This looks like a conflict of interest to me. See below the interests of Dennis Wolff. Is this battle over?


Dennis C Wolff of Millville, Columbia County, Pennsylvania, was appointed Secretary of Agriculture by Governor Edward G. Rendell and confirmed on May 5, 2003. Wolff, a dairy farmer, owns Pen-Col Farms, a 600-acre, 400-head dairy cattle operation specializing in purebred Holstein genetics. He serves as a member of the Agriculture Technical Committee of the World Trade Organization, Pennsylvania Dairy Stakeholders, and Penn State University Board of Trustees. Wolff was recognized as a Master Farmer in 1994 for his outstanding management skills, land stewardship and role in the agricultural community. Wolff is the President of the Nicholas Wolff Foundation, Inc. and Camp Victory, a non-profit summer camp for handicapped and chronically ill children.

How, exactly, do you see a definite conflict of interest? While I'm not sure either way, I would hope that we appoint people who have some understanding of the industry, so the 'conflict of interest' argument would be inevitable -- and even useless -- no? That he is a dairy farmer -- good. On the Ag-Tech committee of the WTO? In theory, he could be a sane member, working toward doing that which is best for the industry AS LICENSEES of the public trust (which is why corporations are supposed to exist). The Stakeholders/ corporate-controlled university part, now that could be a conflict, but we don't normally see business as diametrically opposed to consumer interest -- nor are we supposed to, by the ideals of the corporate license! That businesses think oppositionally is more product of our warped culture than a definite 'conflict of interest' -- but IMO, only.

There is a dereliction of duty, in his failure to look out for the best interests of his public, which is his assigned task. There is, if you look hard enough for my favorite, reason even to assign his behavior the label of treason (fundamental damage to one's own country).

Anyway, what am I missing, by your view? --diana

I think this is an outrage and a violation of our civil liberties. The company should be able to advertise how they want as long as what is on the label is true.

I am a consumer who wants to know where my milk comes from and I do not want to buy milk that has been produced by a cow that has been injected with synthetic hormones.

How are the consumers supposed to make an educated decision about buying a product, if the product is not marked properly?

This is a complete outrage. I have been drinking organic soy milk now for about a year and thank God, this is not an issue for that product!

Thank you for posting this!

The reason Secretary Wolff is taken action against these milk labels is because what companies are putting on the label aren't true! (No milk is hormone-free (along with fruits, vegetables, meat, fish, etc.) and all milk is antibiotic-free). Drinking soy milk has more estrogen than cow's milk---think twice about that if you are truely worried about hormones.

If they say rBST-free or rBGH-free that would be true. Or they could say the milk comes from cows that aren't given hormone shots.

Hey Dairydiva... do you have a source on the estrogen thing in soy milk? I'd like to look into that a little more. Is it in certain brands? Will it be in there if I make it myself? What about rice milk?

Thanks in advance.

It's in all soy. I think it's called phytoestrogen. Many different plants contain phytoestrogens.

There is more info available on soy milk at: www.westonaprice.org. Click on the "soy alert" link on the left. It gives a fairly detailed description of this phytoestrogen topic. Also, it cites various studies done on soy. Hope this helps!

Yeah, a lot of us have come to see soy as an iffy proposition for health. It was horribly over-promoted in the US, kind of like its own Monsanto, maybe Monsanto-lite. I do still sometimes ingest organic tofu (in soups, or I make crisps) but I know there are some people who have had serious issues with the stuff. It also tends to wreak havoc with thyroids, again, for some. That's 'some people' and 'all soy,' BTW. I also sometimes ingest Monsanto products, just because they're so much a part of the US food system, but it's never by preference.

In some ways the real issues are 1) truth in advertising, including on labels, and I don't see dairydiva's challenges as legit -- I'm not against the farmers, I'm opposed the the MegaAg puppeteers who manipulate them; and 2) getting food from a wide enough variety of sources that even if something turns out to be detrimental, we've minimized exposure to it, anyway.

OK, what'd I miss here? --d

Concerning conflict of interest--Wolff being a member of WTO Ag Committee and being state ag secretary is a significant conflict of , see
http://poac.wordpress.com/2007/05/13/the-c...strialized-food

This article has links to other documents on the WTO and the World Food System. The point opponents of the WTO, GATT, NAFTA, and CAFTA have been trying to impress upon us is that these agreements bypass our government. That´s not a problem of narrow nationalists but a problem of making the law of the land and our system of representation obsolete.

See Ron Paul bills to stop WTO in 2000 and the following
on the implications of WTO
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=172
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=409
Also listen to testimony of Sir James Goldsmith to Senate in 1994. Go to http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com and search page for GOLDSMITH.

WTO represents the global elite under WTO´s rules for world government. Members of our government are supposed to represent us while upholding our Constitution.

For those who want to write Pennsylvania officials and newspapers, PASA recommends

Governor Edward G. Rendell
225 Main Capitol Building
Harrisburg, PA 17102

If time is short, use this email address and follow the instructions as prompted:
http://sites.state.pa.us/PA_Exec/Governor/govmail.html

Or call (717) 787-2500 or fax (717) 772-8284.


Other options
--Send copies of any correspondence with the governor to your local legislators.
--Write letters to the editors of your local papers or of the ag press (Lancaster Farming, The Farmer’s Friend, Farm & Dairy, etc…).

I saw, and I disagree. We're on the same page, here, and even the same side. It's wording with which I disagree. It's not, to me, a conflict of interest. I want my government officials knowledgeable, and that usually means 'of the industry.' But I do not want them easily bribed or working in the interests of MegaAg or BigPharma or any other corporate elite. It's not the conflict of interest that one usually finds, such as a judge deciding a *specific* case in which an immediate family member or business/investment interest is involved. In the case of a judge, there will be many other capable judges to fill the role.



Agreed! The system is corrupt, and the people working it even more so. And the movement afoot seems to be to consolidate power in the hands of a few (even further) and then be able to bypass such concepts as sovereign nations and constitutions and such. On one hand, I wish people had been in as much of an uproar when Monsanto rewrote the Iraqi constitution to guarantee the purchase of Monsanto seeds, but I do agree that nation-busting (along the lines of union-busting in the PNW of the US of A a decade back) *is* problematic. Here comes the Amero, bad enough, but out goes our constitution.

You can call it whatever you wish. I like the fact that you're passionate about putting out the info. I'm a little bit afraid your argument can be discounted by what I see as less-than-precise usage of a common term, but I could be way off base. I won't call it a conflict of interest, but I will be right beside you contacting the people who are supposed to represent me, to give 'em an earful of my own wording. Thank you, diana