Skip to main content

Let the lawmakers hear: The people speak out for GMO labeling


Like a lot of people, I was disappointed that the Honolulu City & County left mandatory GMO labeling out of its Resolution 11-339 which will go to the State Legislature for action.  The other three counties (Kaua‘i, Maui, and Hawaii Island) included that in their draft of the Hawaii State Association of Counties Legislative Package that the Hawaii Legislature will look at in 2012.

And like a lot of you, I sat through the hours of testimony that were overwhelmingly FOR the mandatory labeling of GMO products. There was a lot of written testimony submitted too, and I wondered how many were for GMO labeling, and how many against.

The Council's web document sharing system links all submitted testimony, but doesn't label it "For" or "Against." I'd think that kind of info would be helpful to the council members, but what do I know.  I decided to look at every piece of testimony, tally it up and present it here...

There were 213 people For, and 18 people Against which breaks down as 92% For GMO labeling and 8% Against. The submitted testimony was overwhelmingly FOR the mandatory labeling of GMO foods.  So why did the Honolulu City Council vote Against labeling GMO? The ones testifying Against are GMO lobbyists and other folk with money.  Has it become a matter of "how much democracy can you buy?"  I know the Occupy movement decries the influence of corporations on the political process -- I mean, you think? (My post, "Competing GMO corporations sit at the same table in Hawaii.")

I do notice State Senator Maile Shimabukuro (District 21, Leeward Oahu) submitted testimony FOR.  Yay Maile!

Now let's get our stuff together for the Legislative session.  Any suggestions? GMO has got to GO!

H. Doug Matsuoka
17 December 2011
Makiki, Honolulu

P.S. The curious (or suspicious) can download my tallysheet as a Google Doc by clicking the pic below:

Click here to open as Google doc or download


Update of 12/18/2011: 4:59pm. I sent a link to this post to all Honolulu City Councilmembers asking if they took a For/Against tally of the spoken testimony.  Within 4 hours, I got a response from Councilman Tom Berg:


"I did. I separated them - I had 9 out of 10 for labeling. About three inches of paper- written testimony to document the people should have a right to know. Tom Berg"


I'll post any other responses I receive from Councilmembers.


Update of 01/18/2012: If anyone would like to keep track of efforts to regulate or label GMO during the 2012 Hawaii legislature, join GMO-FREE OAHU on Facebook. It's a small group now but can be used for legislative updates, communication, and discussion.

Comments

  1. Thanks Doug! Eye opening statistics. Why indeed did the City Council not rule in favor of the overwhelming majority? We all need to be vigilant to keep our elected representatives from serving powerful corporate and special interests at the expense of the people. Go Doug !!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you for your vigilance. Please continue to monitor the situation and distribute your findings. The greed of the international conglomerate corporations should not be allowed to cause more damage.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

HCDA creates their own anti-homeless police at HAR hearing

While no one was watching, the HCDA (Hawaiʻi Community Development Authority) held  a Hawaii Administrative Rules hearing that creates their own anti-homeless police force, and (incidentally) raises park fees by up to 500%. The affected parks are at the intersection of Honolulu Council Districts 4, 5, and 6, (Trevor Ozawa, Ann Kobayashi, and Carol Fukunaga respectively) but none (or their staff) were present today. These laws were made without any oversight from the public or their elected representatives.

Who knew that such sweeping changes could be made without the oversight of any elected officials? And after one decision making hearing that is accountable to no one? If the Honolulu City Council had to rule on such changes, it would require three full council hearings, and opportunities for public participation at each.

My own interest in attending the hearing was to get some kind of hint as to the mechanism the City would use to curtail First Amendment rights in Thomas Square afte…

What The City Doesn’t Want You To Know About Thomas Square

[This article was originally published by CivilBeat on July 21, 2016. I'm reprinting it with video clips. Doug]

The City of Honolulu plans to close Thomas Square on Aug. 15 for six months and re-open it in February 2017 as something completely different, according to its master plan. Although city officials have unveiled grandiose plans concerning a drastic makeover, there are a number of troubling things they are trying to keep under cover:

1. It will no longer be a public park. The master plan calls for Thomas Square to be transferred from the city’s Department of Parks and Recreation, where it is a public park, to its Department of Enterprise Services. What is it? The department runs the Blaisdell Center, the Waikiki Shell, the zoo and the public golf courses. By way of a memo dated April 28 from the city’s enterprise chief Guy Kaulukukui to the state’s head of the Department of Land and Natural Resources, the city asked the state to make changes to allow a change of purpose for…

Eric Seitz: Pro bono is a crock

At yesterday's "Justice in Jeopardy, Expanding Access to Justice in Challenging Economic Times" at the UH Richardson Law School, Dean of Harvard Law School Martha L. Minow pointed out that one in five Americans now qualify for civil legal assistance because they are within 125% of the Poverty Level -- a record high in the history in the county. As the demand for legal services grows, the available resources continue to diminish, leaving most without the "equal protection" of the law.

I checked out the breakout session on pro bono because I used to work for Hawaii's pro bono referral service, Volunteer Legal Services Hawaii (VLSH).

These days, most pro bono services are not attorneys representing clients, but short informational sessions at legal clinics. Moderator Robert LeClair asked attorney Eric Seitz what he thought of this turn in pro bono services.  This is what Eric said:

"Well, let me start out by saying that I've always thought pro bono w…