 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
This article needs a lot of work. None of the claims other than the Dunkin Donut one has been verified, since all the other links go back to the organisation's own website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Npovcheck (talk • contribs) 02:18, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Controversy?
edit“Another flaw of Proposition 65 is its unique ‘bounty hunter’ provision, which allows activist groups to enforce it via lawsuit and collect a portion of the penalties businesses pay for not labeling a product. With fines for a single violation reaching up to $2,500 per day, there is a huge incentive to make easy money off those who unknowingly violate the law. “Anti-glyphosate groups like Center for Environmental Health and As You Sow both claim to champion environmental and public health. But public records indicate the groups earned a combined $5.5 million exploiting businesses with Proposition 65 since 2000.” Joseph Peronne | Orange County Register
Seems to me that if this is true (and I have no reason to believe otherwise) then this should be highlighted as it's replying on dodgy science such as IARC silliness to extort money from companies. 82.24.18.184 (talk) 15:38, 11 September 2022 (UTC)