Cons of Proposition 37

       Proposition 37 is very promising with the fact that people will now know what they are eating, but there are still flaws to it, which give great reason to vote against it. According to the LA times, the proposition is worded so that courts can construct it so processed food can't be labeled as "natural" even if they do not use GMO's. Laws should be constructed well, so there are very tiny if none loopholes, otherwise, they are completely broken. If anything is to be done, the law should be revised so that the defects are almost, if not gone.
       
       Most of the burden to ensure that foods with GMO's are properly labeled would fall into the hands of the retailers. This would also make it difficult for a mom-and-pop store to stay open because they have to receive paper mandates to verify the food was not genetically engineered. 

       Another thing to note, is the fact that Proposition 37 will be enforced in the wrong way. There is no incentive for a store to label the "unhealthy" genetically modified food other than the fact that they would get sued for not doing it. If there are constant "shakedown lawsuits", then the labeling of GMO products would end up costing more than remaining unaware of the GMO's.

      There are also exemptions in what GMO products should be labeled. Dog food needs a label stating the GMO's contained in it, but fresh produce such as; apples, meat, carrots, etc. are exceptions to the rule and do not need labels. what's the point of a law that promotes labeling  GMO's, if the food that everyone wants to know about doesn't need to be labeled?

- Juan