Legislative Memos

Action Steps 

Copy of Moratorium Bill 

BGH Bill

NYS Labeling Bill

Green Party of NYS 

Green legislative agenda

Contact Us 

Q and A on Genetic Engineering 

Links to Other Groups Working on Genetic Engineering 

Greenpeace 
GE Food Alert
GE Action Network
RAFI 
Pure Food 
Friends of Earth 
Safe Food 
Campaign (Label) 
WWW Sites 
Bio Tech 
Greens
Turning Point
Union Concerned Scientists
Physcians and Scientists PSRAST

rBGH (Bovine Growth Hormone) 

NYS Greens 
EU Union 
Pure Food

The NYS Greens are working with Environmental Advocates, New York Biotech Action Network, New York Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides, Northeast Organic Farming Association - NY, NYPIRG and Sierra Club to pass legislation imposing a five year moratorium on the planting of genetically modified crops in NYS. (A2826 / S-1397).

Groups Speak at State Capitol in Support of 5 Year Moratorium, Labeling Bill

See news release.

Consumers, Environmentalists, Religious Groups and Farmers Call for Action on Blocked Legislation on Genetically Modified Crops and Foods

Oppose Push by Industry to Pass Voluntary labeling bill

(Albany, June 5, 2002) – A coalition of consumer, environmental, farming, and religious groups today called on the chairs of the Agriculture and Consumer Protection Committees in both houses of the Legislature to allow votes on key bills dealing with genetically engineered crops and foods.

The groups also announced opposition to the Assembly's plan to pass a voluntary labeling bill (Luster - D) for geneticially engineered foods, saying it was an industry ploy to avoid informing consumers of the widespread use of genetically engineered organisms in many processed foods.

A.2826(McEneny)/S.1397(LaValle), which would impose a 5 year moratorium on planting genetically engineered crops in New York State, was first introduced in 2000 but tabled by legislators leaders so they could hold hearings to obtain more information. Two years and five hearings later (four held by the Assembly and one by the Senate), there has still been no vote.

Legislation that would require labeling of foods containing genetically engineered materials, A.4206  (DiNapoli) / S. 1834 (LaValle), is similarly hung up in committee.

As time runs out in the session, the delay in placing these bills on an agenda could effectively kill any opportunity for movement. The groups are calling on the chairs of the Agriculture Committees – Senator Nancy Larraine Hoffman, and Assemblymember William Magee – and the Consumer Protection Committees – Senator Charles Fuschillo and Assemblymember Audrey Pfeffer– to allow their committee members to vote their conscience on this vital issue.

“Without a timely opportunity for voting, both rank and file legislators and the citizens of New York are deprived of a fair hearing for these important bills,” said Audrey Thier, pesticide project director for Environmental Advocates of New York. “These bills have been around long enough for action to be taken – and taken now.”

Polls consistently show that people want the right to know when they are eating genetically engineered foods, just as they know how much salt, sugar, and fat contained are in the products they purchase. An estimated two-thirds of the products on supermarket shelves contain GE ingredients. According to a June 2001 ABC News telephone poll, 93 percent of Americans support labeling of genetically engineered foods. A 1999 Time magazine survey revealed that 81 percent of those surveyed say that genetically engineered food should be labeled. In 1997, Novartis, the giant genetic engineering company, released its own survey that showed that 93 percent of Americans want bioengineered food to be labeled.

For some, such as people with food allergies, knowing is a matter of life and death. "Soy beans engineered with brazil nuts genes were stopped from going to market at the eleventh hour and only then because of independent testing not required by law," said Cathy Tretheway, who has a daughter who experiences nut allergies. "Had these beans made it into the food supply, the consequences could have been deadly, but given the widespread use of soy flour, we might never have figured out what was happening or been able to control it even if we knew."

In addition to pressing health concerns, genetically engineered crops and foods pose a litany of other potential hazards, including ecosystem risks, food security issues, and economic risks to farmers.

A number of religious groups have called for the labeling of genetically engineered food. The General Conference of the Methodist Church has adopted a rule calling “for clear labeling of all... altered foods, with premarket safety testing required.”

The Commission on Social Action of Reform Judaism has also supported labeling due to “possible risks of allergic reactions, increased antibiotic resistance or decreased nutritional value”. In addition, the Commission said "many religious...individuals have... reservations about consuming genetically engineered food because of the possible animal sources of genetic materials inserted into plant genes. For them, the consumption of unlabelled genetically altered foods raises matters of ...religious observance."

And even more fundamental questions have been raised by many of the major religious movements. “Pope John Paul II has warned that genetic engineering ‘cannot be evaluated only on the basis of immediate economic interests. It is necessary to subject it in advance to rigorous scientific and ethical checking to prevent it ending up in disaster’,” said Alice McCloughlin of the Peace and Justice Committee of the Albany Roman Catholic diocese.

"I believe it is a basic right of all people to choose what they do or do not put into their bodies as food sources. How can that happen if labeling is missing or ingredient information withheld - especially in the new science of genetically alterated foods? When we begin to change the genetic configuration of earth's plants and animals we enter an unexplored realm where we must procede with utmost consideration and ponderance of our relationship to the complexity and majesty of our Creator's design," said Rev. Deb jameson.

Also speaking on behalf of the legislation was a representative of the Nutrition and Education Committee of the Honest Weight Food Coop of Albany. “The chemical companies that are promoting genetic engineering are playing a reckless shell game with the quality and
safety of our food supply. We support labeling because we believe that consumers have a right to know what they are putting in their bodies,” stated Ed Kurtik of the Co-op.

The groups also urged the legislature to adopt a moratorium on the planting of genetically modified crops to give the government and researchers time to evaluate the potential risks to human health and the environment. Potential hazards include: the development of insect and weed resistance to pesticides (e.g., superweeds); injury or death of non-target species; crop loss from seeds that do not yield as expected or that produce crops with unexpected characteristics; and allergenicity, toxicity, or decreased nutritional value of genetically modified crops

“Governor regulators have given companies like Monsanto the green light to push ahead with genetic engineering in order to increase their profits without adequate consideration of the potential public health and environmental risks. Unfortunately, there is too much of a revolving door between the federal agencies and the companies they are supposed to regulate. We need our state legislators to call time out before we let the genie out of the bag. No other country has rushed so recklessly into genetic engineering as the United States has,” stated Mark Dunlea of the New York State Greens.

Dramatic increases in the planting and consumption of such crops over the past several years have far outpaced our understanding of their immediate and long-term effects. Nationwide, one-fourth of US cropland contains genetically modified crops, including more than 35% of all corn. Most genetically crops in the world are grown in the U.S. More than 50 genetically engineered crop plants have been approved by the USDA, including potatoes, tomatoes, melons and beets. USDA does not presently require any health or safety tests before genetically engineered crops are marketed, leaving it to biotech firms to decide whether they are safe.

No on Voluntary Labeling. A 4458 / S 176

A coalition of environmental, food safety and agricultural reform groups held a news conference to urge state legislative leaders to pass legislation to require a five-year moratorium on the planting of genetically modified crops in New York State, and to require milk with the recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone to be labeled as such.

"If last year's Starlink debacle taught us nothing else, it is that our system is not currently equipped to assess, manage, and monitor genetically engineered crops," said Audrey Thier, pesticide project director for EPL/Environmental Advocates. "A moratorium is a prudent and cautious response to the fundamental lack of information regarding genetically engineered crops, and the absence of adequate regulation to oversee them. We applaud Assemblymember McEneny, Senators LaValle and Leibell, and the other co-sponsors for their leadership in seeking to protect the public health and the environment", added Thier.

Last year, the Assembly Agriculture committee voted to hold the moratorium legislation in committee to allow the Assembly to hold hearings on the issue, which took place last fall. The New York State Senate also held a hearing last September. Testimony at the hearing prompted Senator LaValle and Assembly Jack McEneny to amend the five-year moratorium legislation (A2826/S1397) to include an exemption for research activities conducted under federal guidelines. Legislation (A3586) to require milk with rBGH to be labeled has also been introduced.

The controversy over the genetic engineering of food continues to grow both here in the United States and abroad. Last week the Washington Post reported that corn seed about to be sold to farmers for this year's crop was found to be contaminated by traces of StarLink, a genetically modified variety of the grain that prompted massive recalls last year. If the contamination is found to be widespread, farmers and grain exporters fear it could be devastating because major buyers of American corn in Europe and Asia have said they will refuse to buy any corn suspected of being tainted by StarLink, the Post said.

Due to the prevalence of corn, soy and canola in processed foods, two-thirds of all processed foods currently produced in the US are genetically engineered. Despite this, the US government does not require GE foods to be labeled or tested for potential health risks to consumers.

"Americans have become guinea pigs for the biotechnology industry due to the negligence of federal policies to protect consumers. Currently, American consumers are not being protected against the risks that are associated with genetically engineered foods such as allergenicity, toxicity and antibiotic resistance. Genetic engineering represents nothing less than a going-out-of-business sale on genetic diversity," said Mark Dunlea, Chair of the Legislative Committees of the New York State Greens.

"The benefits of genetically engineered crops are largely advertising claims made by the manufacturers of the seeds", said Sarah Johnston, director of NOFA-NY. "The few independent tests of crop yields, changes in pesticide use or crop nutritional value either indicate problems or are inconclusive", she said.

Johnston said her group of farmers isn't against knowledge and understanding of the genetics of crops. "What we oppose is monkeying around inserting foreign genes into the food we eat before investigating the risks to human health and the environment."

Genetically modified crops are produced using laboratory techniques that allow the natural means of genetic recombination and plant reproduction to be circumvented. A moratorium would give the government and researchers time to evaluate the potential risks to human health and the environment. Potential hazards include: the development of insect and weed resistance to pesticides (e.g., superweeds); injury or death of non-target species; crop loss from seeds that do not yield as expected or that produce crops with unexpected characteristics; and allergenicity, toxicity, or decreased nutritional value of genetically modified crops.

The pollen of genetically modified (BT) corn has been found to kill monarch butterfly larvae. In the mid-1990's, Pioneer Hi-Bred International were days away from introducing a soybean that included a Brazil nut gene when tests found that people with nut allergies had an allergic reaction to the modified soybean. About 2% of adults and 8% of children suffer from food allergies.

The groups also spoke in favor of the Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) labeling bill, which would require that dairy products derived from cows that have been injected with rBGH be so labeled. rBGH is a genetically engineered drug which increases the production of milk by cows.

The U.S. is one of a handful of industrial countries that allows the sale of milk produced from cows treated with rBGH. Canada, in deciding several years ago to continue its ban on rBGH, criticized the United States for the poor quality of the studies it had relied upon to approve the use of BGH. The European Union went even further, citing concerns about significant health risks posed to human by the use of rBGH. Milk from cows treated with rBGH contains elevated levels of IGF-1 (Insulin Growth Factor), a natural hormone which has been implicated in breast, prostate and colorectal cancer.

Confirming the potential hazards of rBGH, a recently-revealed study, conducted by Monsanto, showed that rats that had consumed milk from rBGH-treated cows developed abnormalities of the thyroid and prostate glands. FDA has claimed that it was unaware of the study when it approved the drug.

Cows injected with rBGH also frequently contract painful udder infections (mastitis), leaking pus, blood, and bacteria into the milk. rBGH cows are treated with heavy doses of antibiotics to attempt to control their udder infections. Increased use of antibiotics is one of the contributing
factors in the rising rates of antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria and viruses.

The groups called upon the legislature to exercise prudence in this new agribusiness revolution and keep New York state from plunging ahead with risky new practices that place health, safety,a nd the environment in jeopardy for the benefit of a few corporations.

"Our lobby visits today are an an effort to make New York State legislators aware of issues and concerns about the safety of our food supply. Equally important, we want to support farmers and sustainable agriculture in our state. We want more agricultural research funding to go towards organic and sustainable agriculture programs. We also want resources for research to be shifted away from gmo product development, and instead allocating scarce funding towards research into the safety of genetically modified foods," added Tony Del Plato of the Ithaca-area Safe Food Campaign/Organic Consumers Association .