Home | About | Donate

Reject DARK Act, Food, Consumer, Environment Advocates tell Senators


Reject DARK Act, Food, Consumer, Environment Advocates tell Senators

Nadia Prupis, staff writer

Consumer advocates on Wednesday called on the U.S. Senate to reject a bill that would allow food manufacturers to avoid labeling genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in their products.

Similar legislation passed the House of Representatives last summer. Opponents of the bill, who refer to it as the Deny Americans the Right to Know (DARK) Act, warn that it would do nothing to support consumers and favors corporations over people.


Thank the Goddess!

Best news I’ve heard all day.


Yay. I called. Gotta be grateful for the little things.


We Americans have a name, many have devoted purpose and all have place. We shop and we consume all sorts of stuff like food and air - BUT WE ARE NOT “SHOPPERS” OR “CONSUMERS”. That’s what corporate cynics calls us people whose behaviors they think they own. Thank you, people at the Guardian, for an opportunity to express my comment. Being referred to as consumers, even by our corporatized current government is flat out repugnant.


From the article:

Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety, said the vote was a “major victory for the food movement and America’s right to know. It also is an important victory for Democracy over the attempt of corporate interests to keep Americans in the dark about the foods they buy and feed their families,” Kimbrell said.

i absolutely adore Andy Kimbrell, but in my view, this is far from a “major victory,” but more of a successful desperate holding action. We the people did not advance here; we barely held off another advance by the corporatocracy. We still don’t have GMO labeling.

A “major victory” will be overturning corporate personhood and corporate rule.

That said: Congratulations to Center for Food Safety, Food and Water Watch, Organic Consumers Association, and all the grassroots fighters who stopped this evil legislation.


Did I fall asleep last night and wake up in a different country? The Senate rejected a bill that 90% of Americans were against? And against the wishes and lobbying of Monsanto, et. al? Is this Norway? Where am I?


When it comes to poisoning oneself, even conservatives have their limits. I’m still waiting for these climate deniers to choose between their fossil stocks and a healthy planet.


This corporate establishment bone is not enough and will not stop the bbq of the 1%


Good point about overturning Citizens United and its ilk (…) Center for Food Safety, Food and Water Watch, Organic Consumers Association, and all the grassroots fighters who stopped this evil legislation."

All of them are also announcing this with the caveat that IT IS NOT OVER YET. Wisely on guard for the possibility that the corporations are going to come back at it with a new game plan.

One thing not mentioned in the article - and perhaps a point worth driving home if there is another round - is the MARKETING of GMO labeling lobbying ‘joined at the hip’ with the electronics industry. Earlier on it was pointed out that the cost of GMO labeling, which the corporations claimed to be too expensive - was flatly disclaimed by one producer - I forget which. Clearly a case of one industry ‘scratching the back’ of another. No doubt there were certain sectors salivating over the potential hoodwink for market share of “consumers” that are not considered human beings.

This is a good time to review potentially similar industry tactics that attempt erode rights and triangulate to create unnecessary “markets” to their benefit and at the expense of people moving forward.

Perhaps others can think of additional aspects in critique this scam.


Toward the quelling of that bbq - Move to Amend Citizens United

In case any have yet to sign on and might want visit.


Kudos to Organic Consumers Association for just sending an email link to the roll call vote



i looked for it earlier, and found the link you post, but that is the roll call vote on the Defund Planned Parenthood Act.

Apparently in this instance the DARK Act was introduced as an amendment to the Defund Planned Parenthood Act, and was NOT added as an amendment. But the roll call listed at the link is the subsequent vote on the Defund Planned Parenthood Act, which did not pass. i don’t find any roll call on the DARK amendment, which according to the article received only 44 yea votes, not the 49 listed at the link.

i could still be confused! But i don’t think that’s the roll call for the DARK act.


We the people are cosmic powered biology surfing Big Bang at life speed, far faster than the speed of light.

Corporatistas are primitive beings stricken with insatiable want and an all consuming, 24/7, sleep robbing, gut gnawing fear that someone will better them, quantitatively.

Thank you. I agree. Repugnant.


Nope - you’re not confused. Guess OCA is ahead of the curve and the role call isn’t yet posted. I was so excited to see the email - I didn’t even check.
Heres the link to S.2609 Maybe sometime tomorrow.
Thanks for the heads up.


The roll call apparently hasn’t been posted yet. Heres a link to Gov info page on S. 2609


It could still be the correct roll call, i’m still not sure. Here’s the descriptor that leads to that roll call, from the 2016 roll call page:

“On the Cloture Motion: Motion to Invoke Cloture on the Motion to Concur in the House Amendment with an Amendment; A bill to reauthorize and amend the National Sea Grant College Program Act, and for other purposes.”

And here’s the descriptor from that roll call:

Measure Number: S. 764 (Defund Planned Parenthood Act of 2015)
Measure Title: A bill to reauthorize and amend the National Sea Grant College Program Act, and for other purposes.

All of which shows multiple layers of ridiculousness! It’s the reauthorization of the National Sea Grant College Program Act… which is given the short title of the “Defund Planned Parenthood Act of 2015”… which is then multiply amended for all kinds of other skulduggery including the DARK Act…

i know the right wingers had their own reasons for pushing the “line item veto.” But the practice of larding bills, essentially, with other bills, through the amendment process, is NOT transparent; works against a fair open process of genuine deliberation; and works against the possibility of genuine representation.

i mean, what could be more transparent than “On the Cloture Motion: Motion to Invoke Cloture on the Motion to Concur in the House Amendment with an Amendment.”

The system is so corrupt it’s defunct, but the zombie of this “Republic” still walks the Earth…


Whoops, again! lol I forgot that I was commenting on CC! Geezerville confession! lol


I am a small farmer, growing without harmful or objectionable inputs. When I sell at local farmer’s markets, I want customers and potential customers to know how the food I am offering is produced, that it is healthy for them, and not to be feared like the chemically supported or GMO crops. Any farmer or food processor who desires to hide what may have been used to produce a crop, or used in the production of packaged foods, has a slim chance that I would buy their product. Should the DARK act ever pass, preventing people from knowledege of which foods may be adulterated with GMOs, those products should be boycotted and left on the shelf.

It would make no sense to allow knowledge about whether a food contains GMOs only by accessing the information through a QR Code. Why would anyone waste their time checking QR Codes while shopping in a store? Flat out plain labeling is the only method to assure people are not being fooled by the food industry’s sneaky tricks.


“A “major victory” will be overturning corporate personhood and corporate rule.” Yes indeed. As another posted above, if TPP passes, lawsuits by corporations for potential loss of future profits will prevent and even overturn victories like this in the future.


So true. I have been wondering about corporations using TPP’s and TTIP’s investor dispute mechanism, ISDS. Right now the focus is that it permits corporations to sue for damages for lost profits because of laws that prefer health and safety over profits. I think you are saying it is realistic to consider that corporations will be suing, not only because of laws that prevent the corporate agenda, but where laws don’t actively promote their agenda. In this case that could mean being awarded damages against a jurisdiction that did not pass laws, such as this DARK act, that would stop any kind of labeling, by law or voluntary, of GMO’s and other harmful ingredients and practices, such as toxic chemicals, dolphin safe’ tuna and sodium, saturated fats and sugar content.
I think this is where the corporate ISDS is taking us. The corporations know it but I have yet to see those fighting it focus on the full extent of it.
If I have hijacked your comment, I apologize but this is what it prompted.