Comments on: There WAS a recount on the Prop 37 vote, and it was stopped cold

By: California’s Prop 37 Recount Backstory « Nutrition News

California’s Prop 37 Recount Backstory « Nutrition News — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 16:09:55 +0000

[…] There WAS a recount, headed by Tom Courbat, former senior budget analyst for LA County. The recount process was met with cooperation in Orange and Sierra counties and with massive opposition in Fresno County, to the point that the private citizens who were paying for the recount were unable to pursue and complete the recount. You can read the whole story here: http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2013/03/17/there-was-a-recount-on-the-prop-37-vote-and-it-was-stop… […]

By: Soumya

Soumya — Thu, 28 Mar 2013 01:58:36 +0000

Om
28 March
Dear Ones,
I have lived in India for over 15 years and I have NEVER seen a label for a GMO product. Like you, I have heard copious stories of Indian farmers committing suicide because they could not get out of the Monsanto seed loop, so the plants are there, but it is all hush hush.
Once you posted the list of companies that supported the anti-GMO labeling campaign, I recognized that they are really everywhere. They have so many silent subsidiaries that I made the decision not to support any major company any longer by purchasing their food products. I feel like they are all back room buddies. I also feel that if everyone did this, or even a significant number of people, the companies that might be really clean would be forced to label their products non GMO to keep clientele. Like the Wal-Mart thing, it would automatically make the companies to label from their side. Money/simple economics is the best pressure there is.
Anyway, I am only one, and I am all the way in India, but I make my feelings known to all the westerners I come into contact with when the subject comes up. The word is spreading and awareness is building, one person at a time. We can speed this process up, of course, and people like yourselves have contacts and ways that individuals do not.
I support you as much as I can from here and know that consciousness is on the rise all over the planet and good souls simply are not going to stay quiet for long. I like the idea of a quiet revolution, simply not purchasing anything from the big companies. God is on our side, or rather, we are on God’s side in this. We cannot fail.
The whole thing on Prop 37 only makes us more determined to keep on. Even if the count were correct, we came so close, we have it within our grasp. This is not the time to stop.
God bless all of you for your wonderful work.
Soumya

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 23 Mar 2013 17:02:17 +0000

labeling GMO’s is not the answer and the bill was written very badly – that’s why there are just as many people whom you don’t hear about it, who voted No. to my knowledge, it actually allows for animal products fed with GMO to pass through the inspection – amongst one of the few loopholes. they wanted this to pass so quickly without careful, intelligent analysis of the consequences. they never wanted to answer questions about: 1. who would be the party to verify the process and who holds this party accountable? 2. what would prevent mis-labeling and bought-off labeling which is happening in Organic foods by the USDA (therefore, Organic is not really organic anymore as they allow for passage of a percentage of pesticides and herbicides to pass through – unless you go grassroots, do not trust USDA Organic label compromised and corrupted). and the most common sense question could never understand why they couldn’t get this: if they think getting the FDA or the government involved in basically forced labeling, what makes them think that the FDA in cahoots with Monsanto (and the USDA Organic) is going to “take care” of the food safety? you want MORE govt? * there are so many bad loopholes in the bill, and the campaign people did not want to answer any of these questions and brushed honest organic consumers like me off and like we were crazy. and, they never wanted to talk about Banning GMO’s – it was like taboo. Allowing labeling of GMO’s is saying, Yes, we still WANT GMO”s in the food markets and GMO’s still to be doled out by Monsanto, as long as it’s labeled. that’s not the right way and that is giving GMO’s in the food system, in your foods, permission to exist and never go away. You have to go right to the core of the problem. BAN GMO’s is the next course of action. We don’t have a lot of time anymore for excuses and justifications – and there were plenty. We have to BAN. Peru did it. Poland did.

~~~~

Yes. Definitely need an all out ban. Great points.

The above article focuses on exposing the fraud around “Prop 37 voting”.

See…
http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2013/03/13/can-you-trust-whole-foods/
… for why we should have an all out ban.

By: Deb

Deb — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 18:12:31 +0000

Right after the election, it was reported at Natural News that there were a lot of counties that didn’t get counted at all.

http://www.naturalnews.com/037901_prop_37_vote_fraud_ballot_measure.html

Whatever happened with that? Orange County is the only one on the list of the biggest uncounted counties that Tom and crew demanded a recount on. L.A. County, Santa Clara County, and San Diego County were the other big ones that didn’t get counted (at that time). Why weren’t they chosen to be “recounted”? There were a LOT of votes uncounted since those are huge counties. What’s the status on those counties now? Did they finally get counted and I just haven’t heard about it? My apologies, if so.

The other thing I wanted to ask was about the proposition itself. I’m hearing that it wasn’t actually that well-written or something. That things which shouldn’t have to be affected by the law would be–not just GMOs. As in, the law would have been too broad, and consequently start to hurt small farmers or perfectly good products? Can someone clarify?

Perhaps it’s best that this law didn’t go through? Who wrote the proposition? Is it really that broad? I thought it was just requiring foods containing GMOs to be labeled. Are there exceptions that should have been written in to enable small manufacturers and farmers to operate as they should be allowed?

I’m sorry; I know that’s vague. At the moment, I can’t recall what examples were given of the proposition which would have made the law too broad–or not specific enough even. I do believe that was the other thing: some parts of it weren’t specific enough. ? I think it had to do with animals fed GMOs. ? Does anyone have information about these supposed issues that people have with Prop 37?

How can we make sure all the bases are covered, yet protect small business? Who is allowed to write those propositions? And again, who wrote Prop 37? Could it be revised and submitted for the next vote? I know that’s a long time away, and I personally don’t want to wait that long for labeling to be required, but if Prop 37 can’t get a true recount and those one counties remain uncounted then the next chance isn’t until election again. Correct? So I guess a new proposition is already being written by someone?

Lastly, is anyone able to follow up on the information provided by Gregg DesElms? Is there a lawsuit that should be filed against Fresno for charging those outrageous fees and for charging any money at all for just asking questions? That can surely be reversed or fought out in court, right?

I see that there aren’t enough people in that county alone to make Prop 37 lean the other way, but I am curious as to whether those creeps are going to actually get away with doing that. The other counties should be used as examples of what a “normal” fee would be for recounting. The matter needs to be brought to the attention of someone higher-up (who isn’t corrupt, preferably).

Are they kidding with the $46-an-hour pay for people to sit there and count? What a joke!! If they have that much money to burn, I’m sure there are better things they could do with it. Hell, if I could, I’d fly out there and work for free if they wanted to save money! I count very well. Lol.

By: Melanie

Melanie — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 15:35:42 +0000

I think I just posted this successfully to FB. Let’s see if it disappears.

By: Tom Courbat

Tom Courbat — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 05:12:21 +0000

The statewide difference was about 350,000. Fresno represented about 58,000, so it alone would not have made the difference.

By: Tom Courbat

Tom Courbat — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 05:07:20 +0000

We were attempting to authenticate election results that are just “announced” with no backup to show how the numbers were arrived at! One method is to call for a recount, as we did on Proposition 37, the “You MUST LABEL GMO products as such” proposition – stating that ANY genetic modification to a product you are buying must be clearly stated on the packaging. Anyway, it got over 6 million votes, but still lost by a somewhat significant number.
Lori Grace, an activist and philanthropist, funded the cost of the entire effort, and for that, I want to publicly thank Lori for funding something NO ONE ELSE was willing to put a dime up for. Thank you Lori!

I left out the MOST significant article (an expose, actually) authored by my good friend Brad Friedman. This man spent a lot of time documenting the B.S. that we faced in Fresno County, vs the low cost to us and great reception we received in both Sierra and Orange Counties. People chose to act however they want to – I’d like to believe most people act with integrity and grace.
Go here…http://www.bradblog.com/?p=9848

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 02:47:45 +0000

Good job Jon; I always enjoy reading your articles.

By: Jean Richardson

Jean Richardson — Tue, 19 Mar 2013 23:30:34 +0000

What would the state’s Prop 37 count have been if Fresno county’s numbers were excluded? If Fresno is the deciding factor, it’s certainly worth pursuing a fight with them.

By: Recount of Prop 37 Stopped COLD. Why? | Hole in the Fence

Recount of Prop 37 Stopped COLD. Why? | Hole in the Fence — Tue, 19 Mar 2013 18:03:01 +0000

[…] http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2013/03/17/there-was-a-recount-on-the-prop-37-vote-and-it-was-stop… […]