Washington State voters on Tuesday rejected an initiative that would have required foods containing genetically engineered ingredients to be labeled, The New York Times reported.
The measure, known as I-522, concluded 45.2 percent in favor to 54.8 percent opposed, with more than 980,000 ballots counted, according to the Washington State Secretary of State. Roughly 300,000 mail-in-ballots remained uncounted.
"This is a clear victory for Washington consumers, taxpayers and family farmers across our state," Dana Bieber, spokeswoman for No on 522, said in a statement Tuesday evening. "Washington voters have soundly rejected this badly written and deceptive initiative."
Major grocery suppliers considered this their second win against such individual state proposals, during their three-year plan to try to block labeling efforts across the country.
The measure, which would have been the first of its kind in the United States, required labeling of foods that are made with genetically altered crops, as well as, labeling of genetically engineered seeds and seed products sold in the state. Both side agree that if passed it could convince other states to perform similar actions.
According to the Times, large contributions from multinational food companies have surged into the state, making this one of the most expensive initiative battles in Washington's history, totaling at almost $29 million.
The largest donor to the pro-labeling campaign was California-based Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps and the Center for Food Safety in Washington, D.C. However the initiative garnered almost 30 percent of its funding from individuals in Washington state, the Times reported.
Reuters reported supporters of the measure, who say it would help consumers make informed shopping choices, had not conceded on Tuesday, pointing to ballots unaccounted for through the vote-by-mail system in the Pacific Northwest state.
"We don't have a final tally of the votes tonight," said Delana Jones, campaign manager for Yes on 522. "We'll have regular evening updates as counties report voting results."
Critics said there are hundreds of studies showing GMO crops are not safe for people and the animals who consume them. They also say the crops create environmental problems by encouraging more use of certain agrochemicals, and consumers should have the right to know what they are buying.
A similar labeling measure narrowly failed in the 2012 election in California by a vote of 51.4 percent against to 48.6 percent in favor.
Whole Foods will require labeling of all products it sells in its stores in 2015, as more grocery retailers are pressing companies on the issue. Mark Lynas, an advocate for genetic engineering who was the keynote speaker at an association conference this summer, recently reversed his position and said he supports labeling.
