Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
HR875 S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food - UPDATE: Stealth Passage via CR Addendum
12-02-2010, 02:38 PM,
#31
Question  RE: S 510 Food Safety bill now dead in the water due to blue slip mistake
So this was intentional or are they really that stupid and inattentive to their jobs?

Well they did sign off on the Health Care Bill and the Patriot Act without even reading it, or getting a chance to. What's the excuse here?
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
12-02-2010, 09:25 PM,
#32
RE: S 510 Food Safety bill now dead in the water due to blue slip mistake
I don't know. It's strange, right? I guess one would have to research who wrote that particular portion of the bill and then trace their motives/possible ignorance.
[Image: conspiracy_theory.jpg]
Reply
12-02-2010, 10:13 PM,
#33
RE: S 510 Food Safety bill now dead in the water due to blue slip mistake
Quote:I don't know. It's strange, right? I guess one would have to research who wrote that particular portion of the bill and then trace their motives/possible ignorance.

They want us looking there - since that is what was publicized there is something else to it

Quote:Resolving Differences with the House

A bill cannot become a law of the land until it has been approved in identical form by both houses of Congress. Once the Senate amends and agrees to a bill that the House already has passed—or the House amends and passes a Senate bill—the two houses may begin to resolve their legislative differences by way of a conference committee or through an exchange of amendments between the houses.

Conference Committees

If the Senate does not accept the House’s position (or the House does not agree to the Senate’s position), one of the chambers may propose creation of a conference committee to negotiate and resolve the matters in disagreement between the two chambers.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/common/briefing/Senate_legislative_process.htm#4

On the unanimous consent:

Quote:Voting and Quorum Calls

The Constitution requires a majority of senators to be present for the Senate to conduct business. If a senator suggests the absence of a quorum, and a majority of senators do not respond to their names, the Senate can only adjourn, recess, or attempt to secure the attendance of additional senators. However, the purpose of a quorum call usually is to suspend floor activity temporarily to accommodate individual senators, discuss procedural or policy problems, or arrange subsequent proceedings. As a result, quorum calls usually are ended by unanimous consent before the clerk completes a call of the roll.

Conference Committees

Senate gets to conference with the House by adopting this standard motion: "Mr. President, I move that the Senate insist on its amendments (or "disagree to the House amendments" to the Senate-passed measure), request a conference with the House on the disagreeing votes thereon, and that the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees." This triple motion rolled into one–to insist (or disagree), request, and appoint–is commonly agreed to by unanimous consent. The presiding officer formally appoints the Senate’s conferees. (The Speaker names the House conferees.) Conferees are traditionally drawn from the committee of jurisdiction, but conferees representing other Senate interests may also be appointed.

There are no formal rules that outline how conference meetings are to be organized.

The work around ..

Quote:Once the two chambers go to conference, the respective House and Senate conferees bargain and negotiate to resolve the matters in bicameral disagreement. Resolution is embodied in a conference report, signed by a majority of Senate conferees and House conferees. The conference report must be agreed to by both chambers before it is cleared for presidential consideration. In the Senate, conference reports are usually brought up by unanimous consent at a time agreed to by the party leaders and floor managers. Because conference reports are privileged, if any senator objects to the unanimous consent request, a nondebatable motion can be made to take up the conference report. Approval of the conference report itself is subject to extended debate, but conference reports are not open to amendment.

The Presidential Veto ...

Quote:Enrollment

The Senate and House must resolve all their disagreements concerning a bill or joint resolution before it can be "enrolled" and presented to the president for his approval or veto.

Presidential Action

Pursuant to Article 1, section 7 of the Constitution, "Every Bill, which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; . . . ." If the president approves and signs the measure within 10 days, it becomes law.

If the president objects to a measure, he may veto it by returning it to its chamber of origin together with a statement of his objections, again within the same 10-day period. Unless both chambers subsequently vote by a 2/3 majority to override the veto, the measure does not become law.

So all they need to get the ball rolling to covertly get around this technicality is to have a call for when Senator Tom Coburn cannot attend or is impeded. All they need for quorum is a majority of Senators present to get it to conference for amendment.

Coburn (and anyone else willing to stand up) needs to know this -- if he doesn't already, he has to stay close so he can attend quickly called meetings and blockade this monster.

.. by any means possible
http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contactform
http://twitter.com/TomCoburn
http://www.youtube.com/user/SenatorCoburn

But this is best since you may get filtered one way or another..

Quote:Due to the increasing amount of "spam" messages received, effective February 5, 2007, Dr. Coburn's office will be implementing changes to the constituent correspondence process. These so-called spam messages, usually form letters written by special interest groups, have hindered replies to the letters of individual Oklahomans. The new measures will help ensure Dr. Coburn's office can focus on responding to the concerns and addressing the priorities of Oklahomans rather than Washington, D.C.-based groups.

Should you experience any problems with the new procedures, please call Dr. Coburn's office (Washington: 202-224-5754; Tulsa: 918-581-7651; Oklahoma City: 405-231-4941) and the staff will be happy to guide you through the correspondence process.

Don't bother with mass mailers they never get through and be sure to let them know you are recording your call and follow through. For any emails request a read receipt and CC: it to someone else to verify it was sent and he has been informed.

PS. I'd do it with more than just Coburn - he could flip unexpectedly.

Full listing here:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
12-02-2010, 10:44 PM,
#34
RE: S 510 Food Safety bill now dead in the water due to blue slip mistake
OK tried to dig deeper

http://rules.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=HowCongressWorks.RulesOfSenate DEAD LINK

No Google Cache, No Archive.org (error retrieving data)

WTF.. can't seem to contact the webmaster on the site either -- maybe someone else will have better luck.

I got an inkling from this paper that referenced it though:
http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1004&context=flpr (page 11)

Quote:Even if comprehensive analyses were rigorously conducted, the Congressional budget
process does not place tax expenditures in direct competition with non-tax spending programs.41
Congress virtually never considers trading off a tax expenditure for a direct spending program
(or, for that matter, vice-versa) because each type of spending takes a different path through
Congress.42 If a performance evaluation concluded that a discretionary spending program would
be preferable to an existing tax expenditure, in most cases a bill to make such a substitution
would be required to move through multiple committees.43 For example, first a tax writing
committee would report (and Congress would have to pass) legislation repealing the expenditure.
Then, an authorizing committee would have to authorize the new discretionary spending
program. Finally, funds for the program would have to be included in an annual appropriation
bill. By contrast, the appropriations committees can often directly trade-off funds between
programs when fashioning annual appropriations legislation.44

.pdf   Senate Spending TAX.pdf (Size: 259.56 KB / Downloads: 92)
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
12-02-2010, 11:20 PM, (This post was last modified: 12-02-2010, 11:21 PM by h3rm35.)
#35
RE: S 510 Food Safety bill now dead in the water due to blue slip mistake
It is possible, (since S 510 is basically a re-write of HR 875, and HR 875 wasn't written by Representatives, it was written by Monsanto,) that when they decided to just change the FDA instead of creating a whole new monster with the same acronym, they got caught up in the exact same confusion they created in the format and language of the bill aimed at confusing detractors and simply didn't catch that one piece that was fine in a house bill but not in a Senate bill...

wouldn't that be poetic?
[Image: conspiracy_theory.jpg]
Reply
12-09-2010, 09:21 AM,
#36
RE: Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food - UPDATE: Re-Vote Imminet at Anytime
Quote:S 510 Food Safety bill is still alive and may unleash a new army of FDA agents
Thursday, December 09, 2010
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

The U.S. government wants to know where your greenhouse is. Under Senate Bill 510 -- which is now back in the hands of the U.S. Senate after the House hid an amendment in an appropriations bill and passed it last night -- American food producers would be required to register their facilities with the U.S. government. The feds, it seems, want a database of food growers so they know who to target for surprise inspections (show me your papers!).

As stated in the bill itself

SEC. 102. REGISTRATION OF FOOD FACILITIES. 18 (a) UPDATING OF FOOD CATEGORY REGULATIONS; BIENNIAL REGISTRATION RENEWAL. Section 415(a) (2120 U.S.C. 350d(a))

"The registration shall contain an assurance that the Secretary will be permitted to inspect such facility at the times and in the manner permitted by this Act."


What this language shows is that the point of registration is so that government agents can conduct surprise inspections of food facilities. At least 4,000 new FDA agents will need to be hired if this bill becomes law, greatly expanding the FDA's agent presence in much the same way the TSA expanded over the last few years.

Kangaroo courts for violators

Once an FDA inspection occurs, if the government believes the food grower is producing anything that might pose a risk to the public (and note carefully that "belief" is the only thing required, not actual scientific evidence of harm), that food grower is then "suspended" from producing food.

After that, they get dragged into a kangaroo FDA court where a panel of FDA officials then decides their fate. This takes place with no due process, no attorney, no Constitutional protections and no rights whatsoever. This is, in every sense, a "King's court" where the King can simply decide that you're guilty and put you out of business.

Here's the language in the S.510 legislation:

"(2) HEARING ON SUSPENSION. - The Secretary shall provide the registrant subject to an order under paragraph (1) with an opportunity for an informal hearing, to be held as soon as possible but not later than 2 business days after the issuance of the order or such other time period, as agreed upon by the Secretary and the registrant, on the actions required for reinstatement of registration and why the registration that is subject to suspension should be reinstated. The Secretary shall reinstate a registration if the Secretary determines, based on evidence presented, that adequate grounds do not exist to continue the suspension of the registration."

Did you read this carefully? It means the Secretary (a bureaucrat) gets to decide who can grow food and who can't. This is the FDA's kangaroo court, much like the FTC's kangaroo court that's currently being used to destroy companies offering nutritional supplements and natural cancer cures.

Remember, too, the bill abandoned actual science and now relies entirely on the FDA's "belief" to determine which foods to recall:

SEC. 208. ADMINISTRATIVE DETENTION OF FOOD.
23 (a) IN GENERAL. - Section 304(h)(1)(A) (21 U.S.C.24 334(h)(1)(A)) is amended by
(1) striking ''credible evidence or information indicating'' and inserting ''reason to believe'';

FDA tyranny is on the rise

So essentially what we have here is a food tyranny bill that would hand a group of un-elected bureaucrats who answer to no one the power to control virtually the entire U.S. food supply. This is an agency, by the way, that is already responsible for the deaths of millions of Americans.

This is an agency that has participated in armed raids against natural product companies.

To all those who say "S. 510 is no big deal, the FDA won't abuse its power, this is just about safety" -- I say you have no grasp of the history of tyranny. The FDA has virtually never taken action to protect the People. Its actions have consistently been shaped to maximize the profits of the powerful corporations even at the expense of human lives.

Just read the history of Vioxx if you need a refresher on that point.

That the U.S. Congress would now seek to hand over control of our food supply to this dangerous, rogue government agency is an obscene betrayal of the American people. This is precisely why we must stand up and fight S.510 once again to defeat it in the Senate where it is now schedule for yet another vote. (Like a bad case of herpes, this bill just won't die, it seems...)

Sign the petition at: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=5303

Once again, CALL your representatives in the House and the Senate. You can reach the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask for your representatives by name.

By the way, just for the record, I am appalled at the lack of action on this item by some so-called "health freedom" organizations which appear to be doing absolutely nothing to rally opposition to this bill. A few groups are fighting hard to oppose it (NaturalNews, ANH-USA.com, Natural Solutions Foundation, etc.) but there are several which appear to be sitting on the sidelines, doing nothing. I'm not sure why. This is precisely the kind of issue that should have the entire health freedom community up in arms to protect our food freedoms.

Robert Scott Bell gets it, by the way. So do the Vitamin Lawyer (Ralph Fucetola) and health freedom attorneys like James Turner and Jonathan Emord. All the freedom-oriented people seem to understand how crucial this is to maintain our food freedoms and keep the FDA out of our farms as much as possible. If you think the FDA is bad now, just wait until they are granted yet more powers (and funding) to unleash an army of thousands of new agents who sweep across America, raiding small family farms (no, they're not all exempted from this bill) and imprisoning raw milk producers.

The FDA is about to become the SS of food fascism. This is not an exaggeration. Who would have thought, five years ago, that the TSA would be reaching down your pants and feeling your genitals? Just imagine now what the FDA will do with similar powers over your food and farms. Crudely put, the TSA may be feeling your junk, but the FDA will have us all by the balls.

Take action now to protect your food freedoms (or you will forever lose them).

More article coverage on Bill S510 at NaturalNews.com:

Senate Bill 510 Food Safety? The FDA has killed far more people than contaminated eggs or lettuce

Top ten lies about Senate Bill 510

(Part I) The FDA is a clearing house for the Food and Drug Corruption

(Part II) The FDA is a clearing house for Food and Drug Corruption
http://www.naturalnews.com/030672_Food_Safety_bill_FDA.html
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
12-09-2010, 10:23 AM,
#37
RE: Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food - UPDATE: Re-Vote Imminet at Anytime
This Original Bill document is outdated since revisions. Here are updated links to the text as available here:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:s3804:

There are 2 versions of Bill Number S.3804 for the 111th Congress. Usually, the last item is the most recent.
1 . Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (Introduced in Senate – IS)[S.3804.IS][PDF]
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111s3804is/pdf/BILLS-111s3804is.pdf

2 . Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (Reported in Senate – RS)[S.3804.RS][PDF]
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111s3804rs/pdf/BILLS-111s3804rs.pdf

The RS (Reported in Senate) version is quite a different mutation of the same animal.
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
12-20-2010, 05:35 AM,
#38
RE: Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food
What an underhanded move ..

Food Safety Bill S510 It's been added to HR3082 (PDF) as (page 1685) yup the WHOLE THING reiterated.

Quote:Food Safety Bill Lives
8:39 pm December 19, 2010, by Jamie Dupree

A major food safety bill that had almost been given up for dead was suddenly revived in the Senate late on Sunday evening, and may be ready for House approval as early as Tuesday.

In a parliamentary move laid out on the Senate floor by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid just after 7pm, the Senate took the food safety language that was passed as part of a stop-gap budget plan by the House, attached it to another House-passed bill and approved that by unanimous consent.

A Democratic Senate aide told me that Republicans did not object to the plan, even though the bill has garnered fierce opposition in some GOP quarters.

The move was a surprise, as it seemed like the Food Safety bill was going to die in the waning days of this year, despite strong support in both the House and Senate.

The bill almost went down the drain originally because of an elementary mistake by Senate Democrats, who added revenue provisions to a measure that originated in the Senate, despite the Constitutional requirement that all spending and revenue bills start in the House.

The House refused to act directly on that legislation, because of what's known as a "blue slip" problem.

That problem was solved when the House approved its long-term Continuing Resolution last week, which included the language of the Senate-passed food safety bill.

As reported above, the Senate on Sunday night simply took the revised food safety language that was approved by the House in the CR, substituted it to the language of HR 2751, one of the original "Cash for Clunkers" bills from last year, and approved it by unanimous consent.

That move will fix any Constitutional issues, because the plan originated in the House as part of the CR, and by using a bill that was already approved by the House, the Cash for Clunkers bill.

Before you start screaming about that - the food safety language replaces the Cash for Clunkers language in the amended version of HR 2751.

I was told that the food safety bill should be up for a vote as soon as Tuesday in the House.
http://blogs.ajc.com/jamie-dupree-washington-insider/2010/12/19/food-safety-bill-lives/
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
12-20-2010, 05:39 AM,
#39
RE: Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food - UPDATE: Re-Vote Imminet at Anytime
muthrfuhker! I though we got away with that one... Monsanto must've had their lobbyist running round the clock to figure that one out.
[Image: conspiracy_theory.jpg]
Reply
12-20-2010, 10:33 PM,
#40
RE: Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food - UPDATE: Stealth Passage via CR Adde
(via email)
Quote:Dear NaturalNews readers,

In the dark of night, the US Senate passed S.510 last night with a unanimous consent voice vote (not a single US Senator opposed it).

It's now headed back to the House for a possible vote on Tuesday.

We need your help to oppose this dangerous bill that could destroy small, local organic farmers and reduce the availability of local fresh produce.

If you enjoy farmers' markets or buy food from a CSA, your food supply is now in danger due to HR 2751 in the House of Representatives! (See more talking points below...)

Take Action Now to Protect Small Local Farms

Action item #1) Sign our petition at:
http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/7025/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=5020

(This will automatically email your appropriate representatives in Washington.)


Action item #2) Read our article (and forward it to others) at:
http://www.naturalnews.com/030789_Food_Safety_small_farmers.html


Action item #3) Read the Natural Solutions Foundation article and petition at:
http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=7824eri


Action item #4) Read the urgent action alert from the Farm-To-Consumer Legal Defense Fund at:
http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/aa/aa-20dec2010-s510-in-hr2751-house.htm


Here are the talking points from FTCLDF on why this fake food safety bill is so dangerous to our future:

The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act is fundamentally flawed and is not in the best interest of small farmers, especially those who produce raw milk. The Act is a major threat to the local food movement.

1. FDA does not respect individuals' rights to obtain healthy, quality foods of their choice. The agency has stated, as a matter of public record that:

"There is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular food."

"Plaintiffs' assertion of a 'fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families' is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish."

FDA has even participated in armed raids on small-scale co-ops and membership organizations. This agency should not be given any additional power.

2. FDA has adequate powers under existing law to ensure food safety and effectively deal with foodborne illness outbreaks. FDA has power to inspect, power to detain product and can readily obtain court orders to seize adulterated or misbranded food products or enjoin them from being sold. The problem isn't that FDA needs more power; it's that FDA does not effectively use the power it currently has. The agency has power to inspect imported food yet inspects only 1% of food coming into this country from outside our borders.

3. S.510 does nothing to address many significant food safety problems in this country, such as those resulting from confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs), genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and various contaminants (e.g., BPA, pesticides, herbicides, etc.).

4. FDA has used its existing power to benefit the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries at the expense of public health (e.g., allowing the overuse of antibiotics in confined animal feeding operations and refusing to require labeling for genetically-modified foods). This bill does not address the fundamental problems at this agency in order to truly protect public health.

5. S.510 will expand FDA's involvement in regulating food in intra-state commerce, further interfering with local communities. State and local governments are more than capable of handling any problems related to food in intrastate commerce. All the major outbreaks of foodborne illness involve either imported food or food in inter-state commerce.

6. S.510 will hurt our ability as a nation to be self-sufficient in food production because it has more lenient inspection requirements for foreign than domestic producers creating an unfair advantage for food imports. Giving an advantage to foreign producers will only increase the amount of food imported into this country that does not meet our domestic standards. S.510 does not address food security -- the ability of a country to produce enough food to meet its own needs.



Thank you for your action in this urgent item. We will keep you posted on this news at http://www.NaturalNews.com


- Mike Adams
[Image: conspiracy_theory.jpg]
Reply
12-21-2010, 06:58 PM,
#41
RE: Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food - UPDATE: Stealth Passage via CR Adde
These groups support the bill but I sent the email via naturalnews for you anyway:

http://sustainableagriculture.net/blog/senate-passes-food-safety-bill/
Quote: * Senator Sanders (I-VT) providing FDA authority to either exempt farms engaged in low or no risk processing or co-mingling activities from new regulatory requirements or to modify particular regulatory requirements for such farming operations.
* Senator Bennet (D-CO) to reduce unnecessary paperwork and excess regulation required under the preventative control plan and the produce standards sections of the bill, including instructions to FDA to minimize the number of different standards that apply to separate foods, to make requirements scale appropriate, and to prohibit FDA from requiring farms and other food facilities to hire outside consultants to write food safety plans.
* Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) to provide for a USDA-delivered competitive grants program for food safety training for farmers, small processors and wholesalers, with a priority on small and mid-scale farms.
* Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) to strip the bill of wildlife-threatening enforcement against “animal encroachment” of farms and require FDA to apply sound science to any requirements that might impact wildlife and wildlife habitat.
* Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) to exempt farmers from extensive and expensive traceability and recordkeeping requirements if they sell food directly to consumers or to grocery stores, to allow labeling that preserves the identity of the farm through to the consumer to satisfy traceability requirements, and to in most cases limit farm recordkeeping to the first point of sale when the product leaves the farm.
* Senators Jon Tester (D-MT) and Kay Hagan (D-NC) to give very small farms and food processing facilities as well as direct-market farms who sell locally the option of complying with state regulation or with modified, scale-appropriate federal regulation.

http://mocoalliance.org/2010/11/common-sense-on-the-food-safety-bill-sb-510-from-michael-pollan/

Quote:The Food Safety Bill Passes the Senate, Small Farm Protections Intact

Update, 12/6/2010: While consumers everywhere should be glad that this bill passed with all small farm protection amendments intact, there is still a lot of steps for it to become a law in this lame duck session of Congress, and time may run out before it happens. National Sustainable Ag Coalition explains.

SB 510, the Food Safety and Modernization Act has just passed the Senate. In the deliberations leading up to this vote, sustainable farm activists were concerned that small scale farmers would be over-burdened by regulations that were actually meant for larger agribusinesses, not your local farmer selling directly to consumers at the farmers market.

A few amendments, most notably the Tester-Hagan amendment, leveled the playing field for farms doing under 500k in business a year by requiring less stringent tracking of goods that were sold directly to consumers.

As Michael Pollan (celebrated food writer) and Eric Schlosser (Producer of Food Inc.) wrote in an Op-Ed in the NY Times in the days before the vote, the passage of this bill should be seen as a step forward.

“This legislation is by no means perfect. But it promises to achieve several important food safety objectives, greatly benefiting consumers without harming small farmers or local food producers.”

The bill now faces reconciliation between the House and Senate versions, it is unclear if this will take place in time for the end of the lame-duck session.

Thanks to all those that called their Senators on this bill.
Reply
12-23-2010, 02:22 AM, (This post was last modified: 12-23-2010, 02:31 AM by h3rm35.)
#42
RE: Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food - UPDATE: Stealth Passage via CR Adde
Originally published December 22 2010
Congress sticks it to U.S. farmers with passage of food safety bill that will actually cause fresh produce to be more dangerous
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) The U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 2751 yesterday with a 216 to 144 vote (yes, many members of the House did not even vote). The so-called Food Safety Modernization Act now heads to the President to be signed into law.

When witnessing such a moment in history when the federal government greatly expands its power over an entire industry, it's important to understand the Law of Unintended Consequences. Virtually everything bad that happens after a bill gets passed is due to this Law of Unintended Consequences.

On the surface, the intention behind the food safety bill seems innocent enough: Let's all protect the food supply and prevent people from getting sick due to e.coli and salmonella exposure. But the reality of the result that emerges from the law is quite different.

Get ready for more dangerous, pesticide-ridden food from south of the border
Because the S.510 / HR 2751 food safety bill places an enormous new burden on U.S. farmers -- yes, even small farms that are supposedly "exempt" -- it's going to drive many farmers out of business.

It will also erect new barriers to farmers entering the food production business, and this is especially true for the small local farmers who grow food for local co-ops, farmers' markets and CSA organizations (Community Supported Agriculture). What we're going to see from all this, then, is the following:

• A reduction in the available SUPPLY of fresh local produce.
• A loss of local farming know-how and food sustainability.
• The financial failure of CSAs, food co-ops and small local markets.
• The loss of countless jobs that were related to local food production.
• An INCREASE in the price of local food, especially organic food.

Food safety bill does nothing to address food imports
At the same time these huge regulatory burdens are thrust upon U.S. farmers, there are no new regulations required for food grown outside the United States.

This means that food coming into the USA from Mexico, Chile, Peru or anywhere else does not have to meet S.510 food safety regulations at all. The FDA, after all, doesn't inspect greenhouses in Mexico or grape farms in Chile which export their products to the United States.

Furthermore, many dangerous chemical pesticides that have been banned in the USA are legal to use elsewhere, and foods treated with those pesticides are perfectly legal to import into the United States. So instead of buying food grown in the United States on small, organic farms, more U.S. consumers are going to be buying food grown elsewhere that's treated with extremely toxic pesticides.

Here are some of the unintended consequences of all this:

• An INCREASE in the importation of fresh produce from other countries.

• A worsening of the agricultural trade imbalance between the U.S. and other nations.

• An INCREASE in the pesticide contamination of fresh produce sold at U.S. grocery stores.

• An INCREASE in agriculture jobs in Mexico, Chile, Peru and elsewhere, even while agriculture jobs are lost in the USA.

• A DECREASE in the overall safety of the food supply because now the proportion of foods imported from foreign countries with little or no regulatory oversight will greatly expand compared to U.S. grown foods.

In effect, then, what Congress has done is impaired the competitiveness of U.S. farms, shifted farming jobs out of the country, increased the pesticide residues in fresh produce sold in U.S. grocery stores and harmed local food security and sustainability by driving small, local farmers out of business.

Such is the nature of the Law of Unintended Consequences. And such is the nature of just about everything that Big Government tries to do when it threatens to "solve problems" by expanding its regulatory control over almost any industry.

We need food security in America
What Congress fails to understand is that we need food security far more than we need more FDA regulations. The knowledge base of local farmers who know how to grow, harvest and distribute food is far more valuable to the security of our nation than preventing a relatively small number of people from getting sick from e.coli each year (even if such a trade-off were a simplistic equation, which it isn't). Because if we lose food security, then we become slaves to the big corporate food producers who are attempting to centralize food production and place food, seeds and crops under their absolute control.

A cynic might even suggest that was the whole purpose of the food safety bill in the first place: To destroy small farmers and centralize food production power in the hands of a few wealthy corporations. Whether that was the intent or not, it is certainly going to be the effect.

What Congress has done with this food safety bill, in effect, is to cripple America's food production know-how and poison the population with far more dangerous pesticide-ridden produce that will now be imported from other countries instead. This bill should have been called the "Mexico Farming Jobs Act" because it's going to shift countless jobs south of the border as farms in the USA realize they simply can't operate under the immense burden of FDA regulatory tyranny.

What's the definition of insanity?
It all makes you wonder what the members of Congress are really thinking. Don't they ever step back and attempt to consider the real-world ramifications of their actions?

Time and time again, the U.S. government seems to do the opposite of what would reasonably be required to solve problems. Think about it: When the U.S. government wanted to stop Wall Street bankers and investment firms from wasting money, it simply handed them a few trillion dollars in new money so they could waste more.

When the government wanted to end debt spending, it spent more debt money out of the foolish belief that you can somehow end your debt by going deeper into it.

When the government claimed it would reduce your health care costs and cover everyone with health insurance, it passed a sick-care law that has only seen health care costs spiraling out of control while insurers cancel policies and end coverage for many children.

And now, the government claims to be making your food safer even though the real impact of the new law will be to make your food far more dangerous while destroying U.S. farming jobs.

This is why those who really know government also know that they who govern best govern the least. Instead of trying to "fix" all the nation's problems by meddling with the actions of hard-working people trying to make a living (such as organic farmers), the government needs to simply get out of the way and let farmers produce their food without the heavy regulatory burden of the FDA -- an agency that we know is frequently engaged in actions that can only be called criminal in nature (http://www.naturalnews.com/030461_S...).

Get ready for skyrocketing food prices in 2011 - 2013
With the passage of this food safety bill, I am now publicly predicting skyrocketing food prices over the next two years. We will see fresh, local produce become increasingly more expensive and more difficult to acquire. Many local farmers will shutter their businesses, and farming know-how will be lost for perhaps a generation. The damage that will be done to America's food security and agricultural base is incalculable.

Such is the price we shall all pay for allowing our representatives in Washington to once again violate our Natural Right to grow food and exchange it for goods or cash with our neighbors. The reason this Natural Right was never even mentioned in the US Constitution, by the way, is because the right to grow your own food without government interference is such an obvious "Natural Right" (a God-given right, or a right that is self-evident) that our forefathers never imagined such a right would be infringed by the federal government.

Or if a right were ever infringed by the federal government, our forefathers were certain that the citizens of the United States of America would exercise their other Constitutional rights to nullify the attempted overreaching authority of the federal government and thereby restore their freedoms. Sadly, such a solution does not work when the majority of the population is lulled into a false sense of freedom by a government that deliberately lies to them on a daily basis. Freedom does not exist with the vast majority of the population has no interest in defending it.

Vegetable gardeners can learn something from marijuana growers
Better buy yourself some heirloom seeds while you have the chance. Plant your stealth garden and cover it with camouflage so the government can't see it and order you to destroy it. Soon, backyard vegetable gardeners will need to operate like marijuana growers and start hiding their food from government's prying eyes.

No doubt the U.S. federal government will start using spy satellites to identify "unregistered gardens" that will be targeted for termination. Soon, small farmers may even be raided by armed FDA agents who terrorize their operations and seize cabbages. Seriously.

It sounds crazy today, I know. But a decade ago, no one thought the government would ever outlaw raw cow's milk and arrest ranchers for selling milk to their neighbors, and that's now happening on a regular basis.

In five years, FDA farm raids may be routine. That is, if there's anything left of the federal government (as we know it) in five years. I'm not sure how long they can keep up the financial house of cards, frankly. Always remember this enlightening fact: The entire federal government is just one paycheck away from collapse. I wonder how long FDA inspectors will keep harassing farmers if their paychecks stop? Remember, FDA employees have no loyalty to anything other than their paychecks. Once the money from Washington stops, the army of FDA mercenaries collapses virtually overnight.

And the resilient farmers of America will win in the end, I have no doubt. If I had to choose to live on a deserted island with either ten North Carolina farmers or ten FDA bureaucrats, the choice would be a no-brainer. Farmers can keep you alive. FDA bureaucrats will only stab you in the back, steal your coconuts, and refuse to do any actual work on their own.

They are, after all, parasites who feed on taxpayer dollars and lend nothing of value to society. If the FDA actually did anything useful at all, it would have banned mercury fillings to protect the public from mercury toxicity (http://www.naturalnews.com/030741_m...).
Originally published December 21 2010
Feds order farmer to destroy his own wheat crops: The shocking revelations of Wickard vs Filburn
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) In arguing for S.501, the "Food Safety Modernization Act," there are all sorts of attorneys, legislators and internet commentators who keep claiming, "The government won't try to control the food production of small farms." They say, "Your backyard garden is safe" and that the feds won't come knocking on your door to control your seeds or foods.

As usual, these pushers of Big Government are utterly ignorant of the history in their own country. Because as you'll learn right here, not only CAN the U.S. government control and dictate to single-family farms what they can grow in their own backyards; the government has already blatantly done so!

In this article, I'll share with you the full and true story of how Big Government has already run rampant over the rights of individuals to grow their own food -- I'll even cite the US Supreme Court decision that "legalized" this tyranny.

How the tyrants came after a farmer named Roscoe Filburn
It all starts with a farmer named Roscoe Filburn, a modest farmer who grew wheat in his own back yard in order to feed his chickens.

One day, a U.S. government official showed up at his farm. Noting that Filburn was growing a lot of wheat, this government official determined that Filburn was growing too much wheat and ordered Filburn to destroy his wheat crops and pay a large fine to the federal government.

The year was 1940, you see. And through a highly protectionist policy, the federal government had decided to artificially drive up the prices of wheat by limiting the amount of wheat that could be grown on any given acre. This is all part of Big Government's "infinite wisdom" of trying to somehow improve prosperity by destroying food and impairing economic productivity. (Be wary any time the government says it's going to "solve problems" for you.)

The federal government, of course, claims authority over all commerce (even when such claims are blatantly in violation of the limitations placed upon government by the Constitution). But Roscoe Filburn wasn't selling his wheat to anyone. Thus, he was not engaged in interstate commerce. He wasn't growing wheat as something to use for commerce at all, in fact. He was simply growing wheat in his back yard and feeding it to his chickens. That's not commerce. That's just growing your own food.

But get this: The government insisted he pay a fine and destroy his wheat, so Filburn took the government to court, arguing that the federal government had no right to tell a man to destroy his food crops just because they wanted to protect some sort of artificially high prices in the wheat market.

This case eventually went to the US Supreme Court. It's now known as Wickard v. Filburn, and it is one of the most famous US Supreme Court decisions ever rendered because it represents a gross expansion of the tyranny of the federal government.

The US Supreme Court sided with government tyranny

The US Supreme Court, you see, ruled that Roscoe Filburn's wheat could be regulated and destroyed by the federal government simply because Roscoe's wheat production might reduce the amount of wheat he bought from other wheat producers and therefore could impact interstate trade.

Now stay with me on this, because this is a really, really important point to understand.

The federal government claimed authority under the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution (Article 1, Section 8), even though the Commerce Clause was originally written primarily to prevent states from erecting tariffs, not to allow the federal government to control interstate trade. But thanks to the twisted interpretation of the government -- and believe me, the government will twist every interpretation it can in an effort to assert more power over the population -- the feds claimed that Filburn's growing of his own wheat effectively reduced interstate commerce in wheat. Therefore, they reasoned, they could regulate his backyard wheat production (and order him to destroy his wheat).

Because of this US Supreme Court decision in 1942, it now means the federal government can order you to halt food production in your own back yard by arguing that when you grow your own food, the amount of food you purchase from other food providers is reduced, meaning that your food production impacts interstate trade and therefore can be fully controlled by the federal government.

In other words, the federal government claims the authority right now -- even without the Food Safety Modernization Act -- to knock on your door and order you at gunpoint to destroy all the food in your garden, your greenhouse or your farm. They can order you to destroy all seeds in your possession and all food harvested from your own garden. And they can do all this with the full protection of U.S. law by simply citing the precedent set in Wickard v. Filburn in 1942 as ruled by the US Supreme Court.

Why the naysayers will probably starve

Still think you have the right to grow your own food? I've heard all sorts of naysayers claiming that S.510 -- the Food Safety Modernization Act -- is no threat to small growers and family farms. They say the fears about S.510 are overblown and that the government can't possibly shut down your backyard gardens or small, local vegetable farms. They say this with the kind of smug certainty you might typically hear from a doctor who thinks he knows everything about human health (but who actually knows nothing about nutrition).

These naysayers tend to operate out of an assumption that Big Government will never take away their rights and freedoms and that expanding the reach of agencies such as the TSA, FDA, DEA and FTC with even more power and more armed agents is a good thing because the government always takes care of the people. We need more protection from e.coli, they argue, so let's unleash 4,000 armed FDA agents instead to protect us from bacteria. But who will protect us from the FDA?

What these ignorant naysayers don't understand is that government is constantly trying to expand its power to the point of tyranny. As a current example of this, look at what just happened with Chavez in Venezuela. He has now been granted what are essentially dictatorial powers over the country (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...). Chavez is now the King of Venezuela, and whatever he says is now law. Venezuelan citizens are now slaves to his tyranny, and they must follow his orders or be executed.

The United States is moving in precisely the same direction. First, power gets stripped away from the People little by little. Then it gets concentrated in the hands of a few regulatory agencies who write their own laws and who stay in power year after year because none of their officials are elected. (Think the FDA commissioner is elected by the people? Think again...) And then, over time, a few powerful individuals concentrate power from those agencies into their own hands. Before long, the country is run by a handful of power-crazed tyrants who disregard all freedoms and rights of the People.

This is precisely what the FDA is doing with the Food Safety Modernization Act. Backed by yet more funding and a new army of agents, plus the Supreme Court ruling that says the federal government can order you to destroy the food you're growing in your own back yard, the FDA can now pillage the countryside, going from farm to farm and house to house, burning fields and ordering the citizenry to destroy their plants, seeds and crops. This is exactly what they've been doing to raw milk producers and food coops, by the way (http://www.naturalnews.com/030136_R...).

That is no exaggeration. It is a documented "legal" precedent established in Wickard vs Filburn, and it can be used at any moment to destroy the ability of people to grow their own food, thereby making these people totally dependent on dead processed food (which is always FDA approved if it's dead, of course) made in food factories that churn out nutritional deficiencies and death.

What will you eat when the government destroys your local food supply?

You see, under the argument that your backyard garden "impacts interstate commerce," the federal government can order you to simply spray Roundup on your entire garden in order to kill it.

What will you eat then? When the GMO crops suffer a mass catastrophic failure, and the monocultured wheat dies from a global viral infection called ug99 "rust" (http://theemergencyfoodsupply.com/a...), what will you eat?

If the government has its way, you won't eat at all. You'll starve to death under the "protection" of the food safety thugs at the FDA who don't believe any "live" food is safe in the first place (hence their war against raw milk).

Those people who have the foresight to grow their own gardens and protect their food sources from the tyranny of the federal government may actually have a chance at surviving. The rest will simply starve while waiting in government food lines where the feds hand out nutritionally worthless cheese and other depleted processed foods that Sesame Street absurdly thinks are "superfoods" (http://www.naturalnews.com/030626_m...).

Big Government declares war on the local food movement

Make no mistake, folks: the government is attempting to destroy the local food movement. They are trying to wipe out small, organic farms that compete with corporate agribiz in the same way the FDA has long plotted to destroy natural health supplement companies who compete with Big Pharma.

It's all about wiping out the little guys and protecting the monopoly markets of the largest and most influential corporations that are poisoning the earth and destroying your health. As Wickard vs Filburn clearly demonstrated, the government does not believe you have any natural right or Constitutional right to grow your own food. In fact, the government believes it has the right to order you to destroy your food at the time of its choosing.

Don't think this could happen to you? Filburn didn't either. The idea that his own government would show up at his door and order him to burn his field of wheat was simply unimaginable. Similarly, the idea that the FDA would tear across the countryside wiping out small family farms is unimaginable to many Americans today. But that's only because they don't know their own history and they put far too much faith in the flimsy idea that the government somehow, in some way, respects the rights and freedoms of the People.

The obvious falsehood of that idea is evident in the way we are all being treated by the TSA. Who would have thought, just two years ago, that we'd be subjected to government-enforced molestation at the hands of airport security screeners? That idea seems unthinkable at the time, much like the idea that the FDA could seize your garden seeds or order you to destroy your greenhouse crops. Yet such actions are already within the claimed power of the federal government... merely waiting to be invoked at the time of their choosing.

Traitors to freedom

All those who voted for S.510 -- which includes the entire U.S. Senate, Republicans and Democrats alike -- are traitors to the freedoms upon which America was founded. They have thrust our food supply into the hands of tyrants who are just waiting to exercise their control and "authority" over as many people as possible.

Five years ago, I joked that people might one day be arrested for smuggling broccoli across state lines. Today, that joke has become a sad reality. The mere act of growing food and selling it to your neighbor without government permission is about to become a criminal act. And no, small farms are not "exempt" from S.510. They must provide financial information and apply to the FDA to be granted exemption status. That sounds a lot like slaves begging for mercy from the king, doesn't it?

Keep the big picture in mind as you consider all this: When teens are poisoned by the aspartame in diet soda, the FDA does nothing. When children are given cancer by the sodium nitrite in hot dogs, the FDA does nothing. When countless thousands of Americans suffer heart attacks and cardiovascular disease each year from the partially-hydrogenated oils used throughout the food supply, the FDA does nothing. But when you grow fresh produce in your own back yard and carry it to your local farmer's market to sell it without government permission, you will be arrested by the FDA as a criminal.

Shame on all those who supported this bill. May history have mercy on their souls for the suffering and injustices they have unleashed upon us all.

Sources for this story include:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickar...

Lies the Government Told You: Myth, Power, and Deception in American History by Judge Andrew Napolitano
http://www.amazon.com/Lies-Governme...

(This is an amazing book. Highly recommended reading that will educate you on the history of government abuses of power. All Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians and Independents need to read this book.)
[Image: conspiracy_theory.jpg]
Reply
12-29-2010, 02:18 AM,
#43
RE: Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food - UPDATE: Stealth Passage via CR Adde
Originally published December 28 2010
With food safety bill, U.S. government will spend nearly $1 million per person to prevent food-borne illness deaths
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) The recently-passed Food Safety Modernization Act, which was passed in order to prevent food-borne illness deaths in the USA, will cost $1.4 billion over the first five years. But nobody thinks about the economics of the issue. How many people are we going to save by spending this $1.4 billion, even assuming it works?

To answer that question, let's look at the food illness fatality figures offered by the CDC:

• Out of the 5,000 food-borne illness deaths each year in the United States, only 1,809 are "attributable to foodborne transmission" according to the CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol5n...).

• E.coli, which is often quoted in the big scare stories about food safety, only kills 78 people a year through food-borne transmission (52 plus 26, from the CDC's chart). Interestingly, according to the CDC's own numbers (from 1998), more people are killed from being struck by lightning each year than from e.coli.

• Listeria kills 499 people and Salmonella kills 553 people. But salmonella poisoning is easily acquired from store-bought chickens, of which two-thirds are contaminated with salmonella every day! Since the food safety bill doesn't even address chickens, cows or other animals because those are handled by the USDA, this salmonella fatality figure probably won't be reduced at all. (Salmonella comes largely from animals: Fowl, reptiles, etc.)

So how many people will the Food Safety Modernization Act actually impact? It's primarily going to address e.coli poisoning and Listeria contamination. So we're talking about a grand total of 78 + 499 people each year, or 577 people.

By the way, for comparison, consider the fact that 300 people die in the U.S. each year from penicillin allergies. Another 14,500 people die each year from taking NSAID painkiller medications. Nearly three quarter of a million people are killed by conventional medicine (drug deaths, surgical mistakes, iatrogenic deaths, etc, source: Death By Medicine). Congress does nothing to address these causes of death, of course. The focus is on the few hundred people who die each year from the common causes of food-borne illness.

So in order to prevent the deaths of 577 people each year for five years, the U.S. Congress is going to spend $1.4 billion!

But that's overly optimistic, it turns out. Because no food safety program is 100 percent effective in the first place.

Let's share a wild fantasy and imagine that the Food Safety Modernization Act might be a huge success and prevent 50 percent of those 577 deaths. That's a wild stretch, of course, especially since the bill doesn't even cover cattle, hogs and poultry, and that's where e.coli originates from in the first place.

But just for fun, let's assume a 50% reduction in food-borne illness deaths. That means, if you do the math on this, that spending $1.4 billion over five years would prevent the deaths of 1,443 people from food-borne illnesses. That's almost $1 million per person of taxpayer dollars being spent by the federal government for each food safety death prevented.

A million dollars per person. Is this really the best use of taxpayer money? It would seem that if you're going to spend this money in order to save lives, there's a way to save a hundred times as many lives with the same dollars...

This $1.4 billion, by the way, would be used to fund a huge expansion of the FDA which would unleash a whole new army of FDA agents who run around the country auditing farms and greenhouse operations, then arresting those who don't have their paperwork in order. It's like a whole new TSA, except their agents aren't confined to airports. They come to you and search your farm, your greenhouse or even your backyard garden operation (no, small farms are not automatically exempted from the food safety bill as was claimed by those who supported it).

Congress once again fails to understand economics
This food safety bill was yet another "feel good" bill that nearly everyone in Congress supported. Who wouldn't want to be on the record voting for "food safety?"

But as usual, Congress forgets that it is spending other peoples' money. When you're spending the taxpayers' money, cost doesn't really matter, especially to those members of Congress who habitually think bigger government is the answer to every problem.

The real question, though, is the following: Is there a better way to spend $1.4 billion to save Americans' lives?

The answer is: absolutely!

For example, if you really want to save lives at a very low cost, all you need to do is hand out free vitamin D supplements to the population. Vitamin D3 supplements could easily be purchased for $10 for a 30-day supply (in volume). So a one-year supply of vitamin D would only cost $120. For $1.4 billion, you could provide a one-year supply of vitamin D for 11.6 million people, or nearly four percent of the U.S. population.

Because vitamin D prevents 77 percent of all cancers (http://www.naturalnews.com/021892.html), you could slash the rate of cancer fatalities during that year for nearly 4 percent of the U.S. population! At the same time, because vitamin D boosts immune function and provides greatly improved immunity, you would also sharply reduce deaths from winter colds and flu (which the CDC claims kill 30,000 people a year).

Vitamin D also helps prevent heart disease, obesity, kidney disorders and even psychiatric disorders such as autism and schizophrenia, meaning that with this one nutrient, you could slash the rates of several of the most devastating and costly diseases known to modern medicine.

Statistically speaking, you would save far more than 577 lives per year and at the same time, you would greatly reduce hospitalization costs and expenditures to the point where the $1.4 billion spent on these vitamin D supplements is actually paid back through the savings in Medicare / Medicaid expenditures.

In fact, the payback on a vitamin D investment by the government for the population might be more like ten to one: For every $100 spent on vitamin D supplements, $1,000 would likely be saved in medical costs. This is a rough estimate, but you get the idea: An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, as they say.

Instead of money going out the door, a vitamin D program would actually reduce overall government (and state) spending on sick-care management.

So if you really want to save lives and money at the same time, instead of handing another billion dollars to the FDA which will only use it against the people, it would make a lot more economic sense to invest that money in a low-cost, extremely safe and highly effective nutritional supplement that could sharply reduce cases of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, depression and even mental disorders.

Why can't Congress understand economics and make rational decisions about smarter ways to spend money? The answer, of course, is because it's not their money. This is why governments that spend taxpayer dollars always end up betraying the taxpayers. If it's not their money, there's never any real incentive to spend it wisely.

Economics 101
Congress has never really had a firm grasp on the fundamentals of economics, by the way. In spending your money, Congress acts with extreme arrogance, insisting that Big Government can solve your problems by spending more money -- any amount of money -- to keep you safe, secure and healthy. And they're going to force you into a sick-care system, have FDA agents auditing your backyard farms, and outlaw raw milk just to make sure you stay "healthy" in the way Congress wants you to (which really means keeping you sick, of course).

But as long as they're spending YOUR money, who's counting? It doesn't come out of the pockets of Congressional members, does it? They get paid the same whether they waste your money or not, so the motivation is to blow as much public money as necessary for them to take credit for passing new "safety measures" that sound good on paper but really represent an economic disaster.

It also brings up the question: How much is a human life worth when it comes to spending taxpayer dollars? Is it acceptable for the government to confiscate, for example, $1 million from the taxpayers to save the life of one person? If you answer "yes," then how about $10 million per life saved? How about $1 billion?

At what point do expenditures that are said to "protect lives" become economically unsustainable to the rest of the nation?

And if spending money is the way to protect people, then why not have the government hire a "personal shopping and food preparation coach" for each and every person in America who can do all their shopping and food washing to make sure they don't get e.coli poisoning? That would certainly save lives, too. As Big Government supporters might also add, it would "create jobs!" Sure it would, but government jobs don't count toward the economy -- they take away from the earnings of everyone else because they are funded with the confiscated tax dollars of the rest of the people who are actually working for a living!

Even government workers who earn a paycheck see their own paychecks reduced by the government to take out federal taxes that are used to hire yet more government workers somewhere else!

Risks are inherent in the world
In all this, there's also the point that your safety is not guaranteed in our world. Everything you do has some sort of risk associated with it, and most people do very little to avoid risks in the first place. People drive drunk. They fail to wear vehicle seatbelts. They go skiing and break their legs. They smoke cigarettes, they eat Happy Meals, they drink diet soda and they coat their bodies with toxic cosmetics and personal care products on a daily basis.

The average American bathes themselves in over 200 synthetic chemicals before they even leave the house in the morning! They don't even value their own lives enough to live a safe, healthy lifestyle to begin with.

Real food safety is completely ignored by the federal government
Even in the grocery store, there are all sorts of additional threats to your safety that this food bill doesn't cover. The food bill didn't say anything about the aspartame in diet soda and how it may contribute to brain cancer. It didn't mention the deadly ingredient sodium nitrite found in hot dogs and how it aggressively promotes cancer.

It also didn't cover the startling fact that the vast majority of all store-bought chickens are contaminated with salmonella right from the moment you buy them (http://www.naturalnews.com/028661_c...). Meat, you see, isn't covered under this food safety bill. And that's especially odd given that e.coli doesn't grow in plants -- it only grows in the guts of animals. It seems Congress failed to understand that simple biological point. They think e.coli magically appears in batches of spinach.

In fact, the grotesque and dangerous practices of the entire meat industry were completely ignored in the Food Safety Modernization Act. Instead, all the food safety problems are being blamed on plants. This means that $1.4 billion spent on food safety is actually going in the wrong direction! Instead of auditing greenhouses and small farms, the FDA food police should be going after the outrageously dangerous and inhumane practices of the factory animal operations such as cattle feedlots. That's where the food poisoning originates.

But, oh yeah, I forgot: The FDA doesn't cover that. It's the jurisdiction of the USDA. So why isn't Congress giving money to the USDA to inspect factory feedlot operations?

Because the corporations that run those feedlots have better lobbyists, of course. So Congress simply decided to throw the money at the FDA -- after all, the word "food" is in the agency's name -- and then take credit for "improving food safety" in the USA.

Keeping up appearances
When you're a member of Congress, you see, what's far more important than actually solving problems is to appear to solve problems. If wasting another few billion dollars gives you the ability to claim, during the next election, that you "voted for food safety," then that sounds great with voters. It might get you reelected so you can spend another two years wasting the taxpayers' money on even more Big Government programs.

That's the business of Congress, after all: Stay in office and keep claiming authority over the lives of the American people. And with the Food Safety Modernization Act, they now want to control what you grow, even as they do virtually nothing to improve the actual safety of the food you eat.

The truth of this whole scam is almost too much to swallow. In a nation where 100,000+ Americans are killed each year by FDA-approved medications, the government is going to spend $1.4 billion to try to prevent 1,443 deaths from food-borne illness while doing absolutely nothing to prevent pharmaceutical deaths.

No wonder the American people have lost faith in Big Government. Every time you take a rational look at what the government is doing, it all resembles a circus of morons competing to see who can take credit for coming up with the biggest lie that the American people will actually believe. And year after year, they somehow manage to out-do each other.


[Image: conspiracy_theory.jpg]
Reply
06-19-2011, 01:04 PM,
#44
RE: HR875 S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food - UPDATE: Stealth Passage via CR Addendum
Merged 4 Threads on HR875 and the S510 debacle in the US of A.
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
11-18-2011, 07:10 PM,
#45
RE: HR875 S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food - UPDATE: Stealth Passage via CR Addendum
The Southern Nevada Health District does their worst but the people don't let it phase them, well too much as they will keep on keeping on.

Quote:Outrage: Government Forces Private Citizens to Pour Bleach on Home-Grown Organic Food *Video*
Mac Slavo
November 10th, 2011

“He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.”
~The Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776

With 48 million Americans on federal food assistance we are bewildered by the latest government outrage from Nevada, where a group of private citizens gathered together at Quail Hollow Farm for a Farm-to-Fork dinner consisting of an organic spread prepared by Chef Gio were forced to dispatch and sanitize hundreds of pounds of food with bleach.

As invited guests began to arrive, mingle and satiate their appetites, one unexpected individual, operating under the auspices of the Southern Nevada Health District, had another plan in store for dinner.

The following outrageous first-hand account of the incident should make your blood boil. If it doesn’t then we don’t know what will.

Via Laura Bledsoe of Quail Hollow Farm:

[Video of the Event Can Be Viewed Below]

Our guests were excited to spend an evening together. The food was prepared exquisitely. The long dinner table, under the direction of dear friends, was absolutely stunningly beautiful. The music was superb. The stars were bright and life was really good.

And then, …

for a few moments, it felt like the rug was pulled out from underneath us and my wonderful world came crashing down. As guests were mingling, finishing tours of the farm, and while the first course of the meal was being prepared and ready to be sent out, a Southern Nevada Health District employee came for an inspection.

Because this was a gathering of people invited to our farm for dinner, I had no idea that the Health Department would become involved. I received a phone call from them two days before the event informing me that because this was a “public event” (I would like to know what is the definition of “public” and “private”) we would be required to apply for a “special use permit”.

If we did not do so immediately, we would be charged a ridiculous fine.

Stunned, we immediately complied.

We were in the middle of our harvest day for our CSA shares, a very busy time for us, but Monte immediately left to comply with the demand and filled out the required paper work and paid for the fee. (Did I mention that we live in Overton, nowhere near a Health Department office?) Paper work now in order, he was informed that we would not actually be given the permit until an inspector came to check it all out.

She came literally while our guests were arriving!

In order to overcome any trouble with the Health Department of cooking on the premises, most of the food was prepared in a certified kitchen in Las Vegas; and to further remove any doubt, we rented a certified kitchen trailer to be here on the farm for the preparation of the meals. The inspector, Mary Oaks, clearly not the one in charge of the inspection as she was constantly on the phone with her superior Susan somebody who was calling all the shots from who knows where.

Susan deemed our food unfit for consumption and demanded that we call off the event because:

1. Some of the prepared food packages did not have labels on them. (The code actually allows for this if it is to be consumed within 72 hours.)

2. Some of the meat was not USDA certified. (Did I mention that this was a farm to fork meal?)

3. Some of the food that was prepared in advance was not up to temperature at the time of inspection. (It was being prepared to be brought to proper temperature for serving when the inspection occurred.)

4. Even the vegetables prepared in advance had to be thrown out because they were cut and were then considered a “bio-hazard”.

5. We did not have receipts for our food. (Reminder! This food came from farms not from the supermarket! I have talked with several chefs who have said that in all their years cooking they have never been asked for receipts.)



The only way to keep our guests on the property was to destroy the food.

We asked the inspector if we could save the food for a private family event that we were having the next day. (A personal family choice to use our own food.) We were denied and she was insulted that we would even consider endangering our families health. I assured her that I had complete faith and trust in Giovanni our chef and the food that was prepared, (obviously, or I wouldn’t be wanting to serve it to our guests).

I then asked if we couldn’t feed the food to our “public guests” or even to our private family, then at least let us feed it to our pigs. (I think it should be a criminal action to waste any resource of the land. Being dedicated to our organic farm, we are forever looking for good inputs into our compost and soil and good food that can be fed to our animals. The animals and compost pile always get our left over garden surplus and food. We truly are trying to be as sustainable as possible.)

Again, a call to Susan and another negative response.



Not only were we denied the use of the food for any purpose, to ensure that it truly was unfit for feed of any kind we were again threatened with police action if we did not only throw the food in the trash, but then to add insult to injury, we were ordered to pour bleach on it.

Now the food is also unfit for compost as I would be negligent to allow any little critters to nibble on it while it was composting and ingest that bleach resulting in a horrible death. Literally hundreds of pounds of food was good for nothing but adding to our ever increasing land fill!





http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/outrage-government-forces-private-citizens-to-pour-bleach-on-home-grown-organic-food-video_11102011
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) FastTadpole 37 9,889 02-03-2014, 08:24 AM
Last Post: Herschel38
  Gun Buyback Illegal now in Colorado! shortwave 0 533 07-25-2013, 02:41 AM
Last Post: shortwave
  Another IP issue threatens an even more fundamental part of our daily lives: our food h3rm35 0 627 02-17-2012, 08:53 PM
Last Post: h3rm35
  EU food-supplement clampdown overrides consumer choice hilly7 2 1,584 03-11-2011, 06:00 PM
Last Post: snecker
  ACS:Law loses illegal file-sharing cases TriWooOx 2 1,004 12-13-2010, 03:28 PM
Last Post: rsol
  Mumia Abu Jamal update h3rm35 0 612 11-09-2010, 06:34 PM
Last Post: h3rm35
  Cap and Trade 101 FastTadpole 12 3,134 07-23-2010, 02:07 PM
Last Post: icosaface
  Go to Kmart & try to buy something non food without your ID NickHedge 4 1,694 07-05-2010, 03:46 AM
Last Post: NickHedge
Question Just Exactly What Is An "Illegal Alien"? NickHedge 0 682 05-20-2010, 09:26 PM
Last Post: NickHedge
  US Makes it Easier for China to Get Missile Technology, Then Sells Stockpile to Taiwan FastTadpole 1 1,125 01-30-2010, 08:25 PM
Last Post: FastTadpole

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)