The decline of the R3VOLUTION...

in the entire Constitution. Second worst is the commerce clause, for similar reasons of generalized abuse.

Madison stated that if that general welfare clause was ever used as a catch-all reason to circumvent the limitations of the Constitition, that the entire document should "be thrown into the fire, at once".

The general welfare clause is the bastion of leftists and subversives(both pretty much the same thing).

woops. doubled it up.

1) Privately funded consumer advocacy groups exist...

2) It is perfectly legal for citizens or organizations to scientifically test consumer goods and publish their findings...

3) Individual states, counties, or towns could prohibit the sale of products that don't have labels.

False advertising (stating your product contains things it doesn't, claiming it's not GMO when it is) is illegal.

Thanks for your time.

then you know you have won.

They don't do many of there own studies the companies do them. And 40 percent of there funding comes from the companies seeking approval of the products or those products would not of been allowed on the market without being safe in first place.

Plus they have a bill in congress now that will exempt them from any law suits like in Brazil where they were sued and lost billions. It is kind of hard to argue for something that damages other species and also hurts human health that's not Freedom it is just disinformation.

Conformist, thanks for displaying RP's answer. I especially like

because history shows that federal regulatory agencies are susceptible to ‘capture,’ where the regulators end up serving the interest of the business they are supposed to control.

The bolded portion is meant to stress the regulators become guards of the businesses. The regulators let in the businesses to do what they want while attacking business not those let-in businesses. Couldn't draw a better instance of fascism, the togetherness of business and government.

you hit the nail on the head when you said that "I don't want to eat GM products. I cannot know what is or isn't GM unless its labelled." What you say is true as it is for most all of us, but what I would ask is that you consider your own purchasing power to make companies label their product. No matter how good it sounds, government involvement usually means some form of corruption that is not in your best interest. It's not so much wanting to force you or anyone to be in lock step, it is more of us encouraging each other to apply liberty principles when faced with an issue, just like Dr. Paul does. I think he has made it clear that it is how he has remained so consistent in his views.
Some here may be rude or crass I agree, but try to look past that. I know it's hard at times, but I believe the sincere folks here are really just trying to watch out for each other and help remind each other to always apply our principles. At least I hope so.

so-called revolutions of the past, including the recent past such as the Tea Party and Occupy. Those people never had principles that guided their policies and actions in every instance, so they either disintegrated or allowed their ideals to be corrupted for short term "gain" that backfired and brought systemic corruption due to power for sale, or tyranny. It happens over and over nauseatingly through history.

If one does not keep a movement rooted in true universal principles such as the Nonaggression Principle for the Liberty movement, there is no chance that all of your good intentions can withstand the onslaughts and lures of political power. Try to use the Gun aggressively for any good you name, it will back fire and shoot down all your cherish.

"If food companies want my business - they will provide the info I desire/need - or lose the sell."

EXACTLY!

That's what I meant to say!

I suspect Ron Paul would also have voted NO for the following reason:

If you sold me those cookies, I could take legal action against you. That possibility would deter you from falsely advertising your cookies in the first place. The role of government is to settle the dispute and punish you for committing fraud, not forcibly prevent you from trying to defraud me.

In any case, the free-market solution to this problem is seen in most grocery stores: Many companies that do NOT sell genetically modified foods advertise this on their labels. Theoretically, other companies will follow suit (fearing consumers will assume their products are GM), until we are able to determine a food is GM if the label DOES NOT make any claims to the contrary. No government force necessary.

A word on "consumer rights", full disclosure, and case law: Look to the Constitution for what our Federal government can and can not do, not to what a judge decided based on their own interpretation of their own limits.

Actually if it was a big enough problem for me I would quit buying the companies product... look at all these hypicrites on here... the free market is the free market you don't use force to get your way you imbiciles. Stuff like this is why we have problems like monsanto with state subsidies. You think a label is going to change anything? your still going to eat shit food if it has been processed, grow a garden or get used to it... I don't eat organic and im perectly healthy. Stop using my tax money to push your FDA regulatory agenda.