genetically modified crops included in budget deal oregon 092013

Our Klamath Basin Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.

http://pioneer.olivesoftware.com/Olive/ODE/heraldandnews/default.aspx

Genetically modified crops included in budget deal

Herald and News 9/20/13

PORTLAND (AP) — Gov. John Kitzhaber and legislators spent months trying to agree on a grand bargain in which Republicans would consent to higher taxes and Democrats would OK cuts in retirement benefits for government employees.

Party leaders finally accepted the budget compromise Wednesday, but not without a deal to also include a bill prohibiting local governments from regulating genetically modified crops. While sweetening the bargain for tax-averse Republicans, the addition soured the bargain for environmentalists and some Democrats.

George Kimbrell, senior attorney for the Center for Food Safety, called the late inclusion “outrageous,” and said the group is alerting its members to contact legislators before the Sept. 30 special session.

“Unfortunately, it doesn’t surprise me because we’re talking about powerful chemical companies and out-ofstate interests,” he said.

The agriculture industry is an important constituency for the GOP and spends thousands on legislative races, mostly for Republican candidates. Many in rural communities have been spooked by a growing push from environmentalists to enact steeper restrictions on genetically modified crops.

A measure to ban such crops in Jackson County in Southern Oregon has qualified for the ballot in 2014. An initiative to ban genetically modified crops in Lane County was rejected in July as too broad. A similar measure in Benton County failed to make the ballot on similar grounds.

The state Senate voted earlier this year to prohibit local governments from regulating genetically modified crops, but the House ignored the measure, which was then known as Senate Bill 633. The agreement between Kitzhaber and legislative leaders would allow it to go forward, but Jackson County could keep its regulations if voters approve them.

====================================================

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml