One day after President-Elect Barak Obama picked Iowa Governor, Tom Vilsack, as Agriculture Secretary, anti-biotechnology activists are out in full force trying to paint him as an apologist for the biotech industry. Tara Lohan in an article on Alternet.org declares Obama is sending to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) “…a pro-GMOs, pro-Biofuels Ag Secretary.”

Way back on November 12, when word went out that Obama planned to nominate Vilsack, the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) listed, on its website, six reasons why he’s inappropriate for the position.

Writing on the Nation, John Nichol quotes OCA as accusing Vilsack of having “…a glowing reputation as being a shill for agribusiness biotech giants like Monsanto.”

It’s interesting how anti-biotech groups malign anybody who’s supportive of crop genetic engineering, in total disregard of the nature of such support. Take the case of OCA. It’s quarrel with Vilsack stems from his support for Iowa farmers wanting to grow genetically modified foods. How can anybody expect him not to do that? He’s a Governor of a farm belt state, where life=farming and farming=life. Vilsack’s support for biotechnology has not been a blind one; it has been in the interest of farmers in his state. Well, for his efforts to help Iowa farmers to modernize their farming, he has won accolades from the Biotechnology Industry Organization. Farmers in Iowa will tell you he deserves it. Here is Iowa Corn Growers Association praise Vilsack’s appointment: In a press statement, the association said Vilsack had “…established an outstanding record here in Iowa as a capable, pragmatic leader who understood the importance of agriculture.” These are farmers speaking, not shills for Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta or any other biotech corporation doing business in Iowa.

As Vilsack prepares to move to USDA, he should brace himself for sharper criticism for his stand on genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Governor Vilsack must not fear to stand for what’s right. He should stand his ground, especially when individuals or organizations attempt to contradict science. He shouldn’t lock out organizations such as OCA, the Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and other entities opposed from agricultural biotechnology from the debate about genetically modified foods. But he must insist they stick to science to justify their opposition to GMOs. The same standards should apply to scientists and corporations advocating for genetically modified foods. They, too, have a duty to make a strong case for GMOs. They ought to educate the public about GMOs. It’s their baby, and they must tend to it.