It is currently Sat Jun 15, 2019 11:10 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
 Senate Bill 510 potentially illegalizes gardens/seed saving 
Author Message
GT Truther
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 9:20 pm
Posts: 143
Post Senate Bill 510 potentially illegalizes gardens/seed saving
Senate Bill S 510 Food Safety Modernization Act vote imminent: Would outlaw gardening and saving seeds

(NaturalNews) Senate Bill 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act, has been called "the most dangerous bill in the history of the United States of America." It would grant the U.S. government new authority over the public's right to grow, trade and transport any foods. This would give Big brother the power to regulate the tomato plants in your backyard. It would grant them the power to arrest and imprison people selling cucumbers at farmer's markets. It would criminalize the transporting of organic produce if you don't comply with the authoritarian rules of the federal government....

...This tyrannical law puts all food production (yes, even food produced in your own garden) under the authority of the Department of Homeland Security....

...It would criminalize seed saving (http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2009/0 ... lize-them/), turning backyard gardeners who save heirloom seeds into common criminals. This is obviously designed to give corporations like Monsanto a monopoly over seeds....

http://www.naturalnews.com/030418_Food_ ... seeds.html


Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:26 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:59 am
Posts: 6532
Location: Friendswood, TX
Post Re: Senate Bill 510 potentially illegalizes gardens/seed saving
Sorry, PJ, but it is a hoax. See link below to Snopes:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/organic.asp

_________________
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little. - FDR


Tue Nov 16, 2010 3:03 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:54 am
Posts: 4866
Location: Canada
Post Re: Senate Bill 510 potentially illegalizes gardens/seed saving
Phew becasue this would be beyond stupid IMHO :crazy

_________________
Image Please Obey the Golden Rules viewtopic.php?f=31&t=3563&p=40912#p40912


Tue Nov 16, 2010 4:06 pm
Profile WWW
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:21 am
Posts: 2748
Post Re: Senate Bill 510 potentially illegalizes gardens/seed saving
BB, first, the link you gave refers to HR 875 not S510. Additionally, I have recently found Snopes to be suspiciously like a voice for the "party line". I have found Natural News and Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, to be knowledgeable and honest.

Some other facts excerpted from other sites:

According to the National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association, which opposes the legislation, “S.B. 510 will have the unintended destructive consequence of eliminating small farms and consumer access to local food.”

While the legislation does not overtly seek to shut down farms, it does expand the government’s power to inspect the small, local operations that sell food such as vegetables, milk or homegrown meats. And unfortunately, according to the NICFA, it would also give inspectors the power to feasibly shut down a farm upon inspection.

....any time the government is able to regulate what is grown in private businesses or family-owned farms, it is taking rights away from everyone.

With the economy struggling and high unemployment threatening people’s livelihoods, let’s hope the government can come up with something better than new regulation that will only harm small businesses.
http://www.wnewsj.com/main.asp?SectionI ... eID=185120
******************************

Wonder why the National Guard or Federal agents have effectively imposed martial law by quarantining your town? Under S.B. 510’s House counterpart bill, H.R. 2749 (which has already passed the House!)(Section 133b, “Authority to Prohibit or Restrict the Movement of Food”), sponsored by Congressman Dingell, the Secretary of Health and Human Services will have the power to prohibit all movement of all food within a geographic area, whether the food is in your grandmother’s grocery bag in her Toyota Hybrid or on a flatbed. No court order will be needed, just a phone call to the appropriate state official and a public announcement will be sufficient.

.............. Amazed that U.S. food safety regulations strangely match those of other countries? Well, Section 306 of S.B. 510 would require “Recommendations to harmonize requirements under the Codex Alimentarius.” (How long have we been aware of the dangers of Codex Alimentarius? I've been watching it for at least 4 -5 years, other people probably much longer.)

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-ne ... e-entirely
************************
Will the Food Safety Bill Make Food Safe?
By Alison Rose Levy 10/28/2010
I read the bill and the proposed amendment and spoke with leading experts from organizations that support — and others that oppose — the bill to answer a few basic questions:

1) Are small and/or local suppliers exempt from onerous provisions that would drive them out of business?
..... the proposed Tester Amendment (up this week for a vote for inclusion in S510) would, if included, go even further. It would definitely make small providers adhere to more modest reporting requirements, and exempt them from the extensive ones required of larger companies. The flexibility would also extend to food products sold locally.

Concerned consumers can write their Senators to request inclusion of the complete language of the Tester Amendment, which would also exempt home gardens.

James S. Turner, Chairman of Citizens for Health:
Quote:
“We have the most contaminated food supply of any industrialized country because of the way FDA applies laws,” says Turner, who I interviewed this week (listen here). “The problem is that the words written on paper and the way the FDA typically enforces are two different things.”


2) How exactly will S510 make food safer?
...... the FDA’s stated aim will be to enforce labeling, tracking and monitoring practices, not safer growing practices. In addition, S510 aims to coordinate with Homeland Security to decrease any perceived risks of terrorism impacting the U.S. food supply.

S510 neither mandates nor mentions the safer practices that health consumers and small, farm-friendly groups typically ask for, such as a ban on the use of:
con. here: http://www.allvoices.com/s/event-454806 ... Vucy5vcmcv
**********************

For those interested in comparing the actual contents of the bill to claims made on both sides, a summary is available here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z ... D&summ2=m&

Here are a few highlights which, IMHO, can be easily used/interpreted to benefit the corporate giants, especially Monsanto:
Quote:
expand the authority of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to inspect records related to food, including to: (1) allow the inspection of records of food that the Secretary reasonably believes is likely to be affected in a similar manner as an adulterated food; and (2) require that each person (excluding farms and restaurants) who manufactures, processes, packs, distributes, receives, holds, or imports an article of food permit inspection of his or her records if the Secretary believes that there is a reasonable probability that the use of or exposure to such food will cause serious adverse health consequences or death.


Quote:
(Sec. 105) Sets forth provisions related to produce safety, including to require the Secretary to: (1) establish science-based minimum standards for the safe production and harvesting of those types of fruits and vegetables that are raw agricultural commodities to minimize the risk of serious adverse health consequences or death;


Quote:
(Sec. 404) Declares that nothing in this Act shall be construed in a manner inconsistent with the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization or any other treaty or international agreement to which the United States is a party

(How do you read this? My interpretation is that the US must make its laws in conformity with international treaties, agreements and organizations to which it is a party. IOW, global control over food supplies)

Quote:
(Sec. 406) Requires the Secretary, acting through the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, to study the transportation of food for consumption in the United States, including an examination of the unique needs of rural and frontier areas with regard to the delivery of safe food.


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z ... D&summ2=m&

This bill may not say specifically that I can't grown my own tomatoes and share them with my neighbors, or that I can't save my own seed from Heirloom plants, but you can bet I'm staying below the radar, because the rules are there and the interpretation is left to the FDA and DHS. and I don't think this is JMHO.

_________________
"A time comes when silence is betrayal." - Martin Luther King

"The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything." ~ Albert Einstein


Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:28 pm
Profile YIM
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:54 am
Posts: 4866
Location: Canada
Post Re: Senate Bill 510 potentially illegalizes gardens/seed saving
Just when I thought it was safe :scared

Great work Ruts, your invaluable to this forum!

We should put this to the GT Thread and make this information wide spread, just my opinion of course!

_________________
Image Please Obey the Golden Rules viewtopic.php?f=31&t=3563&p=40912#p40912


Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:34 pm
Profile WWW
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:59 am
Posts: 6532
Location: Friendswood, TX
Post Re: Senate Bill 510 potentially illegalizes gardens/seed saving
Sep 29, 2010: Cloture motion on the motion to proceed to the bill presented in Senate

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-510

As you can see above, the HB is dead. It was deferred to the Senate bill but it is still the same bill.

http://maplight.org/us-congress/bill/111-s-510/360488/total-contributions

Organizations that took a position on FDA Food Safety Modernization Act

29 organizations support this bill

American Bakers Association
American Beverage Association
American Farm Bureau Federation
American Frozen Food Institute
American Public Health Association
American Veterinary Medical Association
Center for Foodborne Illness Research and Prevention
Center for Science in the Public Interest
Consumer Federation of America
Consumers Union
Food Marketing Institute
(Grocery Manufacturers Association
International Bottled Water Association
International Dairy Foods Association
International Foodservice Distributors Association
Kraft Foods North America
National Association of Manufacturers
National Coffee Association
National Confectioners Association
National Consumers League
National Fisheries Institute
National Restaurant Association
Pew Charitable Trust
Produce Marketing Association
Safe Tables Our Priority (STOP)
Snack Food Association
Trust for America's Health
United Fresh Produce Association

10 organizations oppose this bill
American Grassfed Association
Carolina Farm Stewardship Association
Farm Family Defenders
Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund
National Family Farm Coalition
National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association
Raw Milk Association of Colorado
Small Farms Conservancy
The John Birch Society :roll
Weston A. Price Foundation

Small Farms Gain From Compromise on S. 510 - August 2010

Though the recently-released Senate food safety bill didn't include a controversial bisphenol-A ban or an amendment by Jon Tester (D-MT) to exempt small producers from certain measures, the package did include several amendments aimed at easing the regulatory burden on small-scale farms and food facilities.

The manager's package for the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (S. 510), released by a bipartisan group of Senators late last week, is the result of "a long and arduous set of negotiations," according to the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, the group leading the effort to tailor the legislation to prevent unintended harm to the burgeoning sustainable, local, small-scale food movement.

http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2010/08/s-510-compromise-contains-key-changes-for-small-farms/

_________________
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little. - FDR


Wed Nov 17, 2010 7:28 am
Profile
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:21 am
Posts: 2748
Post Re: Senate Bill 510 potentially illegalizes gardens/seed saving
From what I'm seeing online, the vote on S510 and the possible addition of S3767 as an amendment to S510 is happening TODAY!!

There is so much information online that I can't possibly post it all here. Following are a few talking points, among many, for those wishing to call or email their senators on this vote:

Quote:
S3767 - puts new and criminal enforcement provisions into FDA law, mandating that if a person knowingly violates specific food laws with conscious or reckless disregard of a risk of death or serious bodily injury, they will be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.


Re S510:
Quote:
3. As an example of the type of controls imposed, Section 106 provides in part for the regulations issued to be kept secret from the public, “In the interest of national security, the Secretary … may determine the time and manner in which the guidance documents issued under paragraph (1) are made public…”


Re small farms:
Quote:
8. S.510 fails to protect local food production. An amendment offered by Senator Tester to “protect” family farms falls very short of the Food Freedom Amendment, ultimately only partially protecting a few very small family farms, representing a small percentage of local food production, and as inflation kicks in, without indexing, the “protections” will become meaningless.


http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=6910
****************************
CLOTURE: (I admit that I am not as learned as I should be as a citizen regarding workings of our legislative bodies. I wasn't sure what cloture meant, so I looked it up. Very briefly, here is the meaning:)

Quote:

cloture - The only procedure by which the Senate can vote to place a time limit on consideration of a bill or other matter, and thereby overcome a filibuster. Under the cloture rule (Rule XXII), the Senate may limit consideration of a pending matter to 30 additional hours, but only by vote of three-fifths of the full Senate, normally 60 votes.

*********************

House Bill - The House of Representatives passed H.R. 2749: Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009 on July 30, 2009. The bill was sent to the Senate where it was read twice. If the Senate bill S510 passes this week, then a committee will form of senators and representatives to settle any discrepancies between the two bills.
**********************

Re: the Tester Amendment (supposed to protect small farmers)
Quote:
the Make Our Food Safe Coalition — a group of consumer and public health organizations, including the Pew Trusts’ food safety efforts — has serious concerns about the amendment offered by Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont.

snip

Our coalition’s position is that their needs to be a risk component,” she said. “The exemptions should only apply to low-risk products. The whole foundation for S. 510 is risk-based and this could really undermine that.”

Eskin said the Produce Safety Campaign is pushing for shrinking the criteria in the Tester amendment to apply only to produce marketed only 100-150 miles from the farm, adding a component to recognize risk and including a requirement that any food exempt from the law to disclose that fact.

http://thepacker.com/Senate-poised-to-a ... ES&aid=117

(Hmmm... If I am going to my local Farmers' Market to buy some fresh veggies, and there is a label stating that this food is exempt from the safe food law, and I'm not versed in the subtleties of "Food Safety" laws, I might not buy that food from Farmer John but decide to go to my supermarket where all the food is "safe" because it is overseen by the Safe Food laws.

I'll stop there; if you are interested in the issue, there is a TON of info just by googling a few terms. My take on all this?

Disclaimer: The following is the express opinion of the poster and not those of the site, or any admin or other mods.
We've had a few major food scares recently - eggs being a prime example. How convenient that they happened shortly before this bill comes up for a vote, isn't it. What a coincidence - NOT. We know that there has been sabotage of the food supply for a number of years now. (Remember spinach? melamine in the farm fed fish food? Tomatoes, and one more that I just can't remember. Some of you here know what I'm talking about. There are 4 major super foods: spinach, fish, tomatoes, and _____. All four were attacked within the space of a year.

And here we are again - they don't even bother to hide their subterfuge from those with open eyes. To me, one of the scariest aspects of this bill (I haven't gone back to check if there are similar provisions in the HOuse version) is the section that demands that none of the laws, rules, regulations of this Food Safety Act will be in conflict with those of WHO, or other international bodies with which the US has treaties. All regulations must be in harmony with the Codex Alimentarius.

The Codex's main site has some very interesting information, but needs to be read with open eyes. Here is the first paragraph of the explanation of the Codex:

Quote:
The Codex Alimentarius, or the food code, has become the global reference
point for consumers, food producers and processors, national food control
agencies and the international food trade. The code has had an enormous
impact on the thinking of food producers and processors as well as on the
awareness of the end users – the consumers. Its influence extends to every
continent, and its contribution to the protection of public health and fair
practices in the food trade is immeasurable.


The Food Safety Law, if passed by the Senate today, then a joint bill passed by the entire legislature, would seal our participation in the Codex Alimentarius, and effectively hand over control of our food supply to the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), IOW another whole portion of the lifeblood of our country would be totally regulated by the UN - the tool of the NWO.

_________________
"A time comes when silence is betrayal." - Martin Luther King

"The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything." ~ Albert Einstein


Wed Nov 17, 2010 9:28 am
Profile YIM
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:59 am
Posts: 6532
Location: Friendswood, TX
Post Re: Senate Bill 510 potentially illegalizes gardens/seed saving
Senate Reaches Agreement On Food Safety Bill To Exempt Small Farms :clap

MARY CLARE JALONICK | 11/19/10 12:16 AM |

WASHINGTON — Some small farms would be exempt from government efforts to prevent foodborne illness under a Senate agreement on food safety legislation announced Thursday.

The food safety bill now pending in the Senate would give the Food and Drug Administration more authority to recall tainted products, increase inspections of food processors and require producers to follow stricter standards for keeping food safe. Operators of smaller farms and advocates for locally produced food have worried that the bill's requirements could force small farms out of business.

An agreement brokered by Democratic Sen. Jon Tester of Montana would attempt to allay those concerns, allowing farmers who make less than $500,000 a year in revenue and sell directly to consumers, restaurants or grocery stores within their states or within 275 miles of their farms to avoid expensive food safety plans required of larger operations. State and local authorities would still have oversight over those farms. :heart

Food safety advocates have objected to the exemptions, saying Tester's concerns are overblown and the size of the farm is not as important as the safety of the food. :roll But many of those groups signed off on the Tester amendment after it was narrowed and language was added to allow the FDA to revoke exemptions for operations that have been involved in an outbreak.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the Senate will vote on the bill after Congress returns from a one-week Thanksgiving recess. Reid said senators will vote on several amendments, including two sponsored by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.

Coburn had threatened to hold up the bill unless the Senate voted on the amendments. The first would place a moratorium on spending for "earmarks," pet projects in lawmakers' states and districts, while the second is a separate amendment that is a substitute for the food safety bill. :roll

The Senate voted 74-25 to proceed with the bill on Wednesday after Coburn had objected earlier, saying the legislation's $1.4 billion cost isn't paid for.

Read more here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/19/food-safety-bill-act-small-farms-senate-tester_n_785898.html

_________________
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little. - FDR


Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:15 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.