Elinor Everywhere Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 This really pisses me off http://rt.com/usa/monsanto-congress-silently-slips-830/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim in Appalachia Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 That really is infuriating. And it shows how paid off our elected officals are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dandelion Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 Sickening. But since at least one senator read this rider and proposed stripping it from HR5973, it seems that other senators should have been aware. I honestly can not fathom how our senators and representatives can, in good conscience, vote on bills without reading them. The article mentions that the rider was unknown to most senators prior to its approval. But riders get attached and are available for review before the voting takes place. If they read it and passed it knowingly, shame on them for not allowing citizens legitimate recourse for health impacts arising from GMOs. If they didn't read it and passed it anyway, that's even worse IMO - because that means they're not doing their jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 I am furious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 I cannot even begin to describe how I feel about this and not end up banned. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: Faith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6packofun Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 That really makes me angry. :( :cursing: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I talk to the trees Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 Money talks. The fact that this is a family-friendly board prevents me from adding anything to that statement. :thumbdown: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elinor Everywhere Posted March 28, 2013 Author Share Posted March 28, 2013 Ulgh infuriating and horrible. And ominous. Yes, this is what's so infuriating. People seem to be such passive sheep on this issue! Our politicians, BOTH parties, are literally killing us with these decisions. I'm all about CHOICE - choice of marriage partners, choice of educating my kids, and the choice to know what is going into our bodies! I can't believe no one cares that we are slowly losing our choice and living in a police state, where Monsanto seems to be some omnipotent deity. So bizarre. Some think this is over-reacting, but I'm not saying "ban GMO" (well, I wish). But I AM saying "let me know what I'm eating, and I'll decide for myself!!!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunnyDays Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Unbelievable. Well, not really... But infuriating. I completely agree that GMO products should be labeled. I don't understand the hold Monsanto has over our government. It's money, yes, but how is that different from all the other wealthy companies with lobbyists!?! I also can't understand how Congress can't pass a budget, can't decide how to pay down our debt or fix the economy, but protection for GMOs? They're all over that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucy in Australia Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 I don't understand the hold Monsanto has over our government. It's money, yes, but how is that different from all the other wealthy companies with lobbyists!?! Yep. Of all the things happening in this world, the whole Monsanto "super-force" might be the one that turns me into a conspiracy theorist :ph34r: I just don't understand how it's gotten so big, so fast, so powerful & so pervasive with apparently so little opposition. Just another reason to expand my veggie patch :glare: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim in Appalachia Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Yep. Of all the things happening in this world, the whole Monsanto "super-force" might be the one that turns me into a conspiracy theorist :ph34r: I just don't understand how it's gotten so big, so fast, so powerful & so pervasive with apparently so little opposition. Just another reason to expand my veggie patch :glare: Bit of a spin off, but I read a great book last year called Wind up Girl that was loosely based on what happens when Monsanto like companies run the world. The book is ecological dystopian, as well as a great read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoughCollie Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Sickening. But since at least one senator read this rider and proposed stripping it from HR933, it seems that other senators should have been aware. I honestly can not fathom how our senators and representatives can, in good conscience, vote on bills without reading them. The article mentions that the rider was unknown to most senators prior to its approval. But riders get attached and are available for review before the voting takes place. If they read it and passed it knowingly, shame on them for not allowing citizens legitimate recourse for health impacts arising from GMOs. If they didn't read it and passed it anyway, that's even worse IMO - because that means they're not doing their jobs. There's the trouble (bolded & enlarged). Too many of them don't have one. I'm not kidding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tammyla Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 :confused: :scared: I wanted to scream when I read this. I've got to go to the garden center today and pick up some very expensive Heirloom seeds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 There's the trouble (bolded & enlarged). Too many of them don't have one. I'm not kidding. No conscience, not even certain they have souls! Faith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reflections Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 and the piece was evidently unknown to most Democrats (who hold the majority in the Senate) prior to its approval as part of HR 993, the short-term funding bill that was approved to avoid a federal government shutdown. and the rider was introduced anonymously as the larger bill progressed through the Senate Appropriations Committee why are riders like this even legal??? I get why people feel so helpless, and seem like sheep - stuff like this happens all.the.time. and nothing that anyone says, or protests about seems to make any difference, so why bother? AND people who do complain and fight are marginalized and made out to be loons. I am very pessimistic about what this world will look like when my children are moms and dads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrothead Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Oh, they have got to go. :cursing: :cursing: :cursing: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briansmama Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 It infuriates me that other countries have BANNED GMO's because of the health risks they pose for their citizens and the US Government not only claims GMOs are safe but goes so far as to PROTECT the corporations manufacturing GMOs! It's disappointing, sick, and wrong. And it reminds me of our government's unwavering protection to Big Pharma as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4everHis Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Because I totally do not get 'legalize' can someone explain where and what wording protects Monsanto? I'm not being snarky I really want to understand/see it. H.R. 5973: Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2013 (The "Farmer Assurance Provision" AKA Monsanto Protection Act) Sec. 733. In the event that a determination of non-regulated status made pursuant to section 411 of the Plant Protection Act is or has been invalidated or vacated, the Secretary of Agriculture shall, notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon request by a farmer, grower, farm operator, or producer, immediately grant temporary permit(s) or temporary deregulation in part, subject to necessary and appropriate conditions consistent with section 411(a) or 412© of the Plant Protection Act, which interim conditions shall authorize the movement, introduction, continued cultivation, commercialization and other specifically enumerated activities and requirements, including measures designed to mitigate or minimize potential adverse environmental effects, if any, relevant to the Secretary’s evaluation of the petition for non-regulated status, while ensuring that growers or other users are able to move, plant, cultivate, introduce into commerce and carry out other authorized activities in a timely manner: Provided, That all such conditions shall be applicable only for the interim period necessary for the Secretary to complete any required analyses or consultations related to the petition for non-regulated status: Provided further, That nothing in this section shall be construed as limiting the Secretary’s authority under section 411, 412 and 414 of the Plant Protection Act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrothead Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 It infuriates me that other countries have BANNED GMO's because of the health risks they pose for their citizens and the US Government not only claims GMOs are safe but goes so far as to PROTECT the corporations manufacturing GMOs! It's disappointing, sick, and wrong. And it reminds me of our government's unwavering protection to Big Pharma as well. Big Ag: "We will grow crap fake food that will poison them." Big Pharma: "Well, give us the info that will cure the poison. We can all be rich from this little scheme." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravinlunachick Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Because I totally do not get 'legalize' can someone explain where and what wording protects Monsanto? I'm not being snarky I really want to understand/see it. H.R. 5973: Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2013 (The "Farmer Assurance Provision" AKA Monsanto Protection Act) Sec. 733. In the event that a determination of non-regulated status made pursuant to section 411 of the Plant Protection Act is or has been invalidated or vacated, the Secretary of Agriculture shall, notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon request by a farmer, grower, farm operator, or producer, immediately grant temporary permit(s) or temporary deregulation in part, subject to necessary and appropriate conditions consistent with section 411(a) or 412© of the Plant Protection Act, which interim conditions shall authorize the movement, introduction, continued cultivation, commercialization and other specifically enumerated activities and requirements, including measures designed to mitigate or minimize potential adverse environmental effects, if any, relevant to the Secretary’s evaluation of the petition for non-regulated status, while ensuring that growers or other users are able to move, plant, cultivate, introduce into commerce and carry out other authorized activities in a timely manner: Provided, That all such conditions shall be applicable only for the interim period necessary for the Secretary to complete any required analyses or consultations related to the petition for non-regulated status: Provided further, That nothing in this section shall be construed as limiting the Secretary’s authority under section 411, 412 and 414 of the Plant Protection Act. http://badskeptic.co...-protection-act (warning: some bad language) After reading both the link in the OP and the one I posted, I'm not sure WHAT to think. eta snopes link, which is at the bottom of the bad skeptic article: http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/mpa.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4everHis Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 http://badskeptic.co...-protection-act (warning: some bad language) After reading both the link in the OP and the one I posted, I'm not sure WHAT to think. eta snopes link, which is at the bottom of the bad skeptic article: http://www.snopes.co...usiness/mpa.asp As much as I don't like Monsanto I don't want to spread lies. It's all such a muddle and both sides so easily exaggerate and/or cover up that I feel like there's not much hope of finding out the Truth! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aslana Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Wading in as a newb here. Exactly as Ravinlunachick stated. This is NOT a "protect Monsanto" bill. It's not really a "protect farmers from Monsanto" bill either, but what it does do is protect the farmers more from Monsanto than it did in the past. Monsanto is bad, bad. And they are bullies to the farmers. This bill allows farmers to be protected from losing ALL of their crops should something happen. Basically, as I understand Monsanto from Food Inc., if a farmer plants Monsanto seeds in one farm and the farm next to his does not plant Monsanto seeds but through fertilization the seeds get mixed up (maybe a bad wind storm mixed them?), the farmer who did not have Monsanto permission to use their seeds (even though he didn't actually use them) will get shut down by Monsanto. And previously, there was no protection for farmers because of this. As I read this bill, it sounds as though it will now protect that one farmer who was found to have Monsanto seeds on his farm even though he has no control over the wind. Which is a good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4everHis Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Wading in as a newb here. Exactly as Ravinlunachick stated. This is NOT a "protect Monsanto" bill. It's not really a "protect farmers from Monsanto" bill either, but what it does do is protect the farmers more from Monsanto than it did in the past. Monsanto is bad, bad. And they are bullies to the farmers. This bill allows farmers to be protected from losing ALL of their crops should something happen. Basically, as I understand Monsanto from Food Inc., if a farmer plants Monsanto seeds in one farm and the farm next to his does not plant Monsanto seeds but through fertilization the seeds get mixed up (maybe a bad wind storm mixed them?), the farmer who did not have Monsanto permission to use their seeds (even though he didn't actually use them) will get shut down by Monsanto. And previously, there was no protection for farmers because of this. As I read this bill, it sounds as though it will now protect that one farmer who was found to have Monsanto seeds on his farm even though he has no control over the wind. Which is a good thing. Well now, that is totally opposite of this being a 'protect Monsanto' law. What the heck? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aslana Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Well now, that is totally opposite of this being a 'protect Monsanto' law. What the heck? I understand that. If you read the link ravinlunachick posted, my summary came from that. The writer at that link does address your very question and explains why it isn't exactly a bill that protects Monsanto but more of a bill that somewhat protects the farmers. The point is, nothing in this bill actually states it protects Monsanto from lawsuits regarding health issues. I'm not sure if linking to a source like snopes is allowed, but you can go there and see what they have to say about this issue. They do cover the "not quite" aspect of this--the part that everybody thinks this bill is going to fully protect Monsanto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunnyDays Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Hmm. That is odd. I just glanced at both links but I'm confused too. Maybe it would help if Congress wrote things in plain English. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dandelion Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 I've read both the Bad Skeptic article and most of the Snopes review linked above. IMO Snopes provided a more balanced perspective on this. In looking at a few other sources as well, here's what I think is going on here. The rider provides certain protections for both farmers and developers of GE crops, such as Monsanto. That's why it's so confusing because each side is only highlighting the risks/benefits of this bill from their own perspective. Both sides benefit (although I would argue that the protection for large biotech companies is probably much more far-reaching here). If you look at the text of H.R.5973 provided in connib's post above, you see that it provides recourse for "farmers, growers, farm operators, or producers". So yes, there are protections there for farmers. But "producers" means companies like Monsanto. And this rider/bill does allow GMO producers like Monsanto to continue marketing and planting GM seeds, despite any regulation issues that come up or health risks that are identified. In the past, federal courts were able to enact a moratorium while a case was under review, but this bill nixes this power and allows the biotech industry to continue business as usual without restraint even after it's determined that there's a regulatory or health issue. It can take years for the USDA to conduct their investigations of these issues, and decisions can be held up even longer if they get tied up in court. That was the gist of the concern in the article linked in the OP. From what I've read, organic and non-GMO farmers are mostly opposed to this bill. Likely because if there's a dispute between a farmer and Monsanto et. al. that somehow triggers the provisions of this bill, Monsanto is the 800 pound gorilla that can throw its weight around to shift the protections in its favor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.