Reference no: EM131769596

DIRECTIONS: Please answer specifically and cite the readings or articles provided to support your reasoning! BE SURE to follow these directions:

1. Answer each question completely - be careful not to skip any part of the question. Do not write an essay. Label and answer the questions.

2. Paper formatting

o Label each question and each part of each question.

o Insert page numbers and your name at the bottom of each page - use a "footer"as in "A. Suarez - P. 1"

o Use a file name that includes your name,e.g., "A.SuarezFINAL.doc"

3. PROOFREAD your work for spelling, grammar, and sentence structure. Errors count!

Your ability to answer the questions based on the readings logically and cohesively are key to an "A." Be careful to refrain from generalizations and/or making statements without any well reasoned back support. In short, I will be looking for smart, carefully organized work that flows from strong thesis sentences, well developed support AND logical conclusions.

1. Identifyissue(s):integrity? reputation? social responsibility?

2. Identify the decision-making model(s): universalist? Utilitarian?

3. Identify whether there is any bias? Corruption?

4. Complete and provide the results of a stakeholder analysis

5. Back up all of your ideas based on the readings, films, or other material.

QUESTIONS ABOUT CHALLENGING THE STATE OF VERMONT'S GMO LAW

a) Who are the stakeholders that the Grocery Manufacturer's Association represented in their 2016 lawsuit against the State of Vermont?Monsanto, although not a named party (direct legal participant) in the lawsuit, has given significant funds to support the GMA lawsuit and has given money in similar cases in California. How does this financial support impact its status as a stakeholder? Is it somehow a "super" stakeholder? Why or why not? Does this situation raise the specter of collusion? What would Lynn Stout say?

b) Based on the 1933 Pennsylvania Baked Goods law as well as Nestle and ConAgra's decisions to label their GMO based products before the Vermont law was implemented, how would you evaluate Monsanto's ETHICAL position to oppose the Vermont law? Use the Deckop decision-making models to evaluate their decision. Next, look at Monsanto's reputation for social responsibility, using Stout, Friedman and Ma as your basis for evaluation.

c) The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible federal food labeling. Efforts in Congress to support GMO labeling were stymied before the Vermont law's scheduled effective date in July 2016.

Although the political landscape changed that summer, the GMA and Monsanto argued that making GMO labeling a question of the First Amendment and "compelled commercial speech." Remember the Citizens United case?

Is compelling manufacturers to label GMO-based foodstuffs asking grocery manufacturers to violate their First Amendment free speech rights? How? Is there a greater good that can be regarded as more important?

QUESTIONS ABOUT CORPORATE LOBBYING:

1. Lobbying firms provide services that are purchased by firms like Monsanto or Bayer to actively promote their interests in Congress. Is there a point, however, when corporate lobbying means that client firms like Monsanto engage inunethical behavior? Monsanto was the largest contributor of outside funds into the lawsuit filed against the State of Vermont's GMO labeling by the Grocers Manufacturing Association, the International Dairy Association (plus several other groups).

Later, Monsanto appeared to have influenced Congressman Mike Pompeo to introduce a bill. Many of its features survived into the bill eventually passed in the late summer of 2016. How did the "surviving features" such as allowing industry to use QCR codes instead of plain English labeling, show the influence of lobbying.

2. Define what an "ethical" standard of corporate lobbying would be if you had the chance to write it. Be sure to consider the role of corporate social responsibility and those authors who have written about it.

QUESTIONS ABOUT DICAMBA:

1. Do you see any differences in the ways in which Monsanto is trying to handle the complaints about dicamba rather than Round-Up (glyphostate)? When seeds drift, Monsanto wants payment from farmers who "benefit" from the drifting seeds. By contrast, when the insecticide Dicamba drifts, Monsanto has taken a different approach. Is Monsanto becoming more socially responsible? More proactive - or both?

Attachment:- Ethics Final Paper.rar