Take Action to Protect Organic Integrity
Organic Lifestyle Comments Off on Take Action to Protect Organic Integrity
Early in his tenure, the USDA’s new head of the National Organic Program (NOP), Miles McEvoy, announced that the NOP was entering the “age of enforcement.” Yet major fraud investigations have languished, and some large perpetrators have even received favorable treatment and anonymity during Mr. McEvoy’s tenure, according to the Cornucopia Institute.
In September, 2013, McEvoy unilaterally announced sweeping changes in the operation of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB). This 15-member, multi-stakeholder body was established by Congress as a buffer between agribusiness lobbyists and organic stakeholders to ensure that Big Ag did not corrupt the organic label.
McEvoy has stripped much of the power from the NOSB. Along with the illegal stacking of the board with agribusiness executives instead of working farmers, this body has become a rubber stamp for corporate/industrial organics.
Deep fissures then developed in the organic community that are undermining the public/private partnership Congress envisioned upon passage of the Organic Food Production Act 25 years ago. This growing divide threatens the credibility and reputation of the organic label. Help us make the changes necessary to protect the bright promise organics offers to food, agriculture, and the health of our planet.
Our principal request to you is to please mail back your proxy. To get the proxy ballot, visit http://www.cornucopia.org/2015/09/sign-the-proxy-letter-remove-current-usda-organic-management/
Why a proxy instead of an online petition that would be easier to click on and sign? There are so many petitions flying around out there that politicians tell us that they are virtually meaningless. At the same time, USDA officials have told us that when we bring in cardboard boxes filled with these proxy letters (as we have done twice before), they take notice! Their eyes roll back because of the work involved in processing them: they have to scan each letter into their system and type out each name to reply. Thousands of these proxies, literally, carry a lot of weight.
***
STOP SELLING BEE-KILLING PESTICIDES
More than 500,000 Americans have called on Bayer to stop selling bee-killing pesticides.
Farmers, beekeepers, environmentalists, students, bee-lovers and members of the North Carolina community rallied in front of the North Carolina Capitol building and delivered more than 500,000 petition signatures urging Bayer to stop selling bee-killing neonicotinoid pesticides. Bayer is one of the leading manufacturers of neonicotinoids — a key driver of bee decline. Bayer was invited to the rally and petition delivery by environmental and consumer organizations on behalf of the 500,000 people that signed petitions to Bayer, but the company has not responded to the invitation.
“Bayer masquerades as a champion of bee health while doing absolutely everything in its power to protect its pesticide profits and keep its harmful products on the market,” said Tiffany Finck-Haynes, food futures campaigner at Friends of the Earth. “If Bayer is serious about bee health, it must listen to the more than 500,000 Americans calling on it to stop selling bee-toxic pesticides, for the sake of our environment, food system and nation’s food supply.”
The 500,000 petition signatures were gathered by Friends of the Earth, League of Conservation Voters, MoveOn, Organic Consumers Association, Save our Environment, Sierra Rise, SumOfUs, and Toxic Free North Carolina.
***
U.S. MEDIA IGNORES BANS ON GMOS IN OTHER COUNTRIES
When two of the most modernized and economically powerful countries in the world decide to ban a type of food crop that has made its way into roughly 70 to 80 percent or more of the U.S. food supply, you’d think it would be considered newsworthy, says Nick Meyer, who writes for March Against Monsanto and the website AltHealthWorks.com.
But the United States media has missed the boat yet again on major happenings relating to GMO crops overseas.
Both Russia and France officially announced bans on Monsanto’s genetically engineered crops this past week, cementing their positions and upholding the will of the people in nations where public opinion is dead set on keeping the food and farming system natural.
“As far as genetically-modified organisms are concerned, we have made decision not to use any GMO in food productions,” Russia’s Deputy PM Arkady Dvorkovich announced at worldwide conference on biotechnology in the Russian city of Kirov, according to the website RT.
“This is not a simple issue, we must do very thorough work on division on these spheres and form a legal base on this foundation,” he said, rather cryptically. Russia has announced similar plans in the past but the announcement feels even more official considering the wave of GMO bans sweeping Europe these days.
Meanwhile France also announced its plans to stay GMO Free by exercising its “opt-out” clause through the European Union.
In total, five nations in Europe have announced plans to ban the growth of Monsanto’s GMOs within their borders including Germany, Scotland, Latvia, and Greece. The crops are allowed to be grown within the European Union, but each country has its own ability to opt-out.
As noted in an article from Eco Watch, France’s main concerns stem from the environmental risks created by the crops, which are capable of contaminating non-GMO crops via wind pollination and causing other harm, especially when used with the herbicide Roundup that they are designed to withstand.
Monsanto’s MON810 genetically engineered corn, the only crop of its kind allowed in Europe, is a specific threat to natural agriculture in the country because of this concern.
A quick Google News search turns up virtually no results for the bans by Russia and France, aside from a few scattered alternative news sites.
With more Americans than ever before learning about GMOs and trying to make their own decisions on whether to include such foods in their diet, and a huge vote looming in the Senate over a possible ban on mandatory GMO labeling in America, you’d think the news giants like NBC, Fox News, CNN and others would be chomping at the bit to get this news out to their readers and viewers.
But alas, they have chosen not to cover these stories, once again giving the American people an incomplete picture about the ongoing food experiment that is being foisted upon them.
***
WHAT TO FEED MUSICIANS? ORGANIC FOOD, OF COURSE
Feedbands, the startup vinyl subscription service for independent musicians, has announced the launch of a farm in Asheville, North Carolina. The purpose of the farm? Literally, to feed bands.
“This is an open invitation for bands to come stay on the Feedbands Farm and eat farm fresh food grown in the most ecologically responsible ways,” says Graham Langdon, founder of Feedbands. “We grow everything from organic seed: tomatoes, cucumbers, kale, chard, delicata and butternut squash, okra, watermelons, cantaloupe, strawberries, blueberries, hardy kiwis, and so much more, and we’re not using any synthetic chemicals, fertilizers or pesticides. We have eggs from free range chickens and fresh milk from our milking goats. Bands of the world, come play a show, crash for a night and get fed.”
As for the animals on the farm, “They’re not for eating. Don’t even think about it.” says Langdon. “The pigs help dig up the earth for planting, the chickens and ducks lay eggs, and the goats give us milk. None of the animals on the farm are for eating.” Other projects include a solar powered outdoor stage for bands to play, rainwater catchment system and over a thousand feet of garden bed space to grow veggies.
Feedbands operates an independent-only streaming service for musicians and has released vinyl records for 26 independent artists. Artists selected for vinyl are paid in cash and retain all of the rights to their music.
The goal of the Feedbands Farm is to create a model of sustainable and ecological food production while connecting local communities with musical events.
If you or a band you know would like to stay, eat, and play at the Feedbands Farm in Asheville, North Carolina, contact Feedbands at support@feedbands.com.
***
GOODBYE YOG
I can hear his deep, gravelly voice anytime just by remembering it. I can see those thick features in my mind’s eye. I can recall him behind the plate, and watching a couple of strikes fly by before reaching out to hit a ball out of the strike zone into left field for a base hit. He was a clutch hitter and notorious bad-ball hitter. Just the mention of his name brings back memories of my brother and me going to Yankee Stadium to watch the Bombers play.
“He,” of course was Lawrence Peter Berra, known to all as Yogi. He was sui generis, but I know where he picked up that seemingly dumb-obvious way of talking that was really very witty: “It’s so crowded nobody goes there anymore.” And “It’s déjà vu all over again.” He picked that up from Casey Stengel, the manager of the Yanks in those glory years of the early to mid-1950s.
Stengel murdered the language in a way so unique that it became known as “Stengelese.” Yogi learned from Casey, but his approach to mangled language was through ellipsis. It was what he left out that allowed his pronouncements to cut to the chase.
He was one of my boyhood heroes, along with Mickey Mantle and pitcher Allie Reynolds. They’re all gone now, but they live within the boy who lives within me.
###
California Declares Roundup a Carcinogen
Organic Lifestyle Comments Off on California Declares Roundup a Carcinogen
California’s Environmental Protection Agency will now list glyphosate — the toxic main ingredient in the U.S.’ best-selling weedkiller, Roundup — as known to cause cancer, writes Claire Bernish in Antimedia..
Under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 — usually referred to as Proposition 65, its original name — chemicals that cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm are required to be listed and published by the state. Chemicals also end up on the list if found to be carcinogenic by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) — a branch of the World Health Organization.
In March, the IARC released a report that found glyphosate to be a “probable carcinogen.”
Besides the “convincing evidence” the herbicide can cause cancer in lab animals, the report also found:
“Case-control studies of occupational exposure in the U.S.A., Canada, and Sweden reported increased risk for non-Hodgkin lymphoma that persisted after adjustments to other pesticides.”
California’s decision to place glyphosate on the toxic chemicals list is the first of its kind. As Dr. Nathan Donley of the Center for Biological Diversity said in an email to Ecowatch, “As far as I’m aware, this is the first regulatory agency within the U.S. to determine that glyphosate is a carcinogen. So this is a very big deal.”
Now that California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has filed its “notice of intent to list” glyphosate as a known cancer agent, the public will have until October 5th to comment. There are no restrictions on sale or use associated with the listing.
Monsanto was seemingly baffled by the decision to place cancer-causing glyphosate on the state’s list of nearly 800 toxic chemicals. Spokesperson for the massive company, Charla Lord, told Agri-Pulse that “glyphosate is an effective and valuable tool for farmers and other users, including many in the state of California. During the upcoming comment period, we will provide detailed scientific information to OEHHA about the safety of glyphosate and work to ensure that any potential listing will not affect glyphosate use or sales in California.”
Over 650,000 tons of Roundup are sprayed on crops around the world annually, particularly on Monsanto’s Roundup-Ready varieties — genetically engineered to tolerate large doses of the herbicide to facilitate blanket application without harming crops. Studies from Canada to Mexico have found Roundup in drinking water, on crops, in the rain, and in the air. It is not only carcinogenic, it’s ubiquitous.
***
THE WORLD IN 2065
2065—that’s 50 years from now. I won’t be around, but I will make some predictions about the time that’s coming a half century in the future.
THE TRIUMPH OF ORGANIC FARMING. Call it organic farming, eco-agriculture, sustainable farming, or what you will, this world can only feed itself properly by returning to its roots and creating a food production system that can run in perpetuity without poisoning the plants, animals, and people who live on it. That means basing this benign agriculture on nature’s own methods of creating harmony in the wilderness: recycling all organic matter, enhancing the life in the soil, and making life tolerable for all creatures in a strong, biodiverse, agricultural ecosystem. If it ain’t sustainable, it won’t last.
DEALING WITH DISRUPTIVE, MAN-MADE GENES. Much time and treasure will be spent in the future seeking out and destroying unnatural genetic modifications that have escaped into the world and cause disruptions in natural life processes. Mankind has just begun to produce these modified genes, but as time goes by unforeseen consequences will emerge and become evident as we find these genes creating problems in the biosphere.
MANY MORE NATURE PRESERVES. We are entering the sixth great extinction of species on earth, and it looks to be one of the most comprehensive. In order to protect those species still remaining, “islands” of land and water large enough for species to fit into a local ecosystem will be established. No building or economic development will be allowed in them. Without these islands of safe habitat on the land and in the oceans, the world’s biodiversity will be greatly diminished, and thus the health of the world will be damaged.
THE SEAS WILL RISE. It’s debatable how much the seas will rise, but if we keep on our present course, scientists estimate that within a couple of hundred years, even the great Antarctic Ice Shelf will have melted and the seas will have risen 150 feet above the current sea level. The continued dumping of CO2 from the burning of fossil fuel, the release of frozen methane from the melting permafrost in the Polar Regions, and the replacement of reflective ice with dark and heat-absorbing open water will form an unstoppable feedback loop of global temperature rise and subsequent climate change.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF CARBON SEQUESTRATION STRATEGIES. No “silver bullet” exists to avoid the heat-trapping effects of using the atmosphere as a carbon dump. Many strategies will have to be developed—and sooner rather than later. Using biochar in agriculture, inventing scrubbers that pull carbon from the air and sequester it in the earth, developing systems that use renewable energy instead of fossil fuels, changes in eating patterns and lifestyle, and many other strategies not yet invented will be necessary to bring carbon emissions into the atmosphere to a standstill, let alone reverse it.
THE JUDICIOUS USE OF OCEAN RESOURCES. Just as farming must become sustainable, so must the use of ocean resources like fishing. This includes ways to get the islands of floating plastic out of the water before it all disintegrates into tiny pieces (it never goes away) that kills off sea life.
NEW LIVING ARRANGEMENTS WILL PROLIFERATE. A family of four living in a 3,800 square foot house will not be a tenable option for almost anyone in the future. More shared living arrangements and communal style housing will develop because of affordability and better use of resources. The movement of people from the countryside to cities will continue, but will level off by 2065. Better mass transit systems will allow city dwellers to more easily commute to the countryside for hands-on work, while the development of high tech and robotic infrastructure will continue to expand the ability of people to work from their homes without commuting.
THE ABRAHAMIC RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES WILL JOIN HANDS. Christians, Jews, and Muslims are siblings of Father Abraham and have fought each other with bloody consequences for ages. Islam will pass through its current barbaric phase to form, along with Christianity and Judaism, a spiritual safety net that encourages kindness, care for the distressed and afflicted, and a realization that all three religious traditions worship the same deity.
RAPACIOUS CAPITALISM WILL DIE. It will be replaced by some form of western socialism. The countries that will be doing the best economically will be similar to the wealthy countries of socialist Western Europe today: the Scandinavian countries and Germany.
CHINA WILL GO THROUGH A MAJOR CONVULSION. And it will come out on the other side if not a democracy, at least a country where the people rather than an elite are the power base. It will grow in power and influence. It will be the world’s superpower. The United States will still play an important role on the world’s stage, but China’s destiny is plainly in view. The challenge for the U.S. is how to prevent Chinese militarism when it itself continues to be the most militaristic country on earth. The longer and stronger the military-industrial complex calls the tune in Washington, the worse off the future looks for the U.S. Preventing Chinese militarism may only be accomplished by the U.S. presenting a model for de-fanging its own militarism.
NATO WILL BECOME THE WORLD’S COP. There were always high hopes that the U.N. peacekeeping forces would function as the world’s cop, but it is fundamentally feckless. NATO has the muscle, but it can’t devolve into a militaristic authority. It somehow has to win the cooperation of Russia and China, and perhaps the African Union and other political institutions, in its efforts to put out wars and political brushfires. This may require the re-casting of NATO as something else entirely—something less threatening to countries to its east.
SPORTS WILL BECOME EVEN MORE GLOBAL AND IMPORTANT. Nationalism exists, and when its energy finds political channels, a la “American exceptionalism,” it can cause great mischief. Sports has an important function in channeling the nationalistic impulse into sporting contests and teams that people feel allegiance to. This is a great safety valve for world peace. In 50 years, the baseball World Series may indeed be a world series. The Olympics will continue to augment this development.
GREAT ADVANCES IN MEDICINE. The next 50 years are going to see huge advances in the treatment of illness, and especially in the understanding of the etiology of major illnesses. The role of diet and food choices will step out of the murk of contradictory advice into the surety of how to eat for maximum health. Molecular biology will begin to link up with quantum understandings. DNA analysis will be cheap and routine. Exercise will remain important, but there will continue to be no hope for couch potatoes.
***
PRAISE THE LORD AND PASS THE AMMUNITION
A company in Florida is selling a “Christian” AR-15 assault rifle with a Crusader’s cross etched on one side and Psalm 144:1 on the other — “Blessed be the Lord my Rock, who trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle.” Named “The Crusader,” the gun also features a three-setting trigger control labeled Peace, War, and God Wills It.
***
MONSANTO FOUND GUILTY OF POISONING FARMER
A French court has upheld a 2012 ruling in which Monsanto was found guilty of chemical poisoning of a French farmer, who says he suffered neurological problems after inhaling the U.S. company’s Lasso weedkiller.
The decision by an appeal court in Lyon, southeast France, confirmed the initial judgment, the first such case heard in court in France, that ruled Monsanto was “responsible” for the intoxication and ordered the company to “fully compensate” grain grower Paul Francois.
Monsanto’s lawyer said the U.S. biotech company would now take the case to France’s highest appeal court.
Francois, who says he suffered memory loss, headaches and stammering after inhaling Monsanto’s Lasso in 2004, blames the agri-business giant for not providing adequate warnings on the product label.
***
ARE OUR FOODS BECOMING LESS NUTRITIOUS?
According to a study by Donald R. Davis of the Biochemical Institute at The University of Texas in Austin, they are. Here’s the abstract of his paper:
“Three kinds of evidence point toward declines of some nutrients in fruits and vegetables available in the United States and the United Kingdom: 1) early studies of fertilization found inverse relationships between crop yield and mineral concentrations—the widely cited “dilution effect”; 2) three recent studies of historical food composition data found apparent median declines of 5% to 40% or more in some minerals in groups of vegetables and perhaps fruits; one study also evaluated vitamins and protein with similar results; and 3) recent side-by-side plantings of low- and high-yield cultivars of broccoli and grains found consistently negative correlations between yield and concentrations of minerals and protein, a newly recognized genetic dilution effect.”
In less technical terms, as crop yields increase, nutrients decrease. The yields may be stimulated by the use of large amounts of chemical fertilizers, or by the use of high-yielding varieties of the crop.
Other studies have shown that organic foods often have superior nutritional content, even when yields are lower than on conventional farms. The reason is that conventional farms push yields higher chemically, while organic farming techniques rely on increasing the fertility and life in the soil, allowing the plants to build tissues that have higher levels of nutrients.
***
THE RETURN OF MYSTERY MEAT
Some say Americans have a fundamental right to know what’s in our food and where it comes from, but that’s just wishful thinking.
The World Trade Organization, some foreign countries, and even some members of Congress are working hard to take away that right to know.
At issue is “country of origin labeling” of meat (COOL), which requires that meat sold in the United States specifies where it originated. Some foreign countries, including Canada and Mexico, plus the meat packing industry, believe these overwhelmingly popular labels are too burdensome or unfair. And the Republican-controlled U.S. House recently took drastic measures to repeal these labels.
The laws governing country of origin labels require companies to list where food was raised, processed, and packaged. That’s why if COOL requirements were fully repealed, the outcome would be a huge victory for the meat processing industry. Repeal of these labels would allow the industry to save millions by importing cheaper meats from other countries or send meat to countries like China for processing without American consumers ever knowing the difference.
Lawmakers in the Senate have introduced extremely weak legislation – to pacify America’s trading partners and the meat industry – which would fully repeal mandatory labels and establish a voluntary labeling system. But if history is any indication, we know the meat industry won’t use these voluntary labels.
According to a poll conducted by the Consumer Federation of America, an overwhelming 90 percent of Americans support mandatory country of origin labeling and favor even more specific information about where meat is raised, slaughtered, and packaged.
***
MONSANTO ENLISTS SCIENTISTS TO WHITEWASH ITS PRODUCTS
What happens when a private company with a long history of producing some of the most toxic chemicals on the planet and now produces our food starts facing public pressure from a growing national grassroots movement to label their products to conform with basic principles of democracy and transparency? So asks Dave Murphy of Food Democracy Now. Here’s his answer:
Well, if the company in question is Monsanto, then you take a page out of Big Tobacco’s playbook and hatch a secret plan to enlist public university scientists to bury the potential harm of your genetically engineered crops by whitewashing negative studies and systematically demonizing your opponents in the media to mislead elected officials and the American public about the safety of GMOs (genetically modified organisms) and their accompanying toxic pesticides.
Here’s a little history lesson, in the 1940s, tobacco companies ran ads with doctors proclaiming smoking cigarettes were perfectly safe. In 1946, the RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company ran a now infamous campaign called “More Doctors” recommend Camels after “surveying” more than 113,597 doctors “from every branch of medicine.” Camels’ slogan at the time was, “Not a cough in a carload.” In reality, the tobacco company’s advertising agency employees questioned doctors at medical conferences and their offices and used these fake results to deceive a generation of smokers.
Today, Monsanto and the biotech industry are copying the same tactics, this time hiding behind the façade of public university scientists and hiring major PR firms to promote GMOs and the toxic weedkiller Roundup.
The New York Times recently released a stunning expose of how Monsanto and the biotech industry enlisted allegedly independent public university scientists in a deceptive campaign to lobby state legislators in Pennsylvania, interfere with ballot initiatives in Oregon and Colorado, and paper over risks of high pesticide usage on the Hawaiian island of Kauai.
According to New York Times investigative reporter Eric Lipton, as the GMO labeling debate was coming to a boil in America in the past three years, Monsanto and their “industry partners retooled their lobbying and public relations strategy to spotlight a rarefied group of advocates: academics, brought in for the gloss of impartiality and weight of authority that come with a professor’s pedigree.”
And why would Monsanto want to do this? Because independent scientist from public university come with a major halo effect, something that Monsanto’s top lobbyists mention repeatedly in the recently released emails to public university scientists.
***
ENDING GMO CONFUSION
There’s a lot of misinformation and disinformation about genetically modified organisms out there. How can a non-scientist evaluate what’s being said?
One way is to read a fascinating new book titled, “Sex, Love, and DNA—What Molecular Biology Teaches Us about Being Human,” by molecular biologist Peter Schattner. Although he’s a scientist, the book is written for non-scientists.
It provides deep insights into how and why proteins and DNA control our development, both mental and physical, from birth to death. And in so doing, it gives us great insight into why genetic engineering is such a biological disaster in the making.
The book is $19.95 from Olingo Press.
###
What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
Organic Lifestyle Comments Off on What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
Scientists said they will reanimate a 30,000-year-old giant virus unearthed in the frozen wastelands of Siberia. Good idea! What could possibly go wrong?
***
HOW MONSANTO MAY SNEAK THE DARK ACT INTO LAW
“Something is going to happen. If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.”
So we (“we” being Ronnie Cummins, international director, and Alexis Baden-Mayer, political director, of the Organic Consumers Association, who wrote this piece) were told recently by a Senate staffer, during one of the many meetings we’ve held with Senators to urge them to reject H.R. 1599, or what we refer to as the DARK—Deny Americans the Right to Know—Act.
Could that comment mean Monsanto is cooking up another “sneak attack,” similar to the one it conducted in 2013, that led to passage of the Monsanto Protection Act? Only this time, the sneak attack would be aimed at stomping out the GMO labeling movement?
Rep. Mike “Agribusiness Puppet” Pompeo (R-Kan.) introduced H.R. 1599 earlier this year. He then managed to rush it through the House, where it passed by a vote of 275 to 150 on July 23 (2015).
The bill is a sweeping attack on states’ rights to self-govern on the issue of GMO labeling, and on consumers’ right to know if their food has been genetically engineered. If the Dark Act becomes law, there will never be GMO labels, safety testing of GMOs, protections for farmers from GMO contamination or regulations of pesticide promoting GMO crops to protect human health, the environment, or endangered pollinators.
Under what most of us would consider a fair and democratic process, the bill would move next to the Senate, where there would be the opportunity for debate, amendments, and a vote.
But with the July 1, 2016, enactment of Vermont’s GMO labeling law, Act 120, looming, Monsanto is probably thinking it doesn’t have time to slog through a Senate hearing and stand-alone vote, especially as the Senate has yet to introduce its own version of the bill. And perhaps even more daunting than the July 1 deadline, is the prospect that the DARK Act might get watered down, or worse yet killed, in the Senate—a risk Monsanto would likely prefer to avoid.
So, what are the potential “sneak attack” scenarios that would allow Monsanto to push through the DARK Act this year, without going through the normal Senate process?
There are several. They all take advantage of the fact that Congress is seriously behind on its work, and that the threat of a government shutdown looms.
When Congress leaves its must-pass legislation to the last minute, bills don’t go through the normal legislative process where votes and amendments take place in committee hearings and floor debates. Instead, bills are negotiated behind closed doors, then, to increase the likelihood they’ll pass, brought to votes with only limited debate and amendments.
In a skit titled “You Stuck What Where?” the Daily Show’s Jon Stewart described how this last-minute legislating makes it easy for lawmakers to sneak provisions into bills, with no accountability:
It turns out, members of Congress involved in writing a bill while the bill is in subcommittee, are allowed to add any provision they want, anonymously. No fingerprints. The laws of the most powerful nation are written with the same level of accountability as internet comments.
This year, Congress could procrastinate until December and then cram all of its must-pass legislation into one “grand bargain.” This would be the perfect opportunity for Monsanto to launch a “You Stuck What Where?” sneak attack. We might not even know until it’s too late, if unscrupulous House and Senate leaders were to slip the DARK Act into a “grand bargain” that included appropriations, reauthorizations, extensions of expiring legislation, and an increase in the debt ceiling.
But, even if these bills are dealt with individually, there’s still ample opportunity for sneak attacks.
How could Monsanto sneak the DARK Act into law? Here are what we believe are the scenarios industry lobbyists are probably considering.
1. They’ll sneak it into a must-pass spending bill.
The government needs to be funded by September 30. But Congress is way behind in its work on its spending bills. Not a single one of a dozen annual appropriations bills has passed both chambers yet this year. That increases the likelihood that lawmakers will try to pass another Continuing Resolution to keep spending at basically the same level as last year, and keep the government open.
This would give Monsanto a chance to launch the same “sneak attack” strategy it used in 2013, when the Monsanto Protection Act (Monsanto called it the Farmers Assurance Provision) was slipped into a six-month Continuing Resolution cobbled together at the 11th hour to avert a government shut-down.
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) played a big role in the 2013 Monsanto Protection Act “sneak attack.” He could do it again with the DARK Act, especially if he convinces Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, to help him.
The only question for Monsanto is if the Continuing Resolution will last long enough to block the July 1, 2016 implementation date of Vermont’s new GMO labeling law. Continuing Resolutions are normally short-term, 3 months or as long as 6 months. This wouldn’t help Monsanto.
But, Congress may choose to meet its end-of-the-fiscal-year deadline (September 30) by passing a full-year continuing resolution. If this happens, any riders that get attached to the resolution would have a twelve-month lifespan. That could mean a DARK Act that would delay the implementation of Vermont’s GMO labeling law.
2. They’ll sneak it into the Child Nutrition Act Reauthorization bill.
On September 17, Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) will bring the Senate version of the Child Nutrition Act Reauthorization bill to his committee for amendments, debate and vote. The Child Nutrition Act expires on September 30, and should be reauthorized before then for another five years. But, as with the spending bills, if Congress doesn’t finish its reauthorization work it can opt for a short-term extension.
If Sen. Roberts, who chairs the Senate Agriculture Committee, wanted to do a favor for his Big Ag donors who have given him $791.2k so far this election cycle, he could let Sen. Blunt, slip the DARK Act into the Child Nutrition Act. There would be little anyone could do about that, unless they were willing to risk the future of the school lunch program past September 30, when the legislation expires.
If Monsanto can’t get Sen. Roberts to act alone, the other Senators on the Agriculture Committee could be enlisted in a team effort. With a two-person majority, the committee’s 11 Republicans could vote to attach the DARK Act to the Child Nutrition Act Reauthorization without any Democrat’s support.
3. They’ll sneak it into another bill as an amendment
If Monsanto doesn’t manage to stick the DARK Act into an appropriations or reauthorization bill anonymously, it can try for an amendment to one of these bills, once either of the bills hits the Senate floor.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) hasn’t been given $1.1M from agribusiness so far this election cycle for nothing. Monsanto and its allies know that the DARK Act could live or die depending on how important it is to Sen. McConnell. As the Senate Majority Leader, he controls which bills go to the floor and which amendments may be offered.
If the DARK Act doesn’t get attached to another piece of legislation by a committee chair or by a vote in committee, it could be brought to the floor as stand-alone legislation. This rarely happens in the Senate, because it takes 60 votes (a bipartisan effort) to cut off debate and avoid a filibuster.
But amendments to legislation are different. An amendment requires only 51 votes to pass—as long as the amendment is germane. (Non-germane amendments require 60 votes.) Of course, what’s “germane” is largely up to the Senate Majority Leader.
The ability to wield these parliamentary tactics gives Sen. McConnell enormous power and will make him the top target of Monsanto’s lobbying machine.
4. They’ll sneak it into the budget reconciliation bill.
The FY 2016 budget passed by Congress earlier this year allows for a “budget reconciliation” bill to be considered and passed by majority vote—only 51 votes in the Senate. The bill can also be amended with only 51 votes.
For Monsanto’s sneak attack strategy, the catch is that, under the rules of this reconciliation, the underlying provisions of a reconciliation bill must have a “budget effect.” It’s very difficult to imagine Monsanto being able to make the case that passing the DARK Act could save the government money. However, the rule can be broken with 60 Senators voting to override an objection.
The “budget reconciliation” bill is optional, so it’s likely that Congress won’t act on it until 2016.
When it comes to the DARK Act, will consumers be at the table? Or, as our Senate staffer friend suggested, on the menu? We don’t know yet. But we do know which Senators might be able to give Monsanto a hand with a “sneak attack.”
Alexis Baden-Mayer is political director for the Organic Consumers Association. Ronnie Cummins is international director or the Organic Consumers Association and its Mexico affiliate, Via Organica.
###
What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
Organic Lifestyle Comments Off on What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
Scientists said they will reanimate a 30,000-year-old giant virus unearthed in the frozen wastelands of Siberia. Good idea! What could possibly go wrong?
***
Hmmmm. Trump and Mussolini. Need I say more?
***
HOW MONSANTO MAY SNEAK THE DARK ACT INTO LAW
“Something is going to happen. If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.”
So we (“we” being Ronnie Cummins, international director, and Alexis Baden-Mayer, political director, of the Organic Consumers Association, who wrote this piece) were told recently by a Senate staffer, during one of the many meetings we’ve held with Senators to urge them to reject H.R. 1599, or what we refer to as the DARK—Deny Americans the Right to Know—Act.
Could that comment mean Monsanto is cooking up another “sneak attack,” similar to the one it conducted in 2013, that led to passage of the Monsanto Protection Act? Only this time, the sneak attack would be aimed at stomping out the GMO labeling movement?
Rep. Mike “Agribusiness Puppet” Pompeo (R-Kan.) introduced H.R. 1599 earlier this year. He then managed to rush it through the House, where it passed by a vote of 275 to 150 on July 23 (2015).
The bill is a sweeping attack on states’ rights to self-govern on the issue of GMO labeling, and on consumers’ right to know if their food has been genetically engineered. If the Dark Act becomes law, there will never be GMO labels, safety testing of GMOs, protections for farmers from GMO contamination or regulations of pesticide promoting GMO crops to protect human health, the environment, or endangered pollinators.
Under what most of us would consider a fair and democratic process, the bill would move next to the Senate, where there would be the opportunity for debate, amendments, and a vote.
But with the July 1, 2016, enactment of Vermont’s GMO labeling law, Act 120, looming, Monsanto is probably thinking it doesn’t have time to slog through a Senate hearing and stand-alone vote, especially as the Senate has yet to introduce its own version of the bill. And perhaps even more daunting than the July 1 deadline, is the prospect that the DARK Act might get watered down, or worse yet killed, in the Senate—a risk Monsanto would likely prefer to avoid.
So, what are the potential “sneak attack” scenarios that would allow Monsanto to push through the DARK Act this year, without going through the normal Senate process?
There are several. They all take advantage of the fact that Congress is seriously behind on its work, and that the threat of a government shutdown looms.
When Congress leaves its must-pass legislation to the last minute, bills don’t go through the normal legislative process where votes and amendments take place in committee hearings and floor debates. Instead, bills are negotiated behind closed doors, then, to increase the likelihood they’ll pass, brought to votes with only limited debate and amendments.
In a skit titled “You Stuck What Where?” the Daily Show’s Jon Stewart described how this last-minute legislating makes it easy for lawmakers to sneak provisions into bills, with no accountability:
It turns out, members of Congress involved in writing a bill while the bill is in subcommittee, are allowed to add any provision they want, anonymously. No fingerprints. The laws of the most powerful nation are written with the same level of accountability as internet comments.
This year, Congress could procrastinate until December and then cram all of its must-pass legislation into one “grand bargain.” This would be the perfect opportunity for Monsanto to launch a “You Stuck What Where?” sneak attack. We might not even know until it’s too late, if unscrupulous House and Senate leaders were to slip the DARK Act into a “grand bargain” that included appropriations, reauthorizations, extensions of expiring legislation, and an increase in the debt ceiling.
But, even if these bills are dealt with individually, there’s still ample opportunity for sneak attacks.
How could Monsanto sneak the DARK Act into law? Here are what we believe are the scenarios industry lobbyists are probably considering.
1. They’ll sneak it into a must-pass spending bill.
The government needs to be funded by September 30. But Congress is way behind in its work on its spending bills. Not a single one of a dozen annual appropriations bills has passed both chambers yet this year. That increases the likelihood that lawmakers will try to pass another Continuing Resolution to keep spending at basically the same level as last year, and keep the government open.
This would give Monsanto a chance to launch the same “sneak attack” strategy it used in 2013, when the Monsanto Protection Act (Monsanto called it the Farmers Assurance Provision) was slipped into a six-month Continuing Resolution cobbled together at the 11th hour to avert a government shut-down.
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) played a big role in the 2013 Monsanto Protection Act “sneak attack.” He could do it again with the DARK Act, especially if he convinces Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, to help him.
The only question for Monsanto is if the Continuing Resolution will last long enough to block the July 1, 2016 implementation date of Vermont’s new GMO labeling law. Continuing Resolutions are normally short-term, 3 months or as long as 6 months. This wouldn’t help Monsanto.
But, Congress may choose to meet its end-of-the-fiscal-year deadline (September 30) by passing a full-year continuing resolution. If this happens, any riders that get attached to the resolution would have a twelve-month lifespan. That could mean a DARK Act that would delay the implementation of Vermont’s GMO labeling law.
2. They’ll sneak it into the Child Nutrition Act Reauthorization bill.
On September 17, Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) will bring the Senate version of the Child Nutrition Act Reauthorization bill to his committee for amendments, debate and vote. The Child Nutrition Act expires on September 30, and should be reauthorized before then for another five years. But, as with the spending bills, if Congress doesn’t finish its reauthorization work it can opt for a short-term extension.
If Sen. Roberts, who chairs the Senate Agriculture Committee, wanted to do a favor for his Big Ag donors who have given him $791.2k so far this election cycle, he could let Sen. Blunt, slip the DARK Act into the Child Nutrition Act. There would be little anyone could do about that, unless they were willing to risk the future of the school lunch program past September 30, when the legislation expires.
If Monsanto can’t get Sen. Roberts to act alone, the other Senators on the Agriculture Committee could be enlisted in a team effort. With a two-person majority, the committee’s 11 Republicans could vote to attach the DARK Act to the Child Nutrition Act Reauthorization without any Democrat’s support.
3. They’ll sneak it into another bill as an amendment
If Monsanto doesn’t manage to stick the DARK Act into an appropriations or reauthorization bill anonymously, it can try for an amendment to one of these bills, once either of the bills hits the Senate floor.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) hasn’t been given $1.1M from agribusiness so far this election cycle for nothing. Monsanto and its allies know that the DARK Act could live or die depending on how important it is to Sen. McConnell. As the Senate Majority Leader, he controls which bills go to the floor and which amendments may be offered.
If the DARK Act doesn’t get attached to another piece of legislation by a committee chair or by a vote in committee, it could be brought to the floor as stand-alone legislation. This rarely happens in the Senate, because it takes 60 votes (a bipartisan effort) to cut off debate and avoid a filibuster.
But amendments to legislation are different. An amendment requires only 51 votes to pass—as long as the amendment is germane. (Non-germane amendments require 60 votes.) Of course, what’s “germane” is largely up to the Senate Majority Leader.
The ability to wield these parliamentary tactics gives Sen. McConnell enormous power and will make him the top target of Monsanto’s lobbying machine.
4. They’ll sneak it into the budget reconciliation bill.
The FY 2016 budget passed by Congress earlier this year allows for a “budget reconciliation” bill to be considered and passed by majority vote—only 51 votes in the Senate. The bill can also be amended with only 51 votes.
For Monsanto’s sneak attack strategy, the catch is that, under the rules of this reconciliation, the underlying provisions of a reconciliation bill must have a “budget effect.” It’s very difficult to imagine Monsanto being able to make the case that passing the DARK Act could save the government money. However, the rule can be broken with 60 Senators voting to override an objection.
The “budget reconciliation” bill is optional, so it’s likely that Congress won’t act on it until 2016.
When it comes to the DARK Act, will consumers be at the table? Or, as our Senate staffer friend suggested, on the menu? We don’t know yet. But we do know which Senators might be able to give Monsanto a hand with a “sneak attack.”
Alexis Baden-Mayer is political director for the Organic Consumers Association. Ronnie Cummins is international director or the Organic Consumers Association and its Mexico affiliate, Via Organica.
Monsanto Kicked Out of Greece and Latvia
Organic Lifestyle Comments Off on Monsanto Kicked Out of Greece and Latvia
Christina Sarich, writing in Infowars, reports that first Scotland and Germany booted GMOs from their countries, citing fear of GMO crops contaminating their food supplies and concern over putting their food and beverage industries in jeopardy. Now, Greece and Latvia are telling Monsanto exactly what they can do with their genetically modified crops. The tide is turning. A tipping point just became evident through the actions of two additional European countries who have had enough of the Biotech strong arm.
The geographical opt-outs specifically target Monsanto’s MON810 GM Maize, which countries may choose to grow or refuse in the next several months. This is currently the only genetically modified crop allowed to be grown within the EU at present – but only when countries give specific permission.
As Sustainable Pulse explains, “while the European Commission is responsible for approvals, requests to be excluded also have to be submitted to the company making the application; i.e. Monsanto for MON810.”
If additional member states deny Monsanto, we can be assured that the biotech company will try to find other ways to force their GM crops on the world (e.g. the Trans Pacific Trade partnership) but as we collectively say NO, upholding bans, and demanding labeling, we will rid this planet of the plague that is genetically modified food.
***
GMO POTATOES BEING SOLD AS ‘WHITE RUSSETS’
The first generation of genetically modified potatoes, created by J.R. Simplot Company, are being marketed as “White Russets.” Doug Cole, the company’s director of marketing and communications, said about 400 acres worth sold out last summer in grocery stores in 10 states in the Midwest and Southeast. The company plans to market about 2,000 acres of potatoes next summer.
***
GLYPHOSATE PRODUCTS BEING BANNED
No doubt Monsanto is feeling the heat after the World Health Organization declared glyphosate to be “probably carcinogenic.” Since then, not only have Bermuda and Sri Lanka banned the import and use of glyphosate within their borders, but a huge German superstore stopped stocking glyphosate-containing products on their shelves.
And now, two Swiss supermarkets have also stopped carrying glyphosate-containing products.
As reported by Sustainable Pulse, Coop and Migros recently each announced they will no longer sell products that contain glyphosate and will be exploring non-toxic weed killing alternatives.
This is a huge victory for activists against Monsanto, and a clear sign that consumer efforts are working their magic. No doubt countless more countries and businesses will follow suit in the near future.
***
MILLIONS AGAINST MONSANTO
Fraudulent. And Illegal.
You’ve heard it over and over again from Monsanto’s public relations machine: GMOs have been thoroughly tested and proven safe.
You know it isn’t true. But unfortunately, many people—and many U.S. lawmakers—have heard only Big Biotech’s side of the story. And they’ve heard it so often it’s ingrained in their minds.
It’s up to us to counter Monsanto’s message. In the media. In meetings with Congress members. In phone calls and emails to Congress members.
Thankfully, Steven M. Druker, executive director of the Alliance for Bio-Integrity and author of “Altered Genes, Twisted Truth, How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science, Corrupted Government, and Systematically Deceived the Public,” has made it easier for you to become a messenger of the truth.
Druker has taken key points from his 528-page book and created a short 30-point argument for why the U.S. Food & Drug Administration’s decision to allow GMO foods, untested and unlabeled, into the marketplace was fraudulent and illegal. Druker says:
“In reality, FDA decision-makers disregarded the input of the agency’s own scientists, covered up their warnings about the risks, lied about the facts and have failed to conduct any genuine scientific reviews at all (a fact even acknowledged by FDA officials). Without such frauds, GE foods could never have come to market; and they could not remain there if the frauds became widely known. Moreover, the FDA’s policy on GE foods violates federal food safety law, and these novel products are on the market illegally.”
***
JUDGE OVERTURNS MEXICO’S GMO CORN BAN
A judge has just overturned Mexico’s ban on the planting of GMO corn.
Mexico is the country where corn — or maize — was first developed from wild teosinte grain more than 8,000 years ago. And since 2013, Monsanto and other biotech giants have been banned from bringing their brand of pesticide-soaked, genetically engineered corn farming to Mexico.
But after dozens of appeals filed by an army of industry lawyers, a judge overturned the ban. It opens the door for Monsanto’s corporate takeover of Mexico’s corn seed supply.
As the country where corn originated, Mexico has an amazing array of native corn varieties and biodiversity. Generations of small farmers have relied on corn for their livelihood. Nothing is more fundamental to Mexican culture than corn. But all of that is threatened by Monsanto’s efforts to monopolize food production in Mexico, as it has in so many other countries. We’ve seen it happen before — Monsanto seeds were introduced to India’s cotton farms. Now they dominate 95% of India’s seeds in the cotton industry.
***
CAN YOU TRUST THE FOX TO PROPERLY GUARD THE HENOUSE?
Perdue Farms Inc. agreed to acquire Natural Food Holdings and its Niman Ranch brand, a pork supplier for Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc., as part of its goal to expand into organic and antibiotic-free meat.
Closely held Perdue, the third-largest U.S. chicken producer, said in a statement Tuesday it’s buying the business from private-equity firm LNK Partners. Perdue didn’t disclose terms for the deal, which is expected to be completed soon.
Chairman Jim Perdue, whose grandfather founded the Salisbury, Maryland-based company in 1920, has targeted premium-quality meats that appeal to health-conscious consumers. He bought Coleman Natural Foods in 2011, selling organic chicken cuts and cooked sausages under that brand. It’s now the largest U.S. producer of organic chicken.
Niman Ranch will give Perdue pork, beef, lamb, cage-free eggs and a variety of smoked and cured meats sourced from animals raised to “high welfare standards” and without any antibiotics, according to the statement. Niman includes more than 700 independent family farmers and ranchers across the U.S.
“This represents the next chapter in our growth through premium proteins and trusted brands,” Perdue said.
Perdue intends to increase the number of family farmers in the Niman network and expand distribution into more U.S. cities, President Randy Day said in the statement.
###
