An article in the New York Times (September 13, 2012) describes a proposed law in California to label genetically modified foods that is being opposed by large brands while being supported by small independent organic producers. The question revolves around whether the definition of certified organic, which would prohibit genetically engineered ingredients, is sufficient. Opponents of the law claim that it will increase costs added due to the labeling requirements that will raise prices by $ 350 to $ 400 per family, while also alerting customers to a worry that is not warranted. But proponents of the bill expect it to remind consumers of the use of genetically modified foods by large producers, who may also own organic brands. When should worries of cost increases preempt the need to create markets for sustainable products that benefit from explicit labeling ? Rather than requiring all products to be labeled, will labeling by organic producers alone be sufficient to generate the required outcomes ?