Sometimes legislators make mistakes.

Occasionally, they’ll endorse legislation with clauses they don’t understand, such as when Louisiana financiers convinced legislators to pass a law that allowed them to cheat taxpayers out of millions of dollars.

Other times they’ll adopt an ordinance with unforeseeable consequences and unintended results.

These are simple mistakes and while legislators were wrong, we can see how any ordinary person could have made the same mistake.

Sometimes, however, legislators are just willfully ignorant.

In two recent examples, Maine lawmakers have advocated for and passed legislation that is entirely anti-science and wholly indefensible.

Advertisement

Only two years after Maine passed its unjustified GMO labeling law, which was dependent on similar legislation in five other states in order to take effect, activists are pushing to enact GMO labeling immediately.

These activists are trying to get rid of the five-state requirement, and mandate that all GMO products must be labeled now.

Activists rail against the supposed dangers of genetically modified organisms. We need labels, they whine, so people know what toxic substances they’re putting in their bodies. After all, so their tired argument goes, who would willingly eat GMOs, knowing how harmful they are?

Yet even as these activists fight for their unfounded beliefs, Mainers are starting to realize that there’s no evidence to support these hyped-up claims.

Several individuals and organizations are now admitting that science doesn’t support the hyperbolic claim that GMOs are inherently dangerous. The Portland Press Herald, which supported the original law, said in a recent editorial that the measure in place now offers sufficient protection and that there’s no need to fast-track the labeling mandate.

The truth is, years of independent research have shown that the GMOs now available for consumption are no more dangerous than their organic equivalents, and there is no benefit in banning or outlawing these substances.

Advertisement

Mandatory GMO labeling creates an unnecessary and harmful cost for manufacturers, and cements an unwarranted stigma around GMO products.

There is a clear scientific consensus: GMOs are safe.

Anti-GMO legislation, however, isn’t the only anti-science measure up for debate.

On April 27, Portland added electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) to the city’s anti-smoking ordinance, making it illegal to use an e-cigarette (vape) in public places.

What this legislation says, effectively, is that cigarettes and e-cigarettes are the same. There’s no difference in the health effects between the two, according to the Portland City Council. Science, however, says otherwise.

Research shows that e-cigarettes are a healthier alternative to traditional smoking, one that has the potential to help people overcome their cigarette addiction. While e-cigarettes are not necessarily risk-free, the fact that they lack many of the substances that make cigarettes so unhealthy makes them a much safer choice, and an important tool in reducing smoking addiction statewide.

Advertisement

Even more important, e-cigarettes are cutting down on traditional smoking among young people. Research by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows an inverse relationship between vaping and smoking.

As vaping spreads in popularity, traditional cigarette declines. Rather than being a gateway drug to traditional smoking, as anti-vaping advocates claim, the data suggests that e-cigarettes actually may be reducing the number of teens who smoke.

That’s right, e-cigarettes are saving lives by giving teens an alternative to traditional smoking. If there’s such a vast difference between smoking and vaping, why does Portland insist on treating them the same?

Ordinances that make it harder to vape don’t improve people’s lives. Rather, they block access to an activity that can help nurture them off a deadly smoking habit to a far healthier substitute. Legislators ought to recognize the science on e-cigarettes instead of implementing unhelpful ordinances.

To be fair, nothing is ever settled in science. We must keep open minds as new data and research comes forth on subjects like GMOs and e-cigarettes, never allowing our ideologies to blind us to the facts. While we may never reach a definitive answer, we can certainly look at the evidence and come to a rational conclusion.

Scientists the world over have reached a consensus on these issues. Are Maine lawmakers ready to acknowledge this?


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.