DAVID VERSUS GOLIATH - Foodopoly: The Battle Over the Future of Food and Farming in America - page 160

Monsanto even if their crops are inadvertently pollinated by GE alfalfa. At least one farmer contends that
he was sued when his canola fields were contaminated with GE crops from neighboring farms. 56
Organic dairy farmers already face difficulty securing organic feed, and this challenge will only worsen
if GE alfalfa begins to contaminate organic alfalfa more widely. 57 Organic dairy farmers receive a price
premium of $6.69 (44 percent) for their milk, but they also face production costs of $5 to $7 more per hun-
dred pounds of milk—38 percent higher than conventional dairies. 58 GE contamination could eliminate
this premium that covers the higher costs of producing organic products, making these farms unprofitable.
Organic and non-GE growers bear the financial burden of GE contamination and are fighting instead
to make biotech companies liable for these consequences. In 2011 the Public Patent Foundation filed suit
against Monsanto on behalf of farmers and organic businesses, asking the court to determine whether
Monsanto has the legal authority to sue farmers for patent infringement if their GE traits contaminate a
conventional or organic farm. The farmers have lost the case and have appealed.
In 2011 the USDA approved Syngenta's amylase corn, which produces an enzyme that facilitates pro-
duction of ethanol. 59 Although the corn is intended specifically for ethanol use, the USDA determined that
it was also safe for food and animal feed, allowing it to be planted alongside GE corn that is destined for
the human and animal food supply. 60 Contamination of corn crops destined for the food supply is possible,
especially in the absence of a buffer zone to minimize wind pollination. Even the USDA admits that con-
tamination of high-value organic blue and white corns may produce “undesirable effects” during cooking,
such as darkened color or softened texture. 61
During the last three administrations, numerous biotech products have been approved. Under the Clin-
ton administration, fifty approvals took place in eight years, and the Bush administration legalized twenty
during two terms. In 2010 Bush, Clinton, and Gore gave keynote addresses at the large BIO annual biotech
conference held in Chicago and attended by biotech scientists from around the world.
The Obama administration proved to be an even bigger cheerleader for biotech. Not only did Obama
bring Michael Taylor back to the FDA as deputy commissioner in a new position at the newly minted
USDA Office of Foods, but his administration granted a giant favor to big seed and agribusiness compan-
ies. The restricted planting of genetically engineered alfalfa was abandoned by the administration as too
“burdensome for industry.”
Even more alarming was the swiftness with which Obama's appointees have legalized twelve new
products in less than four years. This has meant legalizing actual GE food products, including sweet corn
seed with names like Obsession II, Passion II, and Temptation II. The “stacked” Performance Series™
sweet corn contains three distinct traits, but the stacked combination of these traits has not been through
a safety evaluation of any kind. Research also indicates that two of the corn's traits display resistance to
chemical applications.
According to the vice president of Monsanto's vegetable seeds division, the corn will be aimed at the
250,000-acre fresh market. If the number of acres that Monsanto is targeting is reached, it would constitute
nearly 40 percent of all sweet corn. 62 Monsanto told a news source that it is in discussions with vegetable
canning and freezing companies as well. 63 The new sweet corn could quickly dominate the market.
It is not a surprise that the biotech industry is able to dictate policy to sitting presidents, members of
Congress, and the regulatory agencies. Since 1999, the fifty largest agricultural and food patent-holding
companies and two of the largest biotechnology and agrochemical trade associations have spent more than
$572 million in campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures. The companies and trade associations
have hired a bevy of well-connected lobbying shops—where at least thirteen former members of Congress
and over three hundred former congressional and White House staffers work—to promote genetically mod-
ified food and agricultural products.