Personal freedom. Individual choice. These are important to Oregonians.

So some would say support Measure 92 and its mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food.

Not so fast. Progressive states like California and Washington have already said no to such a law. This year, Oregon voters are facing another version of the law. Oregon should say no, too.

Vermont is the only state with a law requiring GMO labeling, which goes into effect in 2016, but that law is being challenged in federal court.

Yes, Oregon has been on the right side of history many times. The beach bill opened beaches to the public down the 360 or so miles of coastline and hurt only developers who would set off the beach for only the use of their customers. The bottle bill made a five-cent deposit mandatory and cleaned up roadsides and hurt only the grocery stores obligated to handle the messy deposits.

The GMO bill would not solve a lot of problems. It would place a disproportionate burden on the poor. The bill would make Oregon have a whole separate system of food labeling from the nation, yet at the same time exempt most food and beverage products sold in Oregon, even those containing GMOs. Consumers would not be getting reliable information, and food companies would have to repackage and relabel their foods, just for Oregon. Their extra costs would, no doubt, be passed along to consumers.

GMOs are not rare. Roughly 70 percent of the processed food sold in grocery stores has been genetically engineered, the Washington State Academy of Sciences has said.

Consumers need to pay more attention to labels, surely. They also need to be protected from misleading labels, and Measure 92 could create more misinformation than good information. The point being, consumers worried about GMOs need to be smart enough to avoid processed foods whenever possible and eat local.

Studies are being touted from both sides of this issue claiming to prove their points. Proponents of Measure 92 claim food prices would not increase, at least much. Opponents say food prices would most certainly increase, perhaps by hundreds of dollars a year. In this economy, with recession still staring us in the rearview mirror, those are dollars many of us simply don’t have to spend.

Common sense says that mandatory labeling would almost certainly increase food costs by segregating products along the supply chain.

The system already allows for consumer choice, and for voluntarily labeled non-GE products.

Measure 92 would mislead many consumers and place a disproportionate burden on those least able to pay the additional costs. For that reason, it is a good idea to vote no on 92.