is confusing they're spending more money than ever spend on labeling telling people that labeling is too expensive they're pretending that the labeling bill has been created by trial lawyers to force lawsuits and that it's going to be bad for farmers and small businesses and it's going to cost a huge amount of money for california bureaucracy in reality all of these are manufactured. and this is very simply a right to do were label be affixed to a a package indicating whether a product is genetically engineer. and some of the opponents of prop thirty seven jeffries say that the food choices will decrease and prices will increase how do you respond to that. there are sixty one countries that have labeling requirements for genetically engineered foods and not one has increased the cost of shoots to consumers in fact the same companies that sell g m o's in the united states kraft nestle is hershey's and have either labeled it overseas or removed it entirely at no cost to consumers if they wanted to trust the entire cost of hiring an artist to place the actual label would cost about seve

require a label. require a label. a label is simple. a label works. and senator merkley, i see you're on the floor, and i'm finishing up. we have various ways we can do the label. one way is give it to the f.d.a. and tell them to come up with it. another way is the way senator merkley has proceeded in a way to attract more support. he's given four options, all of which are very good. and all of which would immediately give you the information that you need. now, in 2000 when i introduced the first senate labeling of g.e. foods, my legislation had one supporter, and it was me. i had no other supporters back then. it was so long ago, 2000. now 14 senators are cosponsoring the bill, and i am so proud to cosponsor senator merkley's bill, the biotechnology food labeling and uniformity act, which again will put forward four options for companies. so there are reasons that people want this information and not one of us we are should decry or could decry what our people want. they want to know if the foods contain g.m.o.'s because of the prevalence of herbici

this is not just labeling. there are a whole bunch of food regulations that will increase price of groceries at the store. gerri: margo, i want you to weigh in something we've been talking about on this and revamping serving sizes. that is part of the labeling issue. they're going to, instead of saying that a pint of ice cream is two to four servings will say two which is more like reality. there is concern there will be downsizing of packaging along with this and increase in food prices. what do you say to that? >> i say the last time nutrition labeling went into effect there wasn't increase in costs passed on to the consumer even though a lot of people cried wolf and said that was going to happen. so i'm not expecting to see that. customers want a certain size package, they're used to that it will just mean that they will have more accurate nutrition information for what is in that package. bag of chips was about the same size. going to be more honest labeling of it. >> well the food experts i talked to today

these labels to make them easier to read and understand. >> we've been ignoring government labels for 23 years. so now we're going to spend an immense amount of money on a multi-year process to rearrange the information, make it larger and add even more that you'll never read or use. because it makes liberals feel good. it is pure symbolism. >> actually, it's not symbolic at all. it makes us liberals thinner and that's our secret trick to living longer, then winning more elections. that's what you won't see on your food labels. >> you do lead a rich fantasy life. >> in the "crossfire" tonight, director of nutrition at the center for science in the public interest and rick berman. rick, let me start with you. obesity accounts for as much as $146 billion in health care costs in this country. from my perspective that makes it not just a personal issue. this is an issue that affects all of us. certainly as taxpayers. don't you think there's some government responsibility to do something about this crisis? >> first of all, there's always been thin people and there's always been fat people.

label. now it's out of ordinary we are holding a hearing before the fda has released a formal proposal. but it is an important conversation. we must recognize food labeling reforms are not the end-all be-all which is to say they are not a silver bullet solving the nation's health and obesity issues. the committee needs to look at all factors leading to obesity and how congress can use its resources to promote a healthier lifestyle. this means examining fda's role in reviewing the safety of chemicals and ingredients that o into our foods. so foods are safe to consume it. congress can better support robust scientific research and food ingredients and i look forward to discussing this with fda leadership i would hear from fda about the progress it is made improving food safety duties. under the biden/harris administration fda face enormous challenges and regulating food safety including the 2022 infant formula shortage which are severely impacted american families. the largest reorganization in

labeling all genetically modified foods out in california there's a renewed effort to label g.m.o. foods california state senator norine evans has introduced a new g.m.o. food labeling bill in that state it would mandate that all genetically engineered foods the label for bill would also allow foods that only contains some genetically engineered greens to be labeled produced with genetic engineering or partially produced with genetic engineering while big agriculture may not want you or me to know about genetically modified foods an overwhelming majority ninety three percent of americans according to a recent new york times poll an overwhelming majority of us want to know what foods contain genetically modified organisms and there's a good reason for that despite what companies like monsanto are going to try to tell you g.m.a. g.m.o. foods may have some problems as the institute for responsible technology points so even before the f.d.a. decided to let g.m.o. foods go unlabeled the f.d.a. a's own scientists were warning the g.m.o. foods could create unpredictable hard to detect sid

host: how would you design a label?>> guest: with difficulty. i would do something much disagree much like a traffic label system that was used in great britain for a while. the fda proposed a photo packaging system. because the institute of medicine in washington to do the two major reports on the package labeling and the second is a proposed system of photo package labeling and it's like traffic lights where it only looks at the sugar, salt, saturated fat and calories and has a check mark for them. but that came out during an election year and find him and i think the fda is going to leave those reports in the drawer until they get the nutrition facts label straightened out and they may never go back to it but i would pull the report out of the drawer immediately. >> host: because of the availability of more calories per person and is thus likely to decrease world hunger? >> guest: would be nice. it is decreasing according to the food and agriculture organization that just came out with its annual report and its down

multi bacteria tobacco was a major contributors to lung cancer so we regulated it we put warning labels on the car tens in exactly the is that you tobacco and sugar sweetened beverages are not the sole reason for heart disease the evidence is they're a major contributor to those diseases and as such we owe it to ourselves and communities to regulate them i will just close by reminding us all in the thirty years since warning labels and other forms of regulation were placed on tobacco over one billion lives have been saved that's the power of regulating unheath products over one billion lives we're saved thank you very much >> thank you (clapping.) >> i too feel ethnic if you hear something you like as powerful communicate it by silent communications dr. is that all you have perfect supervisor wiener has a few questions. >> dr. thank you very much for your work in trying to make our community healthier sometimes, we - i'm not a physician not a scientist i don't pass myself off as a medical expert but i have a met and spoken with and left hand to and read analysis from many different posi

the label read: the labelling law was part of farm bills in 2002 and 2008, and had support from some. ranchers. canada and mexico never liked the labels fearing they'd be at a disadvantage to u.s. product. with the backing of the world trade organization they are threatening to impose $3 billion or more on tariffs on a wide range of american goods unless the labels are dropped. consumer groups backed the labels because they help consumers under where the food comes from. >> consumers, the american people, the people we represent want to make purchases from a trusted source. >> reporter: canada and mexico many in the industry especially those that buy cattle from north and south of the border see it as a failed marketing tool that drives up costs. >> we have producers that will buy in canada and mexico bring them across the border, add value and market it as the united states. mandatory labelling wouldn't allow it. >> reporter: under the law canadian and mexican animals have to be segregated from those in the u.s. that's pricey. kent says if consumers want the labels. his industry wil

it's a voluntary labeling which means there will be no labeling whatsoever. many states are reflecting the desires of their consumers to basically know what's in the product they're buying. and a consumer has a right to do that. they just do. and this legislation is ironic in this sense: if gmos are so safe, and i'm not here to challenge that assertion, but if they're so safe, why not label so that folks who are getting what the manufacturers assert is so safe know that their product will be labeled and consumers can then make their own decision? i mean, my question really is if they're so safe, why would anyone be afraid of so labeling those products so the consumers would have a right to know? now, in vermont we have our assistant attorney general here who's going to talk about what we've done in vermont. three states have passed labeling laws. several others are considering them. there have been referendums that almost passed in california, and it's reflecting this groundswell of desire that consumers have to know what's in the products that they're buying

if you don't put a warning label you will get sued. here we have a warning label. here is a great little product. say you are driving down the road and you have a wonderful idea and write a note to yourself where you can take this little wheel mate, attaches to the steering wheel. warning, never use this product while driving. >> john: that would seem like a reasonable warning. you don't want people to use it. as the company explained, they said it is impossible to use while driving. so the car would drive around in circles if you tried it but the lawyer said put it on just in case. >> that is what we hear. you will sued if you don't. a warning label on fishing harmful if swallowed. >> john: product three. >> this is neck pillow that parents will put around the neck of the infants in the car. >> john: so the child can be more comfortable. >> it keeps their head stable and hurting the child. warning label actually says keep this product away from facts and children. it's kind of hard to use it. >> john: we called the company and they didn't respond. this is number f

it was labeled dairy free.ever she says eating the candy could have threatened her son's life. 7-year-old tyler is as playful as any first grader diving into his toy tent or wrestling his li never know this carefree little boy faces a terrible threat. >> it is life and death. it is to the something to be taken lightly. >> tyler is severely allergic to dairy products. his mother says the slightest drop of milk or eggs could cause a life-threatening shock. >> he experiences vomiting. his toping and lips get swollen. >> they separate all foods in the kitchen. tyler safe food here and unsafe foods up high. tyler has learned to read labels to find safe treats. >> and he found the candy bar and he said, mommy, this say dairy free and vegan. does that mean i can have it? >> he was thrilled to find these chocolate bars had a dairy free label. >> i read the ingreed -- ingredients and did not see any dairy or egg. >> tyler began to eat one and within minutes the panic. >> he said to us my mouth is burning. my mouth is on

these efforts include work to modernize labels, label claims, ingredient labels, while also taking forward our ongoing efforts to implement nutrition facts labels and to reduce sodium. these are some of the steps we're going to be taking. consumers have long been interested in fighting easier ways to identify healthful foods by looking at the label when shopping for groceries. science-based claims to help people do that. that's why we are looking at modernizing how we look at claims. claims are quick signals on food packages about what benefits the food or beverage may choose -- and they choose might have. claims can encourage the food industry to introduce new products to improve healthy qualities. food makers are going to focus on asher it's that they can advertise -- attributes they can advertise. we will see manufacturers focus more of their investment innovation on things they can talk about, like taste and value. they will be far less emphasis on coming up with the features that can improve nutrition and health. i believe there is more room for competition in the marketplace when it

label on your product. this is the no label required, no g.m.o. label required bill. and so it's a little bit of false advertising or actually a lot of false advertising to call this a mandatory g.m.o. labeling bill. what the bill says is that there are a couple options that exist today that people can use voluntarily. and let me show you an example of that. this is mars product. it is the, on the present mars peanut m & m's, one of my particular favorites, and mars has said we want to make sure that our consumers know what's in the product. so they list all the traditional things, serving size and calories and the total fat, cholesterol, the protein and the sodium. say but our consumers also want to know if there are g.m.o. ingredients. so they answer the question, partially produced with genetic engineering. it's a g.m.o. product. now we don't know from this label which ingredient is the one they're referring to, but to the consumer, that tells them the first important thing they want to know, and a consumer can look into the details elsewhere if they want to and ex

our tags have a score you have front of package labeling, you have the larger back of package label,ou're talking about a lot of labels on one single food. frankly, you could put a label across the front just like a tobacco product that says this product will make you obese and i promise you people are still going to make that -- still going to buy that product if they want it. i think you're arguing apples and oranges here. everyone wants people to be healthier but in the end they'll et what they want to eat. doesn't matter what you put on there. they're going to get what their taster is set for. mr. guthrie: i'm one, i almost never pick up something that has that label on it and not read the calories. i come from wanning the calories but let's do it in a reasonable way. mr. pitts: the chair recognizes the gentleman, mr. schrader. mr. schrader: thank you. i guess for dr. wootan and ms. raskopf, and to everyone, obviously this rule is not ready for prime time. we have considerable discussion about what it's going to do how it will be implemented, i understand that. although the rules

labeling will debate the economic and health impacts of labeling because. it's wednesday august fifteenth of four pm in washington d.c. i'm christine freeze out and you are watching our t.v. we begin today with a look into surveillance and how it affects our daily lives we all know about domestic drones and we know about wiretaps but there's something else on the horizon when it comes to the ever expanding surveillance state facial recognition it's hardly a novel concept but it's one that is gaining steam and it's already implemented in washington d.c. l.a. last vegas new york city and texas possibly also michigan hawaii and maryland are two producer adriano seto explains how the software works and how you were actually helping to build that database. every minute of every day whether you're out on the street working in the office or sneaking into the kitchen chances are someone's watching facial recognition technology was once something only side five flicks could dream up but now it's beginning to look a lot stranger than fiction the f.b.i. is planning on

you have front of package labeling larger back of package labeling talking bat lot of labels on one single food you could put a label across the front just like a tobacco product that says this product will make you obese and people are still going to buy the product if they want it. so i don't think that -- i think you're arguing apples and orange here. everyone wants people to be healthier, but in the end they will eat what they want to eat and doesn't matter what you put on there they're going to get what their taster is set for on that day. >> i almost never pick up something that has the label on it and not read calories. >> now recognize the gentleman mr. schrader. >> thank you mr. chairman. i guess for dr. wooten and miss raskof. these rules -- and to everybody -- this rule is not ready for prime time. we have had considerable discussion how it would be implemented. i understand that. and although the rules come out -- [inaudible conversations] >> it's my understanding that there's not been a whole lot of guidance going on, and some of you already addressed this. some of us sent a l

i think it's a waste of money with all these labels. i have never in my life read a label. in perfect health. i am healed and well my mother is 91. she never counted calories and she never read a label. we eat what we want when we want and my mother is in fantastic hell. host: what's your secret? [laughter] caller: if you believe you will receive. what you say you will have. that is my secret. host: what is your question for t?r guess? caller caller: i agree on not changing the labels. with my health and my mother's health, we never read labels and never counted calories and never did any of these things. it's just a statement. host: thank you. guest: congratulations. host: can that be applied across the board? guest: i don't think so, i think people want to eat healthier. six out of 10 americans want to eat healthier and four out of five a there diet is not healthy so we need some help. i would start with the front of the package labels. you can take that information and combine it into one simple and say this product is healthier than the next and that would be a simple t

these efforts include work to modernize labels, label claims, greedy labels and identity while also takingforward our ongoing efforts to put administration label and reduce sodium. these are just some of the new steps that were going to be taking. consumers have long been interested in finding easy ways to identify hopeful frequently at the label when shopping for groceries pick science-based scd claims can help people do that. that's why we're looking at modernizing how we look at claims. claims a quick signals on food packages for consumers about what benefits of food beverage, a food or they choose might have. clinton also encouraged the food industry to introduce new products or reformulate existing wants to improve their healthy qualities. food makers going to focus the innovation on attributes that they can advertise. if a manufacturer can't make claims around the healthful attributes of the food, then we will see fewer products with these benefits. we will see manufacturers focus more of their investment and innovation of things they can talk about my taste and value. and there will

it was labeled dairy free. however she says eating the candy could have threatened her son's life. 7-year-old tyler is as playful as any first grader diving into his toy tent or wrestling his little brother you would never know this carefree little boy faces a terrible threat. >> it is life and death. it is to the something to be taken lightly. >> tyler is severely allergic to dairy products. his mother says the slightest drop of milk or eggs could cause a life-threatening shock. >> he experiences vomiting. his toping and lips get swollen. >> they separate all foods in the kitchen. tyler safe food here and unsafe foods up high. tyler has learned to read labels to find safe treats. >> and he found the candy bar and he said, mommy, this say dairy free and vegan. does that mean i can have it? >> he was thrilled to find these chocolate bars had a dairy free label. >> i read the ingreed -- ingredients and did not see any dairy or egg. >> tyler began to eat one and within minutes the panic. >> he said to us my mouth

some of the labels they hide msg and the labels they use? >> particularly potent are the hydrolised protein. corn protein, whey protein. there is yeast and yeast extract and sodium casonate and things that have small amounts of msg in them would include citric acid. i am not giving you things in terms of the amount of msg because it varies trough tremendously from product to product and varies on the type of manufacture. you will get powdered milk. when milk and the protein in milk changes to powder there is some acid released or produced and it is that free glutamic acid that is causing the reactions that we see, the various reactions. we need clarification because there is glutimade in the body. it is very functional a and you need it. there is no question about it. when it is manufactured and when it is not found in protein and when it is taken from the protein or manufactured through the process using bacteria that actually manufactures the glutamic acid, that is when it has this toxic potential. protein doesn't have a problem. >> i was

so just another pro'ection to no labels. , , labels. so basically, is the argument _ labels. of view, that any type of division, any extra candidate going in, could risk donald trump getting in, from your point of view?— point of view? yes, the third-party threat is real. _ point of view? yes, the third-party threat is real. the _ point of view? yes, the third-party threat is real. the type _ point of view? yes, the third-party threat is real. the type of- threat is real. the type of traditional republican that will decide — traditional republican that will decide the election, probably supporting nikki haley in the primaries or at least they wanted to when _ primaries or at least they wanted to when she _ primaries or at least they wanted to when she was still running and in fact some — when she was still running and in fact some still do it after she suspended her campaign and they have an unfavorable opinion ofjoe biden, oftentimes— an unfavorable opinion ofjoe biden, oftentimes dislike donald trump more and giving _ oftentimes dislike donald trump more and giving them any

they miss the warning labels that they really need. >> drug labels, i don't read them at all. and microwave popcorn, don't open like this because it's hot. we're not making fun of manufacturers. >> i am. >> we're highlighting a system that makes them feel if they don't do they are vulnerable to a lawsuit. that is the bottom line, the lawsuits that drive these warning labels cost the rest of us as consumers more for the things we buy but remove products from the marketplace that we could use. >> john: they don't introduce them out of the fear of the lawyer? >> right. >> and if we have the same number of tort lawsuits compared to other countries, we would save how much? >> $580 billion a year. we're saying if it's comparable to other advanced nations around the world. on compensating people that have legitimate injuries we would save $1800 per person in america every year. just think what we could do with job creation if that money was invested in product development. >> john: i have an idea at the end of show. let's talk about the warning labels. one was a batman cape, cape doe

labels are fine but that this bill won't give the voters the labels that voters want the no side has focused on perceived to have probably made up exemptions and loopholes that don't actually exist in the law and they also kind of focus on extra costs that will burn these companies us right so you take the cost of what it would cost for every company to take the g.m.o. ingredients out of their products and they say that's what it would cost to label the product labels are virtually cost less so most of the most of the money that's coming from the opposition side is is funneling misinformation base oh yeah this issue because they can't win by thing they don't support consumers right now and as a result of the citizens united and other elections that have allowed all this money to flow into these elections it's really hard to kind of speak through a lot of the misinformation that's coming out california tried to become the first state last year to to require g.m.o. labeling washington now is trying to become the first state to do it how important is it for that first state to break thr

and without advertising support, the label must do all the work. >> at first glance, the label stops you and you go, oh, that's interesting.. >> okay. >> then you grab it, you hold it in your hand. you said oh, this is en more interesting. and you go, i'making this home with me. >> the team studied the labels of competitive products to be sure the new labels won't get lost in the crowd. >> these are the positions that the competition is setting up. you're competing against the big boys. >> that's how they arrived at the brand identity which they summed up in three words. >> unhurried island craft. >> i like it. okay. >> this is the position. this is what sets you apart. >> at least, the unveiling of the first label decide. >> nice. >> top of that, i have one for you to hold in your hands. >> okay. >> we made a craft label tea label inspired by wars makan tea dancer. first notice the name, ellis family special teams. >> i'm trying to digest the name change. >> do you want to move forward to the next one? >> oh, there's more? >> yes, there is more. a second design which has the same me

they all have come out against labeling because they know that labeling as this woman is suggesting it have it, will in some way scare people and lead to the kind of disinformation campaigns, these women are perfectly willing to hype to scare people and the science is somehow undecided. if you don't believe the national academy of sciences and the american medical association and the world health organization. then you are anti science there is no other way to describe your position. >> patty i have to give you the last word. we don't have much time. please go ahead. >> there is so much there i am not sure where to start. we are not anti-science. we think that the science has been politicized in this case and i think that there are thousands of example where his that happens ranging as far back as people saying smoking was good for you for how many years, the signs is not pure. the politics can influence that we into he it time and time again. which the comes down to the food industry, it is fascinating i think it's one of the few industries that regularly calls its customers stupid an

if you don't put a warning label you will get sued. here we have a warning label. here is a great little product. say you are driving down the road and you have a wonderful idea and write a note to yourself where you can take this little wheel mate, attaches to the steering wheel. warning, never use this product while driving. >> john: that would seem like a reasonable warning. you don't want people to use it. as the company explained, they said it is impossible to use while driving. so the car would drive around in circles if you tried it but the lawyer said put it on just in case. >> that is what we hear. you will sued if you don't. a warning label on fishing harmful if swallowed. >> john: product three. >> this is neck pillow that parents will put around the neck of the infants in the car. >> john: so the child can be more comfortable. >> it keeps their head stable and hurting the child. warning label actually says keep this product away from facts and children. it's kind of hard to use it. >> john: we called the company and they didn't respond. this is number f

those labels for guidance. to propose changes captured the most up to date science in a way that's easy to read and understand the new labeling is supposed to reflect the changes in nutrition science that have occurred since food labeling and nutrition facts were first rolled out two decades ago all fats were the focus back in the eighty's nutritionists today are concerned more with overall calorie intake and added sugars they've added that to the label now added sugars speaking about the new labels first lady michelle obama said that our guiding principle here is very simple you as a parent and a consumer should be able to walk into your local grocery store pick up an item off the shelf and be able to tell whether it's good for your family. and this is obama is absolutely right we have the right to know what's in the food we eat and if it's actually healthy for us but to achieve that goal we need to go beyond the new nutrition facts label and start labeling all of the important things that are in the foods tha

labeling, allergen labeling, bioterrorism and recordkeeping and proposed updates to the nutrition facts panel. we also have our own safety and quality standards that go beyond these laws. the last thing we want is someone to get sick from the food in our grocery stores. you might ask how is this related to what we are talking about today. these are all related to the supermarket industry and where we devote time and resources. they are regulations that are not applied to chain restaurants. when the f.d.a. takes a chain restaurant menu labeling law and stretches it out to grocery stores on top of the other laws that we comply with and abide with, it shouldn't surprise anyone that the glove simply doesn't fit. we are committed to aiding our customers and making healthy choices and i will highlight three of those things we are doing. we with other grocers have a healthy initiatives departments that make informed decisions about healthy eating, something we didn't have to do but it's the right thing to do. we invested significant resources in the scoring system, a system that gives a zero t

elon musk says this change is around bringing in these labels, it is to bringing in these labels, itd what it links to. but when you click on that ban of government funded accounts, it takes you through to the page that explains it and it talks about state affiliated media, which is something totally different. that is the kind of media we see examples of in russia and china, where the governments have sometimes control of the message that is on those platforms. so once again, a confusing situation. and once again, elon musk having to try and defend what he is doing in real time, as it happens. what he is doing in realtime, as it ha ens. ., ., ., what he is doing in realtime, as it ha ens. ., . ., . happens. how have the other media organisations _ happens. how have the other media organisations reacted _ happens. how have the other media organisations reacted to _ happens. how have the other media organisations reacted to this - happens. how have the other media organisations reacted to this you - organisations reacted to this you have had their label changed for them? , ., ., ., ,

>> you are saying like a different label for the diesel verses gasoline? >> yes. >> yeah, i suppose that would be up to the policy makers to decide what the best way to do it was and i think that eyer original thinking was simpler was easier and better to have just one label so that we can save on the printing cost and design costs and confusion, but, yeah, i think that is a decision for the policy makers to decide, if you want to have the specific customized labels for each of the fuel types. >> we don't have that many, that would be a a little better. one thing that i just wanted to jot down this is something along these lines and each gallon of this fuel that you use, produces an average of whatever, we say that the thing is, 20 pounds of, and co2, the gap, and something as simple as that and with the food note of the epa and it is talking to me, right? and i am doing something. yes, go ahead. >> and so, wow, heather you are really inspiring me and those are great, great ideas and they bring up one of the point that i just want to talk about with fundin

label will satisfy the trade obligations. north american label will not necessarily satisfy our obligations and can in no way no matter how fast we try be negotiated in the remaining 37 days to prevent retaliation. it's important to note repealing mandatory cool doesn't prevent voluntary labeling as some companies do. some critics will claim this will weaken inspections for meat imports and nothing could be further from the truth. united states department of agriculture has and will continue to provide the most rigorous science-based imported inspections inspections of foreign products to the united states whether or not it has a mandatory origin of country labeling will not affect these inspections. this legislation is desperately needed. our manufacturers and pork producers, our grape growers and ranchers have repeatedly asked us asked congress to ensure we repeal cool provisions and bring the u.s. back into compliance with our w.t.o. obligations fully and quickly. . it is important to ensure our economy is protected and th

require a label. require a label. a label is simple. a label works. and, senator merkley, i see you're on the floor and i'm finishing up. we have various ways we can do the label. one way to give it to fda. tell them to come up with it. senator merkley has proceeded, in a way to attract more support. he is given four options all of which are very good. and all of which we immediately give you the information that you need. now, in 2,000, when i introduced the first senate labeling of ge foods my legislation had one supporter, and it was me. i had no other supporters back then. it was so long ago. 2000. now 14 senators are cosponsoring the bill. and i am so proud to cosponsor senator merkley's bill, biotechnology food labeling and uniformity act, which again wili put forward four options for companies. so there are reasons that people want this information. and not one of us here could decry or should decry what our people want. either they want to know if the foods contained gmos because ofo prevalence of herbicide resistant crops? we know from the us

to be labeled. the roberts-stabenow bill also contains a huge loophole in the labeling requirement stating that there is no labeling requirement for g.m.o. foods that could have occurred -- quote -- "through conventional breeding or found in nature." end of quote. essentially if the genetic engineering done by a company could have a card in nature, there's no requirement to label it which would prevent g.m.o. corn, beet, sugar and soy oils from being labeled. the f.d.a. has confirmed this loophole stating that as the language is currently written -- quote -- "many of the foods from genetically engineered sources will not be subject" -- end of quote -- under this bill. consumers will be left in the dark for at least another two years, maybe longer. once usda has published its regulations, there is no mandatory timeline for companies to comply. in other words, we are pushing this issue further and further into the future. and perhaps the real giveaway as to why this is not a serious piece of legislati

carbon labelling is about communicating - labels?imate change impact of a product or service at the point of purchase or consumption. what it really involves is calculating what we call the life—cycle carbon emissions, greenhouse gas emissions, actually, of the product or service stop so including the way it was made, the materials that went into making it, its production distribution and then also its consumption and in some cases how it is disposed of. and it is all about calculating that and communicating it in a meaningful way with the product itself was not and tesco's some time ago tried it, found it very difficult. t time ago tried it, found it very difficult.— very difficult. i think communication - very difficult. i think communication is i very difficult. i think. communication is key very difficult. i think- communication is key because very difficult. i think— communication is key because if all different companies and brands do their own labelling, you can't really compare like would like, it becomes difficult, doesn't i

label was not always as described. often at the stores, we found the same wine maker and varieties but with a different vintage year. does it matter? our wine expert, david said, not usually with local wines. >> california, you know, yes we have differences. but it is, it is much more subtle of a difference from year to year. >> that is because the climate here is more consistent. but he said, that is not the case in other regions. >> yes. >> and the classic example is champagne. it's the coldest, wettest fine wine region of france and the vintages vary greatly, not just the quality but the style of the wine. >> in our spot check at one safeway store, we counted 47 wines with the shelf label that described a different vintage be than what was on the shelf. that is out of 88 ratings. so, more than half were wrong. and sometimes the vintage was not just off a year or two. here, we see a shelf label describe ago 2009 merlot. it received 87 points from wine enthusiasts but on the shelf next to it was a 2014 vintage that re

it's a straight forward labeling law. >> yes on 37 campaign.we will look at the other side coming up in our next half hour. local baseball fan, it's not the time to panic yet. >> the playoffs started off on the wrong foot for the green and gold. today is another day. the highlights in the weekend early edition when we get back. their postseason openers. dan hurd: when i was a child, california was a leader in education funding. erika derry: and the fact that california isn't making it a priority frustrates me. dan hurd: i'm ashamed of that, and i don't want this to continue for my daughter. brenda kealing: prop 38 is going to bring a lot of money to our schools. suzan solomon: the money stays at the school site. cade derry: what i would really like to see is that the teachers... that were laid off come back to the school. navaz hurd: a smaller class size. navaz hurd: as a mom i want that. as a teacher i want that. it was a tough day and night on the diamonds. both teams dropped the post season openers. >> it's not over yet. the a's started with

but while our diets have changed, the labels have not. the fda says there is now a shift to focus on calories to help consumers construct healthy diets. >> the hope with the new label is that the calories perceiving will be prominently displayed right at the top so you know from the start what a serving is. >> reporter: health advocates are lobbying for other ways to help, clearer measurements not just in grams but in teaspoons and serving sizes that make sense. the fda will not say exactly what the revised labels will look like or when you will see them in your kitchen. but likely they will release recommendations in the next few months. >> when we look at the history we know more and more people are starting to look at labels. so they're looking there for a reason. so we want to make sure they look at the labels and make healthier choices. >> reporter: the usda estimates that 42% of working adults read the labels always or most of the time. older adults use them 57% of the time. >> so i think there are definitely a lot of important bits