**Will it be illegal to grow my own food? WHAT????**

Thanks
LittleHouseOnThePrairie..
I am with Moabite on this!

Now is the time to start watching close... It is my opinion most of the "pork" is put in bills at the last second.

The big corps will lobby hard to get any exemptions removed.

ON

Quote:
Actually, if you read the last couple of pages of posts, you will see that it does not make this illegal. That amendment took farmer's markets out of it. The rest was already out of it. Any site that says or even implies this bill makes it illegal to save your own seeds for your own use is not telling you the truth and, to me, immediately proves they have no credibility.

This bill does address putting some controls on the quality of food that is imported from other countries. Seafood raised in sewage is one example that has been in the news lately but there are others. The bill does specifically say it will not affect the rules and regulations in other laws that allow our farmers to sell their produce overseas. I'm not sure what your objection to our farmers being able to sell their goods internationally is? Or is there another reference to international trade in there that you are referring to? If there is, could you please specifically point it out and mention what you find so appalling about it? I'd like to see it in the bill.

the bill is dead. remember your senators that voted for it and vote them out next time

Well, back to the facts. Anyone patting themselves on the back hasn't read the bill (it will be back - just wait for the next food contamination scare). Every `blog' I've read since this bill hit the web has falsely listed rules for ALREADY REGULATED FACILITIES (have been since 2002) as somehow being applied to EVERYONE. Supplements defined as foods!, oh no! (have been so defined since 1994). The bill specifically excluded farms (didn't have to as the bill conformed with 415 of the FDCA as amended in 2002).

The Tester Amendment was a sop to all those who didn't read the bill (same exclusions as existed in 2002) and, probably hacked off some small producer who was not yet regulated but who, because he/she/it made over $500,000 would now be regulated (purely arbitrary dollar amount to appease `vox populi').

This bill was opposed, it seems, by those small/medium sized producers that were ALREADY REGULATED. They are required to be inspected (not enough inspectors), they are required to maintain specific records (though they can simply refuse to show them as the FDA had no authority to demand them - specific change for regulated facilities re: fines). The bill also provided the FDA more latitude in dealing with the food products entering the United States.

So, everyone is still, today, operating under the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act as Amended by the 2002 Food Safety and Bioterrorism Act - same exclusions/same definitions of what constitutes a regulated facility that this bill WOULD NOT have changed at all.

I'm reposting the actual language so, when this comes up again (e.coli in spinach/Salmonella in tomatoes/Exotic Newcastle Disease in Poultry/e.coli in Nutmeg?) I'll just link back to it.

From the Bill:



FDC Act (Chapter IV (U.S.C. Subchapter 4) Food Maintenance and inspection of Records (FD&C Act # 414./U.S. Code Section # - 21 U.S.C 350c.)

http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInform...icActFDCAct/FDCActChapterIVFood/ucm107899.htm

`Facilities Defined': Registration of Food Facilities (FD&C Act # 415/U.S. Code Section # - 21 U.S.C. 350d)

http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInform...icActFDCAct/FDCActChapterIVFood/ucm107910.htm

List of exclusions - those who won't be bothered: (FDA's implementation of the 2002 Bioterrorism Act)

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/G...FoodDefenseandEmergencyResponse/UCM113920.pdf

Exclusions from the pamphlet linked to above:



Big producers could care less about backyarders - they comply with all regs as they don't want to lose market share. If we were in business we'd want excellent inspection of both ourselves and our competitors as some fool down the road with 300 chooks who knows that production birds will produce like clock work even if poorly cared for, who buys OTC antibiotics and keeps the birds dosed because he can't be bothered with cleaning them up, and then sells contaminated eggs alongside ours -- then all producers are suspect. When this happens on a large scale (like the Exotic Newcastle outbreak in California) other countries simply place a ban on the foodstuff and those who play by the rules are screwed.

The Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services examined the FDA's inspections back in 4/10 (why the FDA was given authority through civil action - in the language of the bill).

Look at the countries that won't import our beef because of mad cow disease. That was one thing they were unable to overcome at the recent negotiations in South Korea. They don't want our beef over there because of mad cow. Of course it could just be an excuse, but it was a fact for some isolated cases here.

Thank you for the well documented posts. I will be directing others who are trying to decide what to think of this bill to these comments.

JoAnn_WI_4-H_Mom,

Some more info: Best, current, `reasoned' discussion regarding this legislation: http://www.grist.org/article/food-2...ty-gritty-on-small-farms-and-food-safety-bill (pay attention to comments re: Tester/Hagan - both good and bad, IMHO)

History of the 2002 Food Safety and Bioterrorism Act (plenty of links). As the current legislation is primarily a footnote to this law it is useful: http://www.foodlaw.org/security_and_bioterrorism.htm

Discussion of implementation of 2002 law (many of the same concerns, basically the current dust-up is a rehash as many folks don't realize they're complaining about provisions in the 2002 law - not changes specific to the 2009 bill) - not particularly any more specific to New Jersey than any other state - good stuff.

http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/18173/1/wp030010.pdf