S 510 bill passed by Senate in late-night sneak attack on small farmers and food freedom.

S 510 Fake Food Safety bill passed by Senate in late-night sneak attack on small farmers and food freedom

www.naturalnews.com

The infamous S.510 "food food safety bill" was passed by the US Senate last night in a sneaky, last minute voice vote. All Senators voted for it, Republicans and Democrats alike. Not a single U.S. Senator -- not even Coburn -- objected to its passage.
With this vote, the US Senate now sends the bill back to the House of Representatives where it is due for a final vote as HR 2751 that would then send the bill to the White House for a presidential signature. This House vote could take place as....

(visit the link for the full news article)

A betrayal of food freedom

This last-minute sneak vote of unanimous consent is widely considered a betrayal of food freedom by the few Republicans who had opposed this bill. TheHill.com posted their report on this unexpected turn of events late last night (thehill.com...) and has since been overrun by comments from steaming mad members of the public who feel utterly betrayed by their Senators.
The Natural Solutions Foundation posted a blog entitled, "Betrayed by the GOP" which blasts Republican and Democratic lawmakers alike for approving this bureaucratic monster that will grow the size and power of the FDA (www.healthfreedomusa.org...).
The Farm-To-Consumer Legal Defense Fund also posted an urgent action alert (www.farmtoconsumer.org...) urging people to call their representatives in Washington and oppose HR 2751.

This passed in the darkness of night. This bill would keep coming back again and again until they passed it, and since our votes matter less and less everyday, the 1,000s of emails, phone calls, and faxes they get don't matter to a hill of beans. The corporations own and control the media, and as such they have the power to shape and to control every election to their whims, and our politicians know this. Who do you think they're going to listen to, lowly poor voters or the people who have the power to make them look good and their opponents look bad in the press?


www.naturalnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by RUSSO


I say maybew e should start growing our own foods, rasing our own cattles and then trade between neighbors, let the government have their own poisoned food

reply to post by prexparte


Im already growing some food here im my home. Corn, some fruits, tomatoes, onions...

The taste is really better.

reply to post by RUSSO

Similar laws in other countries have wipedout 60% to 75% of the farms in the nation.

As a token nod to the screaming masses S-510 contained the Tester Amendment. A "for show" amendment that actually does little to protect family farms and will no doubt be removed a few years down the road.

Last night, consumer groups crossed the aisle to join forces with the sustainable agriculture camp, agreeing to some compromises in the language of the Tester amendment (PDF of the revisions here).

* The FDA gains the authority to withdraw its exemption from a farm or facility that has been associated with a food-borne illness outbreak

* The radius a facility or farm can sell direct within and still be eligible to be a "qualified end-user" has been reduced from 400 miles to 275 miles

* Language has been added clarifying that farmers market sales are "direct-to-consumer" for FDA's purposes...
www.grist.org...

An absolutely useless amendment in the long run.

If you have ANY doubts this is not good for consumers:

..The Act will greatly expand the power of FDA, an agency that does not respect your freedom of food choice. The FDA has stated as a matter of public record that people have "no fundamental right to their own physical and bodily health" and "no fundamental right to obtain any food they wish."
www.ftcldf.org...

The Tester Amendment does NOT stop the FDA from regulating small farms.

...These So called for new “authorities” as FDA Commissioner Hamburg calls them, are a smokescreen for what S 510 really does which includes all of the following:

1. The FSMA ratifies the FDA’s interpretation of its existing authority to require a Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) like approach to controlling food safety threats in all food packers, processors, storage facilities and distributors unless exempted by the Tester-Hagan amendment. This is despite the fact that they are completely inappropriate for pure packers, storage facilities and distributors as they have no critical control points at which an action can be taken to reduce any threats. Instead, these parts of our food system are already well regulated with Good Handling Practices (GHPs) and the FDA’s transportation rules. For months I have challenged supporters of this approach to give a single example of an outbreak that originated at one of those three types of food facilities. No one has named one.

2. The FSMA ratifies the FDA’s interpretation of its existing authority to regulate fruit and vegetable farmers’ production and harvesting of their crops.

3. The FSMA creates a huge, completely unfunded mandate for the inspection of the fruit and vegetable farmers not exempted by the Tester-Hagan amendment. This cost was not included in the CBO’s $1.4 billion dollar estimate of the cost of the FSMA....
www.healthyfoodcoalition.org...

Direct from senator Tester

Under Tester’s amendment, food producers who sell their goods directly to consumers and have less than $500,000 in annual sales would not be subject to the onerous new requirements designed for industrial-scale food producers. Family-scale producers would, however, continue to be overseen by local and state food safety and health agencies.
tester.senate.gov...

Now how many of US family farms ACTUALLY sell direct to the customer ONLY??? Darn few. Most sell commodity products like grain to Cargill or livestock at auction. It is VERY hard to find a good local butcher thanks to the 1996 HACCP regs and it is time consuming to sell meat direct to the customer. It is not exactly easy to sell fruits and veggies direct either. Most of the farmers I know who do sell fruits and veggies sell products from several different farms.

According to the 2002 Ag Census, there are 2.2 million farms in the USA. 73,752 are incorporated.
Number of Farms:....by value of sales (GROSS not net income)
826,558..................... Less than $2,500
213,326..................... $2,500 to $4,999
223,168..................... $5,000 to $9,999
256,157..................... $10,000 to $24,999
157,906..................... $25,000 to $49,999
140,479..................... $50,000 to $99,999
240,746..................... $100,000 to $499,999
70,642..................... $500,000 or more

I would divided them into
up to $25,000.............1,519,209 -hobby
$100,000 to $499,999.....240,746 provides a living - 5% MAX is the actual income
$500,000 or more............70,642 the Corporate farms.

Soon only Corporate farms will be left.

Originally posted by prexparte
reply to post by RUSSO

 

I say maybew e should start growing our own foods, rasing our own cattles and then trade between neighbors, let the government have their own poisoned food

i'll bet that greenhouses on one's property will bring FDA agents to your home to inspect that you only grow the frankenseed stuff and GM food plants owned by the Corps.

i actually was going to get a expandable greenhouse starter (8X10) from a prominent builder supply. this spring, i am now wondering if it will be worth the hassle to put in a residential area greenhouse

reply to post by RUSSO


Nothing like eating a fresh veggie from the garden eh? I love it!

reply to post by crimvelvet

According to the 2002 Ag Census, there are 2.2 million farms in the USA. 73,752 are incorporated.
Number of Farms:....by value of sales (GROSS not net income)
826,558..................... Less than $2,500
213,326..................... $2,500 to $4,999
223,168..................... $5,000 to $9,999
256,157..................... $10,000 to $24,999
157,906..................... $25,000 to $49,999
140,479..................... $50,000 to $99,999
240,746..................... $100,000 to $499,999
70,642..................... $500,000 or more

I would divided them into
up to $25,000.............1,519,209 -hobby
$100,000 to $499,999.....240,746 provides a living - 5% MAX is the actual income
$500,000 or more............70,642 the Corporate farms.

Soon only Corporate farms will be left.

This information is also very good and disturbing.

Will it reach the point at which I am forbidden to grow my own food?

Disturbing thought.

reply to post by crimvelvet


we are not talking small farms which government could control, we are talking family gardens, independant gardening

reply to post by RUSSO


My husband always told me, " your one of those people" meaning conspiracy theorist. He THOUGHT I was a bit of the rocker-nutty. Until recently suddenly the lights came in is small mind. Know he is hearing my words of advice...I believe a community work together can insure the government keeps their dirty hands off our gardens and few cattles. That is IF america can come together and work together. The Man can only take what the people allow. I believe america is begging to wake up as a whole.

reply to post by prexparte

HOW TO BOIL A FROG

we are not talking small farms which government could control, we are talking family gardens, independant gardening

I am really get sick of being told "Do not worry it doesn't affect YOU.... this time" so go back to sleep until we are ready to come for you.

"In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up." -- by Martin Niemöller

If you have followed this evil for the number of years that I have then you would be aware that government control of gardens is also on their agenda. They just haven't gotten to it yet. All it will take is a small paragraph attached as a rider to another bill to place gardens under the FDA. They got THIS law passed using that technique!

The original bill, BEFORE it was modified BECAUSE my friends and I raised such a ruckus contained the following:

(13) FOOD ESTABLISHMENT-

(A) IN GENERAL- The term 'food establishment' means a slaughterhouse (except those regulated under the Federal Meat Inspection Act or the Poultry Products Inspection Act), factory, warehouse, or 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....

“..FOOD PRODUCTION FACILITY- The term 'food production facility' means any farm, ranch, orchard, vineyard, aquaculture facility, or confined animal-feeding operation...”

“ The Administrator, in order to protect the public health, shall establish a national traceability system that enables the Administrator to retrieve the history, use, and location of an article of food through all stages of its production, processing, and distribution.

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

conduct monitoring and surveillance of animals, plants, products, or the environment, as appropriate

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”

Food Safety bill HR-875

Notice it did not say a person SELLING food, it says a person holds, stores, or transports food or food ingredients.

What is the most relevant definition of ''establishment'' Notice how the FDA weasels out of actually defining what is meant by ''establishment''

Federal Register Interim Final Rule - 68 FR 58893, October 10, 2003: Registration of Food Facilities Under the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002

Some commenters disputed the statement in the proposed rule that ndividual homes are not subject to the regulation if the food that is manufactured/processed, packed, or held in the home does not enter commerce.'' (68 FR 5378)....

(Response) FDA has concluded that private individual residences are not ``facilities'' for purposes of the registration provision of the Bioterrorism Act. Under the Bioterrorism Act, the term ``facility'' includes ``any factory, warehouse, or establishment.''

Congress did not specify any definition for these terms. Under their common meanings, the terms can include private residences. For example, according to Webster's II New Riverside University Dictionary (1994), the most relevant definition of ``establishment'' is ``a business firm, club, institution, or residence, including its possessions and employees.'' However, ``n determining whether Congress has specifically addressed the question at issue, the court should not confine itself to examining a particular statutory provision in isolation.

HR 875 also included 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 Commerce Clause:

...Wickard v. Filburn got to the Supreme Court, and in 1942, the justices unanimously ruled 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?'" www.fff.org...

Are their any examples of the US government enforcing this?

Today a state Ag inspector and two county officials show up and scare the bee-jesus out of me. First they accuse me of selling products and milk, then explain that even "giving milk products away" is illegal in California. Now everything is pasteurized, but it is illegal to share milk products in any form! They explained it was even ILLEGAL to give it to my own children if they did not live under my roof! I can't even take a lasagna dish to my grown sons home without risk of being fined, arrested and or jailed! This is OUTRAGEOUS!!!!" Donna, Aug 12, 2008. (See more stories on Feds raiding farms and co-ops.)

If you really think this is not going to affect you in coming years I have this nice expensive bridge I want to sell...