Monday, February 01, 2016 by Greg White
The 2016 presidential democratic candidates are wrong about many issues, but when it comes to genetically modified organisms (GMOs), one’s hat must be tipped to Bernie Sanders who stands against the bio-tech front. By contrast, the leading democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, has a long history with Monsanto and other big businesses eager to monopolize the food supply.
During a 2014 bio-tech conference, Clinton publicly endorsed GMOs by declaring, “I stand in favor of using seeds and products that have a proven track record.” She then chastised GMO critics by saying, “there is a big gap between what the facts are, and what the perceptions are.”(1)
While Clinton has done lip service to the “safety” of GMOs, her palate suggests otherwise. Both the Clinton and Bush II Families consumed organic foods during their stay at the White House. Clinton’s endorsement of GMOs while consuming the alternative is the height (perhaps depths) of hypocrisy.
Walter Scheib served as the White House executive chef from 1994 to 2005. He said he had, “the professional challenge of fulfilling Hillary Clinton’s mandate of bringing contemporary American cuisine and nutritionally responsible food to the White House.”(1)
During Scheib’s employment at the White House, organic foods were prioritized. Almost all the food was purchased from local businesses and suppliers. The White House even had a small roof garden to grow foods devoid of pesticides and fertilizers. The Clinton’s continue to consume whole foods while promoting frankenfoods cooked up in Monsanto’s lab. Former President Bill Clinton even refers to himself as a vegan, though he does admit to eating salmon or an omelet once a week. (2)
In 2013, Organic Consumers Union associate director Katherine Paul said, “if Hillary Clinton intends to run for office in 2016, she should think carefully about supporting a food and farming system that is proven to be detrimental to public health.” Her views are “no different than those of previous administrations, including the Bush (II), Clinton, (Bush I) and Reagan administrations, and they are taken straight from the biotech industry’s talking points.”(1)
Clinton’s relationship with Monsanto first came to light in the 1980s as a Rose Law firm lawyer. Both Monsanto and Tyson Foods were clients.(1)
During Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, she heavily pushed GMOs on other countries. In addition, she used tax payer money to popularize GMOs across the globe. Her fierce promotion of the biotech giant earned her the name “Bride of Frankenfood” by critics. (As everyone knows, Hillary ceased to be the Bride of Bill years ago.)(1)
Monsanto gave the Clinton Foundation a generous donation of up to one million dollars, so it should come as no surprise that Clinton has latched herself to the corporation. She even hired Monsanto lobbyist Jeffry Crawford as the adviser for her “Read for Hillary” super PAC. Other corporations contributed large sums of money to the Foundation as well. As always, money trumps truth in politics.(1)
As a potential presidential nominee, critics press serious conflicts of interest can arise by accepting large sum of money from big corporations and foreign governments. Federal law prohibits governments and corporations from contributing to U.S. political campaigns.(1)
By contrast, Bernie Sanders has a history of consistently looking out for the interests of small farmers and protecting consumers who desire foods that aren’t genetically altered and coated with pesticides. Consequently, many Democrats are gravitating towards Senator Sanders, whose campaign is fueled largely by individual voters rather than corrupt corporations. Although he’s promising a golden goose America’s checkbook can’t cash, unlike Hillary, at least Sanders’ standards aren’t two-faced.(3)