# Washington Initiative 522 (2012)

Elections in Washington :
Federal government
Presidential elections
1892
1896
1900
1904
1908
1912
1916
1920
1924
1928
1932
1936
1940
1944
1948
1952
1956
1960
1964
1968
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
1992
1996
2000
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024
Presidential primaries
Democratic
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024
Republican
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024
U.S. Senate elections
1889
1891
1893
1895 sp
1897
1899
1903
1905
1909
1911
1914
1916
1920
1922
1928
1934
1940
1946
1952
1956
1958
1962
1964
1968
1970
1974
1976
1980
1982
1983 sp
1986
1988
1992
1994
1998
2000
2004
2006
2010
2012
2016
2018
2022
2024
2028
U.S. House of Representatives elections
1889
1890
1892
1894
1896
1898
1900
1902
1904
1906
1908
1909
2nd sp
1910
1912
1914
1916
1918
1920
1922
1923
5th sp
1924
1926
1928
1930
1932
1934
1936
1938
1940
1942
1944
1946
1947
3rd sp
1948
1950
1952
1954
1956
1958
1960
3rd sp
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1975
3rd sp
1976
1977
7th sp
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
1st sp
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024 :
State government
General elections
2004
2008
2010
2012
2016
2020
2024
Gubernatorial elections
1889
1892
1896
1900
1904
1908
1912
1916
1920
1924
1928
1932
1936
1940
1944
1948
1952
1956
1960
1964
1968
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
1992
1996
2000
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024
Lieutenant gubernatorial elections
2020
2024
Secretary of State elections
1992
1996
2000
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
2022 sp
2024
Attorney General elections
2000
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024
State Treasurer elections
2024
State Auditor elections
2024
Commissioner of Public Lands elections
2024
State Senate elections
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2013
26th sp
2014
2016
2017
45th sp
2018
2020
2022
House of Representatives elections
2006
2008
2010
21st
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
Supreme Court elections
2004
2006
2008
2012 :
Ballot measures
1972
276
2004
872
2006
920
933
937
4223
2007
67
2008
1000
2009
71
2012
74
502
1185
1240
2016
732
2018
1631
1639
2019
976 :
Seattle
Mayoral elections
2005
2009
2013
2017
2021
2025
City Attorney elections
2021
City Council elections
2019
2021
3rd recall
2023
Ballot measures
Sound Transit 3 :
Spokane
Mayoral elections
2011
2015
2019
2023 :
vte :
Washington Initiative 522 (I-522) "concerns labeling of genetically-engineered foods" and was a 2012 initiative to the Washington State Legislature. As certified by the Washington Secretary of State, it achieved enough signatures to be forwarded to the legislature for consideration during the 2013 session. The legislature did not vote on the initiative, so I-522 advanced to the November 5, 2013 general election ballot. If passed into law by voters, I-522 would have taken effect on July 1, 2015. The initiative failed with 51% opposition.
If approved, I-522 would have required that non-exempt foods and agricultural products offered for retail sale state "clearly and conspicuously" on the front of the package if they were genetically-engineered, contain or might have contained genetically-engineered ingredients.
With more than $17.1 million in donations opposed before September 30, I-522 set a new record for money spent against a state initiative, exceeding the $12.35 million spent in 2011 to oppose Initiative 1183, privatizing liquor sales. By late October, No On I-522 had set the all-time record for any initiative campaign with $21 million. Combined contributions of $27.7 million are still less than $32.5 million spent by both sides around I-1183.

## Ballot title and summary

As described by the Secretary of State's office, the measure "would require most raw agricultural commodities, processed foods, and seeds and seed stocks, if produced using genetic engineering as defined, to be labeled as genetically engineered when offered for retail sale."
According to the official ballot measure summary,
   This measure would require foods produced entirely or partly with genetic engineering, as defined, to be labeled as genetically engineered when offered for retail sale in Washington, beginning in July 2015. The labeling requirement would apply generally to raw agricultural commodities, processed foods, and seeds and seed stock, with some exceptions, but would not require that specific genetically-engineered ingredients be identified. The measure would authorize state enforcement and civil penalties, and allow private enforcement actions.
Full text of the measure is available online at the Washington state website.

## Provisions

I-522 is approximately nine pages long and adds a new chapter to Title 70 of the Revised Code of Washington.
Section one includes more than three pages stating various reasons for the initiative, related to consumer choice, religious belief, consumer health concerns, environmental concerns, economic concerns and worldwide trends in consumer labeling laws. This section explains that 49 countries, including many significant US trading partners Japan, South Korea, China, Australia, Russia and the European Union have labeling requirement for genetically engineered foods. This section asserts that labeling will give Washington's foods a share of the multibillion-dollar lost market opportunity in exports to these countries.
Section two establishes various definitions, including section 2(3)(a) which strictly defines "genetically engineered" by specific genetic engineering techniques, and differentiated from selective breeding. These specific genetic engineering techniques include various recombinant DNA and RNA methods such as micro-injection, electroporation, micro-encapsulation, liposome fusion, protoplast fusion or other "hybridization techniques that overcome natural physiological, reproductive or recombination barriers, where the donor cells or protoplasts do not fall within the same taxonomic family, in a way that does not occur by natural multiplication or natural recombination."
Section three requires that "any food offered for retail sale" be labeled "clearly and conspicuously" if it contains genetically-engineered ingredients, with certain exceptions. Exemptions consistent with current federal regulations include prepared foods such as those coming from a restaurant, meat from animals fed genetically engineered feeds, alcoholic beverages and foods processed with GE enzymes. For non-exempt foods, it would require "on the front of the package" the words "genetically engineered," "produced with genetic engineering," "partially produced with genetic engineering" or "may be partially produced with genetic engineering" stated "clearly and conspicuously."
Section four authorizes the Washington State Department of Health to "adopt rules necessary to implement" the law, with section five authorizing civil penalties for violations, section six noting that I-522 creates a new chapter for RCW Title 70 and section seven a basic severability clause.

## Support

Support for the I-522 was coordinated by YES on 522, a group that included food activists, small-scale producers and several food co-operatives such as PCC Natural Markets and natural food stores such as Whole Foods Market. It was also promoted by the Organic Consumers Association, which called for a boycott on Safeway Inc. unless the grocery store company would withdraw from the Grocery Manufacturers Association and contribute financially to the Yes on 522 campaign. In addition to being the single largest donor, Dr Bronner's Magic Soaps issued a special label in support of I-522.
Other support came from labor groups including the Washington State Labor Council. The Yes on 522 web page for endorsements lists over 350 businesses, 25 seafood groups, 150 farms, more than 100 other groups, 45 elected officials and many individuals. As of mid-October, 2013, reported campaign donations showed more than 13,000 donors for I-522 giving $6.2 million with a median donation of approximately $25.

## Opposition

Opposition to I-522 came primarily from large chemical corporations (Monsanto Company, DuPont Pioneer, Dow AgroSciences LLC, and Bayer CropScience), and organizations such as Washington Friends of Farms and Forests, Northwest Food Processors, Washington Association of Wheat Growers, the Washington State Farm Bureau and the Grocery Manufacturers Association, who rallied and mounted a $46 million campaign via Nestle SA, General Mills Inc., Coca-Cola Co and PepsiCo Inc to defeat the initiative. These large donations have reportedly "shattered" previous fundraising records against any other initiative, a full month ahead of the election.
Opponents of I-522 cited the editorial boards of fifteen different newspapers as opposing the initiative. As of mid-October, 2013, reported campaign donations showed ten donors for I-522 giving $17.2 million with a median donation of approximately $545,827.

## Donors

Public records of initiative donations are listed at the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission website.
Dr Bronner's Magic Soap Company was the largest donor in support, and the only pro-522 donor giving more than $1 million. The largest donation in opposition was $7.2 million of opposition money was identified as coming from the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), details of which emerged after Washington state attorney general Bob Ferguson filed charges against them for violation of state campaign-finance laws. As of October 25, 2013, GMA had reportedly given $11 million in total.
In 2022, GMA (renamed the Consumer Brands Association) paid $9 million to settle the charges, and apologized for the violations.
State law requires the top five contributors to be listed. As of October 23, 2013 the largest contributors in support of I-522 are Dr Bronner's Magic Soaps, Organic Consumer Fund Committee to Label GMOs in WA State, Joseph Mercola, Presence Marketing Inc, and Nature's Path Foods USA. The top five contributors in opposition to I-522 are the Grocery Manufacturers Association, Monsanto Company, DuPont Pioneer, Dow AgroSciences LLC, and Bayer CropScience.