Hous of Reps. #875/Protect our organic food!

[hiitdogs]

.

The problem with this bill is the potential to put small, local, and organic food producers in serious jeopardy under a burden of excess bureaucracy and regulation. The little guy isn't the problem with the food chain...they're close to their product in every phase of production. It's the big industrial producers who are so incredibly far removed from the food they produce that crap like the e coli incident can happen.

I agree it is the big industrial producers who are the problem but maybe someone can point me to where in the bill it says or implies anything about small, organic. local food producers? And where does it say anything about food grown at home for your own use? I have read through the bill several times.

 

[LauraMax]

You're kidding, right?

No.

"The problem with this bill is the potential to put small, local, and organic food producers in serious jeopardy under a burden of excess bureaucracy and regulation."

Oh no! Not the "R" word! Because deregulation has worked so well with every other business.

Amy, in trying to be concise I don't think I articulated what I was trying to say very well. Let me try again:

The amount of food consumed by humans is a teeny tiny part of our ecosystem. The amount of food that's bioengineered and/or grown w/pesticides is an even teeny tinier part of that teeny tiny part. If I have a choice betw. pesticides & engineered food which will somehow result in the death of biodiversity, or non-pest controlled, non-engineered food which will result in any number of critters contaminating it w/any number of incredibly unhealthy & disgusting expectoration (good thing that contamination would be ORGANIC!), then I pick the pesticides.

 

[Gayle]

I agree it is the big industrial producers who are the problem but maybe someone can point me to where in the bill it says or implies anything about small, organic. local food producers? And where does it say anything about food grown at home for your own use? I have read through the bill several times.

It doesn't note them specifically, but the bill as written implies that they would be included by the definition of a "food production facility". Putting them under the same administrative regulations as industrial producers. So when the "facility's" staff includes the farmer (who's already pulling 15 hour days) and a couple of part-time hands, these regulations become burdensome to the point of failure. Not mention that there are probably associated costs to getting approved/certified/whatever. I'm not sure how the "home use grown" food would fall into this unless you gave your food away...heck, we've been known to put extra zucchini out at the end of the driveway for sale.

If there were exceptions to this bill made exclusions for small producers, I think it *might* be more palatable, but as it stands, no.

ETA: I think there's still a lot to the interpretation of this bill that needs to be ironed out, but overall the fact that Monsanto has a hand in it speaks very badly about it for me.

 

[Stephanie0523]

It may not mean much to you, but I live in an area where the small farm is a HUGE part the community, the economy, the culture, and the environment.

Gayle, I'm not insensitive to small farmers. I have family who own a farm in up-state NY. I know that regulations can be a burden, but I still feel that anything that is sold for public consumption should be safe. I don't bend on that.

 

[Gayle]

The amount of food consumed by humans is a teeny tiny part of our ecosystem. The amount of food that's bioengineered and/or grown w/pesticides is an even teeny tinier part of that teeny tiny part. If I have a choice betw. pesticides & engineered food which will somehow result in the death of biodiversity, or non-pest controlled, non-engineered food which will result in any number of critters contaminating it w/any number of incredibly unhealthy & disgusting expectoration (good thing that contamination would be ORGANIC!), then I pick the pesticides.

Two words: Soybeans & corn.

85% of the soybeans grown in the U.S. are GM as is about 1/3 of its corn. Given the prominence of these crops in the typical grocery store (pick a label...any label), the "teeny tiny" qualifier is woefully incorrect.

 

[Gayle]

I know that regulations can be a burden, but I still feel that anything that is sold for public consumption should be safe. I don't bend on that.

ITA, but I don't think a big industrial farm should be regulated in quite the same way as a small one. I think there need to be variations and nuances applied to any such bill so we all don't end up having to eat iceberg lettuce and those-bland-but-transportable mealy tomatoes...blech.

ETA: I think there can be different means to the same end.

 

[LauraMax]

Two words: Soybeans & corn.

85% of the soybeans grown in the U.S. are GM as is about 1/3 of its corn. Given the prominence of these crops in the typical grocery store (pick a label...any label), the "teeny tiny" qualifier is woefully incorrect.

OK then, please give me the percentage of soybeans & corn in relation to the entire world's ecosystem.

 

[Stephanie0523]

I respectfully bow out. You guys brought numbers into the mix, and I'm a word gal.

Gayle and Baylian -- no hard feelings. I love a good political/policy debate. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

(But I still think I'm right. )

 

[Gayle]

OK then, please give me the percentage of soybeans & corn in relation to the entire world's ecosystem.

Laura, are you capable of seeing past the tip of your nose?

 

[Gayle]

I respectfully bow out. You guys brought numbers into the mix, and I'm a word gal.

Gayle and Baylian -- no hard feelings. I love a good political/policy debate. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

(But I still think I'm right. )

Stephanie - I think your totally right about food safety, I just have issues with this bill in particular. Who knows, it could be re-worked in committee to a point where I'd support it.

 

[LauraMax]

Laura, are you capable of seeing past the tip of your nose?

Wow. Nothing like hurling around a few insults when you can't back up your argument. So typical of you Gayle. You should either move out of your glass house or quit throwing stones.

 

[sparrow13]

Stephanie - I think your totally right about food safety, I just have issues with this bill in particular. Who knows, it could be re-worked in committee to a point where I'd support it.

Gayle, once again ITA! (And Stephanie I agree with the importance of food safety!) I don't like the bill as it stands right now because it is overly-broad/undefined and stands to potentially crush our small farmers who are already struggling.

Have you seen King Corn?

Sparrow

 

[Gayle]

Okay, Laura, let's see if I can appeal to you liberal sensibilities (which I happen to share to an extent).

Biodiversity is very important in the eradication of poverty worldwide. These were articulated in some of the links I posted, but here's a snippet:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Biodiversity matters to the hungry and malnourished


Currently, there are well over 800 million people who do not have enough to eat. What's more, population growth is not expected to level out until the 9 billion mark is reached. To end hunger and provide enough food to meet the global demand, FAO estimates that agricultural production must increase by more than 75 percent in the next 50 years.
Harnessing biodiversity will be the key. Farmers will require new varieties capable of producing under diverse conditions, without large amounts of fertilizers and other agrochemicals. The genetic diversity contained in different varieties provides farmers and professional plant breeders with options to develop, through selection and breeding, new and more productive crops, crops that are nutritious and resistant to pests and diseases.
Livestock keepers need a broad gene pool to draw upon if they are to improve the characteristics of their animals under changing conditions. Traditional breeds, suited to local conditions, survive times of drought and distress better than exotic breeds and, therefore, frequently offer poor farmers better protection against hunger.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

[Gayle]

Have you seen King Corn?

I've seen small pieces of it. It's one of those things that I don't rent because it'll make me mad, like "Who Killed the Electric Car".

 

[hiitdogs]

Putting them under the same administrative regulations as industrial producers. So when the "facility's" staff includes the farmer (who's already pulling 15 hour days) and a couple of part-time hands, these regulations become burdensome to the point of failure. Not mention that there are probably associated costs to getting approved/certified/whatever.

What administrative regulations in the bill would you be worried about? I am a big supporter of local farmers and buy mainly organic, locally grown produce, maybe I am blind but I haven't seen anything in the bill that I would consider unreasonable or designed to put small or organic farmers out of business.

I guess even the Organic Consumer's Association called the paranoia over 875 the "internet rumor of the week" and states
"The Organic Consumers Association is not taking a position for or against this bill, but encouraging its members to write to Congress to urge it to enact food safety legislation that addresses the inherent dangers of our industrialized food system without burdening certified organic and farm-to-consumer operations."

Me personally, I don't think it is unreasonable for any small business, farmer or not to maintain records. The only thing I would be worried about is the potential of abuse through whoever the "administrator" would be.

I find the hysteria about the bill a little over the top - if we grow our own produce we will get fined $ 1 Mio ..... come on now!!! I am not a fan of Monsanto in any way shape or form but I don't get how they would benefit from that legislation. I guess the only connection is that Rep. DeLauro's husband works for Monsanto as a researcher or does anyone have any additional information?

 

[LauraMax]

I know all that Gayle. Believe it or not, I've done some research on my own. And I came to a different conclusion than you did. I actually came to the conclusion that scientific advances will solve many of the problems you described. However I tried to read sources that supported both sides of the arguments. Apparently if someone disagrees w/you it warrants nastiness & insults.

And you know what? The research was sitting much further than the tip of my nose.

But hey, at least you responded w/more than a "STFU" this time. Of course, you're not an intellectual, so I understand & sympathize w/your inarticulate responses.

 

[sparrow13]

I find the hysteria about the bill a little over the top

As do I actually. Some of the action alerts I've received have been a little too much even for me, and I usually appreciate a good drama. Hyperbole and hysterical language rarely accomplish anything worthwhile.

 

[Gayle]

I know all that Gayle. Believe it or not, I've done some research on my own. And I came to a different conclusion than you did. I actually came to the conclusion that scientific advances will solve many of the problems you described. However I tried to read sources that supported both sides of the arguments. Apparently if someone disagrees w/you it warrants nastiness & insults.

And you know what? The research was sitting much further than the tip of my nose.

But hey, at least you responded w/more than a "STFU" this time. Of course, you're not an intellectual, so I understand & sympathize w/your inarticulate responses.

Fascinating...

 

[Gayle]

Me personally, I don't think it is unreasonable for any small business, farmer or not to maintain records. The only thing I would be worried about is the potential of abuse through whoever the "administrator" would be.

I agree, but I think that's where the biggest questions in this bill lie. The devil is in the details. For example, there are livestock producers who go to great and expensive lengths (i.e. GPS) to track and inventory their stock. If such a method were imposed on *all* producers (not that the bill says it it, I'm just hypothesizing), it would put the business of farming out of reach. Like I mentioned to Stephanie, this bill could become something that's workable, but now is the time to let our representatives know that the welfare of our small and organic farms is an important consideration.

I also agree that the Internet furor is kinda over the top, but it makes for fun reading.

I can't find another connection to Monsanto aside from the bill's creator being married to a researcher. Is there a place where you can find info on lobbying?

ETA: Dawn - Sorry for hijacking your thread!

 

[NY25]

(5) CATEGORY 1 FOOD ESTABLISHMENT- The term ‘category 1 food establishment’ means a food establishment (other than a seafood processing establishment) that slaughters, for the purpose of producing food, animals that are not subject to inspection under the Federal Meat Inspection Act or poultry that are not subject to inspection under the Poultry Products Inspection Act.

(6) CATEGORY 2 FOOD ESTABLISHMENT- The term ‘category 2 food establishment’ means a seafood processing establishment or other food establishment (other than a category 1 establishment) not subject to inspection under the Federal Meat Inspection Act, the Poultry Products Inspection Act, or the Egg Products Inspection Act, that processes raw seafood or other raw animal products, whether fresh or frozen, or other products that the Administrator determines by regulation to pose a significant risk of hazardous contamination.

(7) CATEGORY 3 FOOD ESTABLISHMENT- The term ‘category 3 food establishment’ means a food establishment (other than a category 1 or category 2 establishment) that processes cooked, pasteurized, or otherwise ready-to-eat seafood or other animal products, fresh produce in ready-to-eat raw form, or other products that pose a risk of hazardous contamination.

(8) CATEGORY 4 FOOD ESTABLISHMENT- The term ‘category 4 food establishment’ means a food establishment that processes all other categories of food products not described in paragraphs (5) through (7).

(9) CATEGORY 5 FOOD ESTABLISHMENT- The term ‘category 5 food establishment’ means a food establishment that stores, holds, or transports food products prior to delivery for retail sale.

Here is the actual bill: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-875

Where does it mention home gardens? Oh, it doesn't!

However, Mr Olson says: ".. but local agriculture doesn't need government because it takes care of itself." It regulates itself!
That should work - look how well that argument worked for Wall Street!!

Hey, Chicken Little, I'm hungry!! Please, bring me another downer cow that you fed a ground up downer cow (lest you forget that mad cow is man made). With a side order of peanut butter and jalepeno sauce!!