Food labeling increases the liberty of consumers, while it’s only a little step for producers.


Comments are closed.