Measure 92 would hurt Oregon farm families (including ours), cost taxpayers millions and increase grocery costs for Oregon families by hundreds of dollars a year.

What would Oregonians get for our money? A costly, unreliable food labeling system that doesn’t exist in any other state. I oppose Measure 92. Let me explain why.

This year, our farm celebrated its 115th birthday. For farmers like us, Measure 92 would create new liabilities, limit our crop options and could compel us to make costly changes in how we handle what we grow.

Every party in the food supply chain (seed companies, suppliers, farmers, food processors, distributors and retailers) would be required by Measure 92 to provide “sworn statements” declaring that non-genetically engineered food ingredients have not been produced using genetic engineering — and have not been “commingled” with any crops that may have been.

Certain foods that may have been harvested, transported, handled or “commingled” with GMO crops or ingredients would have to be specially labeled in order to be sold in Oregon.

This requirement, along with the measure’s extreme “zero tolerance” threshold, would result in many foods being labeled as “genetically engineered” — even if they’re not. Backers of Measure 92 know consumers would avoid foods with such labels — even though they are just the same as other foods containing the same ingredients.

These requirements for separate and costly new production systems for harvesting, storing, processing, and transporting products would burden Oregon farmers and food producers whether they grow and use GMO crops or not — and so would the costly new recordkeeping and tracking systems that would be required.

It’s easy to understand why Measure 92 is bad for farmers and food producers. But it’s just as bad for Oregon taxpayers and consumers.

Measure 92 would create two new state bureaucracies to enforce and implement its costly regulations. According to the Oregon Department of Administrative Services, inspection-based programs to enforce Measure 92 could cost taxpayers more than $14 million every budget cycle. And Measure 92 has no funding source — or limit on how much these new bureaucracies may cost.

Consumers also would face higher grocery costs under Measure 92. The increased costs for farmers, food producers and suppliers to comply with Measure 92’s Oregon-only requirements would make it more expensive to sell food in our state. These costs would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher grocery costs for Oregon families.

But Measure 92’s labeling requirements are so badly written that they would give consumers inaccurate information about which foods contain GMOs and which don’t. Under Measure 92, thousands of food products would be labeled “genetically engineered” — even if they’re not. Thousands of other foods would be exempt from labeling even if they do contain or are produced with GMO ingredients.

Measure 92 arbitrarily exempts two-thirds of the foods we buy from its labeling requirements — even if they are made with or contain GMOs. For example, under Measure 92, meat and dairy products would be exempt from labeling, even if they come from animals raised on genetically engineered feed or injected with GE medications. This conflicts with existing national labeling standards for “organic” and “non-GMO” labels for these products.

Measure 92 also exempts restaurant foods, alcoholic beverages, foods and beverages sold “ready to eat,” foods in school and hospital cafeterias, and many other food products. And Measure 92 would not tell consumers which ingredients in food products are GMOs or how much of the product is made of GMO ingredients, if any.

Measure 92 is opposed by a statewide coalition of groups such as Oregon Farm Bureau representing more than 33,000 Oregon family farmers, ranchers, food companies, store owners, consumers and taxpayers that have joined together to provide Oregon voters with the facts about Measure 92.

I encourage you to look into the facts for yourself by visiting FactsAbout92.com. If you do, we believe you’ll agree that Measure 92 is a badly written, costly and misleading proposal that deserves a NO vote.

Lyndon Kerns raises cattle and hay in the Klamath Basin. He serves as Regional Director for Klamath and Lake Counties on the Oregon Farm Bureau Board of Directors.

Read the Complete Article »