Organic Bytes #165: Workers Rights, Toxins, Organic & Pandemic Threats, & More..., Please post questions and comments regarding this issue. Options

[Craig Minowa]

Organic Bytes
Health, Justice and Sustainability News
March 12, 2009 - Issue #165

[attachment=1:ocalogo_forum.gif]

In This Issue

--Alert of the Week: Domestic Fair Trade Means Supporting Workers' Rights
--Internet Myth of the Week: Congress To Pass Bill That Will Outlaw Organic Farming?
--Consumer Tool of the Week: Pocket Guide for Carcinogens in Personal Care Products
--Web Video of the Week: Faulty Drug Tests Trigger Arrests of Organic Consumers & Producers
--Frankenstein Experiment of the Week: Avian Flu Virus Contamination in Lab Nearly Sets Off Pandemic
--Web Forum Posting of the Week: OCA Supporter Who Lived Through the Great Depression Offers Sustainability
--Advice Headlines and Articles of the Week

* Subscribe http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/642/signUp.jsp?key=411
* Read Past Issues http://www.organicconsumers.org/organicbytes.cfm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Alert of the Week:
Domestic Fair Trade Means Supporting Workers Rights

The economy is in shambles, poverty is on the rise, and corporate exploitation of labor is still the norm, even in the $70 billion organic and natural food and farming sector. American workers--especially in the farm and food sector--in comparison to Europeans, are routinely underpaid, deprived of healthcare and childcare benefits, and kept in line by pro-corporate, anti-worker labor laws that make it next to impossible to organize a union and provide a countervailing power to billion dollar corporations.

The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), introduced in Congress this week, would provide a simple European-style "card check" union sign-up for workers, including penalties against companies that refuse to engage in collective bargaining, or illegally fire or intimidate employees in an attempt to prevent them from forming a union.

Fair Trade is not just something that should apply to workers overseas. The Organic Consumers Association believes that Fair Trade is for everyone. That's why OCA is educating and campaigning for "domestic Fair Trade" and a "sustainable supply chain," that includes greening American commerce and employment and advancing workers rights. The Employee Free Choice Act, supported by President Obama and the majority of both houses in Congress, is an important first step to strengthen our economy and promote social justice.We can no longer allow big corporations, the Republican Party, and indentured Democrats to stifle workers rights and suppress domestic Free Trade.

Visit OCA's Employee Free Choice Act Action Center:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/efca.cfm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Internet Myth of the Week:
Congress To Pass Bill That Will Outlaw Organic Farming?

This week, we received numerous calls and emails from OCA supporters who came across alarming YouTube videos and emails circulating on the internet that claimed a new food safety bill (HR 875) introduced in Congress would make "organic farming illegal." Although the Bill certainly has its shortcomings, it is an exaggeration to say that is a secret plot by Monsanto and the USDA to destroy the nation's alternative food and farming system. In actuality, HR 875, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009, is a limited-vision attempt by moderate Democrats and Republicans to craft food safety legislation to address the out-of-control filth and contamination that are inherent in our industrialized, now globalized, "profit-at-any-cost" food system.

This being said, OCA does not support HR 875 in its present form, given the fact that, if the Bill's regulations were applied in a one-size-fits-all manner to certified organic and farm-to-consumer operations, it could have a devastating impact on small farmers, especially raw milk producers who are already unfairly targeted by state food-safety regulators. Although the OCA deems this Bill as somewhat well-intentioned, we are calling on Congress to focus its attentions on the real threats to food safety: globalized food sourcing from nations such as China where food safety is a joke, domestic industrial-scale and factory farms whose collateral damage includes pesticide and antibiotic-tainted food, mad cow disease, E.coli contamination and salmonella poisoning--and to support a massive transition to organic farming practices.

Click here to learn more and take action:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_17194.cfm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Consumer Tool of the Week:
Pocket Guide for Carcinogens in Personal Care Products

As noted in last week's Organic Bytes, the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) released a new study that assesses levels of the petrochemical carcinogen 1,4-Dioxane in leading conventional as well as "natural" brands of personal care and household cleaning products. This cancer-causing contaminant is all too frequently found in products directly applied to the skin, but it is not listed on ingredient labels, making it difficult for consumers to avoid potentially dangerous products. To help protect the health of your family and the environment, the OCA's study results have been put together in a user-friendly printable consumer pocket guide that fits neatly into any wallet.

Print your 1,4-Dioxane Pocket Guide here:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/bodycare/S...SafetyGuide.pdf

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It's Working!
Your OCA Support is Bringing Positive Change

The Organic Consumers Association is one of the few nonprofit organizations that provides you with success stories, nearly every week, showing you how your financial donations are directly bringing about positive change. These success stories are due to the involvement and donations of our supporters. In order to continue bringing positive change in the realms of health, social justice, and sustainability, we need your contributions. If you are unable to donate, please help spread the word about OCA to friends, family and colleagues. Please donate today!

Donate Here:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/donations.cfm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Web Video of the Week:
Faulty Drug Tests Trigger Arrests of Organic Consumers & Producers

Before there was a war on raw milk producers and non-GMO farmers, there was a war on drugs. As the new study "False Positives Equal False Justice" explains, because field drug tests used by police officers are so faulty, it's likely that something in your pocket, home, or car could be used by a malicious or ignorant cop to trigger a false-positive drug test and provide the basis for your arrest. It's happened to a consumer of organic soap and makers of organic raw chocolate. Unless we get the police to stop using faulty drug tests, it could happen to you.

Read the full story and watch the video:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_17136.cfm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Frankenstein Experiment of the Week:
Avian Flu Virus Contamination in Lab Nearly Sets Off Pandemic

The World Health Organization is investigating a European pharmaceutical company that has confessed to carrying out a potentially catastrophic mixing of experimental viruses. Baxter International admitted to contaminating a mix of common and highly contagious human flu viruses with a deadly avian (bird) flu virus. The resulting mix was allegedly accidentally mislabeled and shipped out of the company's facilities where it was used to intentionally create infections. If left undiscovered, this scientific malfeasance could have triggered a pandemic that would have killed millions of humans. Investigators say there is no threat of further contamination, at this point, but that the investigation will continue.

Learn more:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_17198.cfm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Web Forum Posting of the Week:
OCA Supporter Who Lived Through the Great Depression Offers Sustainability Advice

C. Ruth C. posted the following comment in OCA's web forum:
"I eat all natural foods and I'm still active and healthy at age 86...Last week I planted 3 more dwarf fruit trees so I now have 12 of various kinds. I COOK my food and don't eat out of a box. I home can, dry, and freeze my surplus summer foods. Just like your great-grandmother used to do. I grow a small vegetable garden and also a medicinal herb garden. Everything is organic. I've studied herbs for some years. I grew up during the Depression of the 30s and I can do it again. People can be surprised how many things they can do without when it comes down to food. But we NEED the small organic farmers. I'm thankful I found your web site Keep up the good work."

Read more and join the discussion
http://organicconsumers.org/forum/index.ph...ic=2538&hl=

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Headlines and Articles of the Week:

1) To Feel Lucky as Collapse Progresses / Tom Friedman's Awakening
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_17196.cfm

2) US Organic Sector's Growth Slows from 20% in 2007 to 12.5% in 2008
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_17147.cfm

3) Food Security and Global Warming: Monsanto Versus Organic
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_17177.cfm

4) Free-Range Eggs Contain More Vitamin D According to Mother Earth News Study
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_17169.cfm

5) New Cornell Study: 70 Percent More Energy Required to Make Ethanol than Actually is in Ethanol http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_17166.cfm

Let OCA sift through the media smog and bring you the top new and analysis of the day. The OCA website has 10 or more news articles posted each day, and a library of over 40,000 articles covering issues including health, justice, food and farming, politics, and the environment.

Bookmark OrganicConsumers.org http://www.OrganicConsumers.org

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Organic Geek News of the Week: Do You Twitter?

The OCA is now on
Twitter! We will be posting from our news feed, as well as new campaigns, alerts, and anything else we think you'll like! Get OCA news anywhere and everywhere you go. Sign up http://twitter.com/organicconsumer: http://twitter.com/organicconsumer

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Please forward this publication to family and friends, place it on web sites, print it, duplicate it and post it freely. Knowledge is power!

ORGANIC BYTES is a publication of:
ORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION
6771 South Silver Hill Drive
Finland, Minnesota 55603
Phone: (218)- 226-4164
Fax: (218) 353-7652
__________________________________


Read past issues of Organic Bytes here

OCA Homepage
http://www.organicconsumers.org/organicbytes.cfm

Subscribe
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/642/signUp.jsp?key=411


-----------------------------------

[RyanK]

I have been getting the Organic Bytes newsletter for quite some time and have always agreed with most of the material covered. However, today there is a big exception. So big I have joined the forums to voice my opposition.

My concerns surround the story "Internet Rumor". I am surprised at OCA's position on this issue. I learned of HR 875 earlier this week and read the bill in its entirety. Leaving monsanto out of the discussion, I fail to understand how anyone could read this bill and not see it as a threat to small organic farmers. I do realize that OCA has pointed out it's general opposition to the bill in its current form, but to call the notion that it is a threat to small organic farmers a "myth" is in my opinion, naive.

OCA has expressed its concerns that this could be harmful to raw milk producers and small farmers, but then on the other hand says it is no threat to organic farming. This is deeply disturbing to me. How many mega-farms out there are organic? At my website I wrote an article on this issue not 10 minutes before I received my OBytes newsletter. In this article I point out that I do 90% of my summertime shopping at farmers markets. I have gotten to know my local growers very well, and have learned some things about them. They, like me, are generally distrusting of the government and rarely agree with government policy. They, like me, want to be left alone. A good example of this is the fact that these farmers, while using 100% organic farming practices, refuse to jump through the USDA hoops to be certified as such. With the astronomical costs involved in most cases how can you blame them? I trust them and their produce and that is good enough for me. That being said, how willing are these guys going to be to submit to the crushing grip of some new "Food Safety Administration"? Well, if they are growing crops, and then transporting them with the intent to sell them, they MUST submit, or face up to $1,000,000 in fines per violation.

Don't take my word for it, read the bill. Google HR 875 and read the actual text like I have done.

Given the wording of this bill, I submit to Organic Consumers Association my less than favorable review to their position on HR 875. Perhaps only time will tell who is correct on this issue, and I hope for the sake of the freedom to chose who we buy our produce from, that it is OCA. I am not so trusting, and you shouldn't be either.

Ryan Karcher
www.ryankarcher.com/alert.html

::edit::
Why do we need a new government agency? We don't need MORE government, we could just FIX the FDA.

[allnaturalme]

I too was pulled into the OCA Forum today!

Kudos to Ruth and her inspiring lifestyle. She made me so happy that I had to register just to compliment her and get it off my chest or I was not going to be able to sleep tonight. I'd just keep smiling and smiling and smiling and... oh you get the point. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Much love!
Sadie from allnaturalme.com

[alexis]

In last week's issue of Organic Bytes (posted above), the OCA had a story entitled "Internet Myth of the Week: Congress To Pass Bill That Will Outlaw Organic Farming?" The article focused on our stance on a new controversial bill in congress: HR875, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009. There's been a lot of hype circulating the internet about the possible ramifications of the bill, and the OCA felt it was necessary to weigh in on the issue. Linn Cohen-Cole, the most vocal opponent of HR 875, and the person who initially shared her concerns about the bill with the OCA, responded to our article in Organic Bytes last week with deep concerns. We've posted her main points below for our readers to discuss.

Linn is responding here not just to the OCA alert, but also to others in the organic and sustainable agriculture movement who have determined that HR 875 is not a serious threat to small farms. OCA has taken a middle-ground position. We think food safety legislation is needed. We'd like to see factory farming stopped along with the practices of confining animals, feeding them slaughterhouse waste and manure, and not letting cows eat grass. This would virtually eliminate mad cow, salmonella and E. coli. HR 875 doesn't do this, but it does make food recalls mandatory and allows for civil penalties, two important tools the government could use against the factory farms that are making us sick. On the other hand, we agree with Linn that it is important for proponents of local and organic agriculture to speak up early and often against any one-size-fits-all approach to food safety that could adversely impact small producers if their perspective isn't taken into account.

--------

Here's what Linn had to say:
[i]
1. In response to farms not being covered (an example of how misguided people are), here is evidence that even gardens are:

Wickard v. Filburn "The government claimed that if Mr. Filburn grew wheat for his own use, he would not be buying it — and that affected interstate commerce. " The supreme court ruled against the farmer. This ruling is why the US government can now control everything within state as "interstate commerce"

http://www.fff.org/freedom/0895g.asp
Enter Roscoe Filburn, an Ohio dairy and poultry farmer, who raised a small quantity of winter wheat — some to sell, some to feed his livestock, and some to consume. In 1940, under authority of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, the central government told Mr. Filburn that for the next year he would be limited to planting 11 acres of wheat and harvesting 20 bushels per acre. He harvested 12 acres over his allotment for consumption on his own property. When the government fined him, Mr. Filburn refused to pay.
Wickard v. Filburn got to the Supreme Court, and in 1942, the justices unanimouslyruled against the farmer. The government claimed that if Mr. Filburn grew wheat for his own use, he would not be buying it — and that affected interstate commerce. It also argued that if the price of wheat rose, which is what the government wanted, Mr. Filburn might be tempted to sell his surplus wheat in the interstate market, thwarting the government's objective. The Supreme Court bought it


The Court's opinion must be quoted to be believed:
[The wheat] supplies a need of the man who grew it which would otherwise be reflected by purchases in the open market. Home-grown wheat in this sense competes with wheat in commerce.
As Epstein commented, "Could anyone say with a straight face that the consumption of home-grown wheat is 'commerce among the several states?'" For good measure, the Court justified the obvious sacrifice of Mr. Filburn's freedom and interests to the unnamed farmers being protected:
It is of the essence of regulation that it lays a restraining hand on the self-interest of the regulated and that advantages from the regulation commonly fall to others.
After Wickard , everything is mere detail. The entire edifice of civil rights legislation stands on the commerce power. Under this maximum commerce power, the government has been free to regulate nearly everything, including a restaurant owner's bigotry. The Court has held that if Congress sees a connection to interstate commerce, it is not its role to second guess.

And From HR 875:

HR 875
"require each food production facility to have a written food safety plan that describes the likely hazards and preventive controls implemented to address those hazards;"

"include, with respect to growing, harvesting, sorting, and storage operations, minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water"

"include, with respect to animals raised for food, minimum standards related to the animal's health, feed, and environment which bear on the safety of food for human consumption;"

"set good practice standards to protect the public and animal health and promote food safety"


"..facility owned or operated by a person located in any State that processes food or a facility that holds, stores, or transports food or food ingredients."
Notice it does not say a person SELLING food, it says a person holds, stores, or transports food or food ingredients.
HR 875 also includes this.
"in any action to enforce the requirements of the food safety law, the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdiction SHALL BE PRESUMED TO EXIST."
The fact you are growing veggies for you and friends and not selling them does not exclude you!
The bill specifically states it covers commerce with in state but againthere is no exclusion for food raised for home use. This is very scary given Ag Sec. Venman's "
September, 1995 when USDA's Food Safety & Inspection Service presented a 600-page document Farm-To-Table - control of every step in the food chain from production to home preparation. haccpalliance.org/sub/news/AAMPReport.pdf

2. Yet one only need see this (harmonized bills with their laws) to see what will happen and who is driving it and why. It should end all dismissal of those who are trying to alert people to what these bills will do.

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/savePolishCountryside.php

3. But if anyone needs a period on that, please read the following.

Title: Seeds. How to criminalize them.

Description: Some cannot believe that HR 875 will criminalize seed banking. "The bill doesn't say any such thing," they say. "It says food safety," they say. And Bush said he "brought democracy to Iraq." Here's how what they say is "food safety" can make saving seeds a crime.


Article.

Wisdom says stop a bill that is broad as everything yet vaguer even than it is broad.

Wisdom says stop a bill that comes with massive penalties but allows no judicial review.

Wisdom says stop a bill with everything unspecified and actually waits til next year for an unspecified "Administrator" to decide what's what.

Where we come from, that's called a blank check. Who writes laws like that? "Here, do what you want about whatever you want and here's some deadly punishments to make it stick."

Wisdom says know thy enemy wrote that bill and will administer it.

Wisdom says wake up.

Here's the bill. Let's use our imaginations and extrapolate from the little bit it reveals and from reality we know.

SEC. 206. FOOD PRODUCTION FACILITIES.

(a) Authorities- In carrying out the duties of the Administrator and the purposes of this Act, the Administrator shall have the authority, with respect to food production facilities, to--

(1) visit and inspect food production facilities in the United States and in foreign countries to determine if they are operating in compliance with the requirements of the food safety law;

(2) review food safety records as required to be kept by the Administrator under section 210 and for other food safety purposes;

(3) set good practice standards to protect the public and animal health and promote food safety;

(4) conduct monitoring and surveillance of animals, plants, products, or the environment, as appropriate; and

(5) collect and maintain information relevant to public health and farm practices.

((IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) Inspection of Records- A food production facility shall permit the Administrator upon presentation of appropriate credentials and at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner, to have access to and ability to copy all records maintained by or on behalf of such food production establishment in any format (including paper or electronic) and at any location, that are necessary to assist the Administrator--

(1) to determine whether the food is contaminated, adulterated, or otherwise not in compliance with the food safety law; or

(2) to track the food in commerce.

© Regulations- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture and representatives of State departments of agriculture, shall promulgate regulations to establish science-based minimum standards for the safe production of food by food production facilities. Such regulations shall--

(1) consider all relevant hazards, including those occurring naturally,and those that may be unintentionally or intentionally introduced;

(2) require each food production facility to have a written food safety plan that describes the likely hazards and preventive controls implemented to address those hazards;

(3) include, with respect to growing, harvesting, sorting,and storage operations, minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water;

Ah, such a little paragraph, and so much evil packed in it.

Notice they mention harvesting, sorting and storage operations? They never mention seeds but they are precisely what those words cover.

Now, watch how they will be able to easily criminalize seed banking and all holding of seeds.

First, to follow how this will be done, you must understand that:

1. there is a small list inside the FDA called "sources of seed contamination" and
2. the FDA has now defined "seed" as food,
3. so seeds can now be controlled through "food safety."

[Paraphrased Little Red Riding Hood's wolf, "The better to take them all.]

Those seeds (so far) include:

seeds eaten raw such as flax, poppy sesame, etc.;
sprouting seeds such as wheat, beans, alfalfa, most greens, etc.;
seeds pressed into oils such as corn, sunflower, canola, etc.;
seeds used as animal feed such as soy ....

That is most seeds. It may even be all seeds, given how they are skilled at new definitions.

And what are the "sources of seed contamination" inside the FDA? They include only six little items but cover all functions in farming, and especially (because of the second one) organic farming:

agricultural water
manure (but not chemical pesticides or fertilizers)
harvesting, transporting and seed cleaning (sorting) equipment
seed storage (storing) facilities

[Words in the bill itself are highlighted.]

Did you know that seed cleaning equipment is THE single most critical piece of equipment for sustainable agriculture? It is how we collect organic seed. It is the machinery used after the season, when plants "go to seed," to separate out (sort) the seeds from the plant material so the farmer can collect (harvest) and then save (put in storage) seed for the next year at little cost. With his own seed, the farmer also stays free of patented, genetically engineered, corporately privatized seeds.

To get the drift, perhaps you need to know as well that Monsanto is getting rid of the people who do the seed cleaning and our means of having access to seed .
http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-multi...090203-854.html

This year, 2009, one item on the "sources of seed contamination" list is suddenly illegal in some parts of this country - seed cleaning equipment (sorting).

How can they make such vital equipment illegal? Quietly, first of all, so as not to alert organic farmers who have a lot of political ties. And by saying it contaminates food.

"Contaminate" is their favorite word since the public fears the deadly contamination that industry itself - not farmers - has caused. That fear is valuable. Scare the public and it is easy to get "food safety standards" set without anyone reading them. 39 progressive co-sponsors leap on, thinking this is about "food safety." But it is only about the use of "food safety."

For to eliminate seed cleaning equipment, the FDA only needed to set "food safety" standards for seed cleaning (the simple separation of seed from plant) such that a farmer would need a million toa million and a half dollar building and/or equipment to meet the new requirements ... per line of seed.

On the ground, where reality lives, a farmer in the midwest who has been seed cleaning flax for 40 years with his hand made seed cleaner now can't sell his flax on the market anymore. Never mind there are NO instances of anyone ever having gotten sick from seed cleaning equipment. And a farmer in another part of the midwest who has been cleaning wheat, corn and soy for years with one single perfectly fine piece of equipment would now need three to four and half million dollars for three separate pieces of equipment, in order to satisfy the "food safety" standards.

The FDA isn't so high-bar-setting when it comes to other things like melamine in baby formula. Though it is proven to sicken and kill infants, initially the FDA just denied the melamine was in all the corporate baby formula but when people found evidence it was, the FDA just quickly invented a "food safety" standard that defined whatever level was there as fine.

This game playing about "food safety" standards - one to eliminate farmers, and one to protect industry - is nothing new but now it is being suddenly extended to seeds and penalties meant to wipe out farmers, are being applied. The effort to eliminate both seed cleaners and seed cleaning equipment tips us off to who is behind this (shhh) and to this new means of controlling seeds and makes it possible to see just a few suspect words in this bill, and to sense where things are heading.

Organic farmers are not aware of any of this happening. It appears the organic community is being treated with kid gloves until HR 875 and related bills should be passed, coddled so they don't get wise to what's afoot. And they are too disconnected from traditional farmers to be aware of how the USDA has been tromping on them for years.

So organic farmers have missed the handwriting on the wall for themselves.

Plus, plain ole farmers have a history of no one listening to them, which is too bad in general but now it's blatantly dangerous because it is they who are the ones bringing the warning that these bills are not just bad but deadly. The organic community, lulled by its own seeming safety, hasn't heard or understood.

But given what just happened with seed cleaning equipment (sorting), the method and the intent are exposed. "Food safety" is the weapon, with public fear, kept at a high pitch, as the driver. After which, those running this game only need to set the bar at a "food safety" level impossible to meet and apply horrendous punishments for not complying. Farmer is either crushed by that pincer move or quits.

Those severe punishments are essential to control groups which will see the whole thing for what it is - insane in terms of health, a threat to survival, and driven solely by profit and power.

So, one crucial piece of equipment (seed cleaning) is illegal now and without most people realizing. And simply because a single "foods safety" bar has been raised. In time, as more and more farmers are forbidden from using their equipment, significant sources of organic seeds will begin to dry up, at which point the organic community would begin to ask what was going on. By then, it will be too late.

Why? Because look at the last item on the list - (seed) storing facilities.

Farmers, gardeners, seed saving exchanges, seed companies, scientific seed projects, and seed banks, all require storing. All are working overtime to protect biodiversity that is rapidly disappearing specifically because of genetic engineering. As Monsanto began reducing access to seeds, people around the world have worked hard to compensate. But Monsanto is now taking over the whole game and going after even these small sources of biodiversity - by simply defining seeds as food and then all farmers' affordable mechanisms for harvesting (collecting), sorting (seed cleaning) and storing (seed banking or saving) as too dirty to be safe for food.

Set the standard for "food safety" and certification high enough that no one can afford it and punish anyone who tries to save seed in ways that have worked fine for thousands of years, with a million dollar a day fine and/or ten years in prison, and presto, you have just criminalized seed banking.

The penalties are tremendous, the better to protect us from nothing dangerous whatsoever, but to make monopoly over seed absolutely absolute. One is left with control over farmers, an end to seed exchanges, an end to organic seed companies, an end to university programs developing nice normal hybrids, and an end to democracy - reducing us to abject dependence on corporations for food and gratitude even for genetically engineered food and at any price.

When you know that Monsanto with the help of the US government plundered ancient and rare seed banks in Iraq that held seeds with a genetic heritage (a biohistory belonging to all of us) going back 1000s of years and then made it a crime for farmers there to collect or use their own normal and non-patented seeds off their own land, you see how extreme the intent to control is.
http://au.messages.yahoo.com/news/localnews-vic/2527?p=last

Now, perhaps it is possible to see how the identical thing is being done here, only it comes in a heavily, heavily disguised way - through "food safety" that isn't at all - and in only one tiny little paragraph within a very large bill.

The Iraqis are now utterly at the mercy of Monsanto and the US for survival itself and will have topay whatever prices are set for food. They can no longer just grow their own and be free people. So, no matter what form of government they may ever have, as long as this is true, they are now enslaved because the control over them is that extreme. Kissinger was right - control food and you control people.

We are inches from this ourselves. The left needs to wake up.

In Afghanistan, people are buying and planting beans from America which at the end of the season have nothing whatever inside, the pods are empty. In Equador, the potatoes there do not develop eyes so can't be planted next season to grow potatoes.

Monsanto's claim to care about feed starving multitudes is belied by its removal of normal seeds and its terminator technology (empty beans). Monopoly is monopoly is monopoly. And at this level,and when it comes to seeds which are life itself, monopoly terminates democracy as well as beans.

This trick of setting bars above any ability to be in the game was done to blacks and in realizing this, we must recognize that Obama is accountable for pushing these bills.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Farming--...090125-421.html

There are other items of the list which surely will be controlled as well. Because in toto, that little list of six items contains the deconstruction of farming itself, especially of organic farming.[/i]

[Aine]

I'm just wondering whether anyone else is concerned about Rep. DeLauro's husband's links with Monsanto:

http://www.fcplfoundation.org/programswesu...s/greenberg.htm

[jeanruss]

I have been getting the Organic Bytes newsletter for quite some time and have always agreed with most of the material covered. However, today there is a big exception. So big I have joined the forums to voice my opposition.

My concerns surround the story "Internet Rumor". I am surprised at OCA's position on this issue. I learned of HR 875 earlier this week and read the bill in its entirety. Leaving monsanto out of the discussion, I fail to understand how anyone could read this bill and not see it as a threat to small organic farmers. I do realize that OCA has pointed out it's general opposition to the bill in its current form, but to call the notion that it is a threat to small organic farmers a "myth" is in my opinion, naive.

OCA has expressed its concerns that this could be harmful to raw milk producers and small farmers, but then on the other hand says it is no threat to organic farming. This is deeply disturbing to me. How many mega-farms out there are organic? At my website I wrote an article on this issue not 10 minutes before I received my OBytes newsletter. In this article I point out that I do 90% of my summertime shopping at farmers markets. I have gotten to know my local growers very well, and have learned some things about them. They, like me, are generally distrusting of the government and rarely agree with government policy. They, like me, want to be left alone. A good example of this is the fact that these farmers, while using 100% organic farming practices, refuse to jump through the USDA hoops to be certified as such. With the astronomical costs involved in most cases how can you blame them? I trust them and their produce and that is good enough for me. That being said, how willing are these guys going to be to submit to the crushing grip of some new "Food Safety Administration"? Well, if they are growing crops, and then transporting them with the intent to sell them, they MUST submit, or face up to $1,000,000 in fines per violation.

Don't take my word for it, read the bill. Google HR 875 and read the actual text like I have done.

Given the wording of this bill, I submit to Organic Consumers Association my less than favorable review to their position on HR 875. Perhaps only time will tell who is correct on this issue, and I hope for the sake of the freedom to chose who we buy our produce from, that it is OCA. I am not so trusting, and you shouldn't be either.

Ryan Karcher
www.ryankarcher.com/alert.html

::edit::
Why do we need a new government agency? We don't need MORE government, we could just FIX the FDA.

[Peeko Sanchez]

I am also concerned about HR875, but was unaware of the online opposition to it. I read the bill and was alarmed by it. I already wrote to my representative asking him to amend it to protect organic and small farmers and remove the enforcement of NAIS from the new administrator's duties, or, to vote against it. I actually like the idea of a seperate agency focused solely on food and the mandated consolidation of enforcement and data sharing with other agencies, but agree that the language is very unclear and gives too much power to its administrator. There also isn't anything (that I could find) in the bill setting requirements for public comment on the new agency's proposed regulations or actions.

This bill needs a lot of work or it will end up creating another agency as equally inept as the FDA is today.

[alexis]

Here's another response received via e-mail: Hmm. I've just been reading the discussion of the so-called "Food Safety" bill and have downloaded a copy so I can read the entire bill myself. It sounds as if OCA may need to take a closer look and adopt more than just a "neutral" position on this bill. OCA is always opposing and exposing everything -- why is it timid about this bill? Is it a matter of "picking your battles" or is the reason more complicated? I get the impression OCA members and readers would like to know. It would be helpful if OCA could share its detailed analysis of the bill and why OCA is not concerned.

Thanks!

Here's my take: OCA agrees with those who talk about a corporate take-over of the food system, but we do not agree that HR 875 is the vehicle for this.

I am increasingly distressed that so much attention is being given to HR 875 and what it could do *if* it were passed when farmers are losing their land to corporate entities as we speak through a number of existing laws and contracts. By focusing on HR 875, which is unlikely to pass this year, we are also missing an opportunity to stick it to the factory farms in the climate change legislation that *is* likely to pass this year.

Here are a few things that I think are more alarming and important than HR 875:

The Kansas House will probably pass a bill tomorrow that would prevent farmers from labeling any dairy products sold in Kansas as being "free" of genetically modified bovine growth hormone (rbST or rBGH). Farmers could say that the product comes from cows that haven't received injections of the artificial bovine growth hormone, which stimulates milk production (and increases the use of antibiotics and the presence of pus in milk). However, such products would also be forced to include disclaimers saying that the federal government has found no significant difference between milk from cows injected with rbST and milk from those that have not received the hormone. While there is an exemption for certified organic milk, OCA opposes this law. It has Monsanto's fingerprints all over it. The revolving door that brought Monsanto executives through the FDA is the reason the federal government took the position that there's no difference between milk produced with or without rbST. Monsanto sold rbST to Eli Lilly in August 2008, but the pro-rbST strategy hasn't changed much.

http://www.hutchnews.com/Localregional/milklabeling

The Montana legislature is considering a bill that would require that Monsanto and other companies get permission from a farmer before sampling crops on their land. If the farmer denies permission, the company could ask a district court for an order to sample the crops.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/articl...Jqoa0gD970V6JO0

The Northeast Organic Dairy Producers Association reports that the major organic dairy brands are lowering the price they pay farmers even as average retail prices for organic whole milk increased by 9¢ over retail prices a year ago.

http://www.nodpa.com/in_payprice_drop_030609.shtml

The National Family Farm Coalition reports that farmers facing $10 per hundredweight milk prices, while costs of production average $20 nationwide.

http://www.nffc.net/Pressroom/Press%20Rele...production.html

A vaccine for E. coli has been conditionally approved by the USDA. Now the USDA can force this new animal drug on all beef and dairy producers rather than focus on the cause of E. coli and its spread, feeding cows grain instead of grass, confining cows in pens where they wade in manure their whole lives right up to slaughter, and the manure lagoons that leak into the water and onto nearby vegetable farms.

http://www.capitalpress.info/main.asp?Sect...amp;TM=58133.16

The chemical companies have yoked farmers with increasingly expensive and ineffective fossil-fuel-based inputs that contribute to global warming. Now they propose a techno-fix for their techno-fix: gene-altered drought-tolerant crops. Monsanto invests $2.6 million daily in its research. Think how many people could be eat healthy food on long-term, sustainable basis if Monsanto and its partner the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation invested $2.6 each day in organic agriculture!

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5950
http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.c...ulture-res.html
http://www.planetark.com/enviro-news/item/51966

[verronica]

"The initiative taken for the concern is very serious and needs an attention of everyone. This is the concern which exists in the society and needs to be eliminated from the society as soon as possible.
verronica
Drug Intervention New Mexico"

[Karen Walter]

If you already have an online business which is doing well you can try out the same thing with an offline outlet too. In fact offline business opportunities give a personal touch to the business where you get to interact with your clients and customers.
---------------------------
Karen Walter
Easy Money

[activist]

I have been getting the Organic Bytes newsletter for quite some time and have always agreed with most of the material covered. However, today there is a big exception. So big I have joined the forums to voice my opposition.

My concerns surround the story "Internet Rumor". I am surprised at OCA's position on this issue. I learned of HR 875 earlier this week and read the bill in its entirety. Leaving monsanto out of the discussion, I fail to understand how anyone could read this bill and not see it as a threat to small organic farmers. I do realize that OCA has pointed out it's general opposition to the bill in its current form, but to call the notion that it is a threat to small organic farmers a "myth" is in my opinion, naive.

OCA has expressed its concerns that this could be harmful to raw milk producers and small farmers, but then on the other hand says it is no threat to organic farming. This is deeply disturbing to me. How many mega-farms out there are organic? At my website I wrote an article on this issue not 10 minutes before I received my OBytes newsletter. In this article I point out that I do 90% of my summertime shopping at farmers markets. I have gotten to know my local growers very well, and have learned some things about them. They, like me, are generally distrusting of the government and rarely agree with government policy. They, like me, want to be left alone. A good example of this is the fact that these farmers, while using 100% organic farming practices, refuse to jump through the USDA hoops to be certified as such. With the astronomical costs involved in most cases how can you blame them? I trust them and their produce and that is good enough for me. That being said, how willing are these guys going to be to submit to the crushing grip of some new "Food Safety Administration"? Well, if they are growing crops, and then transporting them with the intent to sell them, they MUST submit, or face up to $1,000,000 in fines per violation.

Don't take my word for it, read the bill. Google HR 875 and read the actual text like I have done.

Given the wording of this bill, I submit to Organic Consumers Association my less than favorable review to their position on HR 875. Perhaps only time will tell who is correct on this issue, and I hope for the sake of the freedom to chose who we buy our produce from, that it is OCA. I am not so trusting, and you shouldn't be either.

Ryan Karcher
www.ryankarcher.com/alert.html

::edit::
Why do we need a new government agency? We don't need MORE government, we could just FIX the FDA.