They want to make it ALL illegal. What do you think of Senate Bill 510

[Wifezilla]

You weren't supposed to notice

 

[JoAnn_WI_4-H_Mom]

If there is an exemption for any food producer making under $500,000, that would cover every farmer I know in my county. The law would then only affect large conglomerates like Tyson, etc.

So....with that ammendment, the law is actually good for small producers, correct?

I know we like to vent about additional controls placed on our lives by "Them", and that is needed sometimes. But I want to clearly understand whether this particular bill is actually a problem for society.

 

[PortageGirl]

I just caught the tail end of a program about this on the Diane Rehm show. here's the page and you can listen to it after the fact. I did hear several of the topics that are worrying people here discussed in the few minutes I heard. I'm going back to listen to the whole thing myself after while, no time just now though.

http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2010-12-02/new-food-safety-regulations

//edit to add// Podcast isn't available yet, not sure what time frame they put past shows up in, and not really able to check right now. I'll keep an eye out though since I want to hear the earlier part, all I heard was the last 10 minutes.

 

[BlackBart]

Yard full o' rocks :

Unfortunately Georgia is still a large agricultural state.....so many here would be affected.

My question is simply this, if the government cannot effectively control

Social Security
The National Debt
Homeland Security
Medicare/Medicaid
Classified Information Leaks (wikileaks)
Oil independence
etc
etc

Who up there (or anywhere) could possibly think that they could properly control the food source(s)?

Sounds like another moronic way to gain power, spend OUR money, and insure BIG business stays in the hip pocket of the politician

Sorry for the rant....getting off my soapbox now

Or the Politician stays in the pocket of big business

links on another thread from poster thaiturkey
http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/monsanto.html
http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cycle=2010&cmte=C00042069​

 

[PortageGirl]

Here's a link to being able to listen to it, couldn't find the 'podcast' where you could download it, still, can listen to it here. http://thedianerehmshow.org/audio-player?nid=13373

 

[poltroon]

Guys, the bill only affects the FDA.

The FDA does not have jurisdiction over meat and eggs. USDA regulates meat and eggs. (Glenn Beck has apparently not read the bill, either.) FDA does not even have jurisdiction over any food containing meat or eggs, like a pepperoni pizza. (FDA does regulate cheese pizza. Go figure.)

It does not affect your home garden.

Here are some things the bill does that are positive:

1. It gives the FDA power to force a food producer to recall food that is tainted or causing harm. Today, believe it or not, the FDA can only ask nicely.
2. It increases food plant inspections from every other never to once in a while.
3. It gives FDA the power to inspect foods on the farm, when it is a large farm.
4. It creates safety standards for imported food.

Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa, one of the bill's co-sponsors, recently argued that the bill "couldn't be more urgent or absurdly overdue," adding, "It is shocking to think that the last comprehensive overhaul of America's food-safety system was in 1938 -- more than seven decades ago."

People get sick and even die every year from contaminated food factories. Remember the peanut butter plant that had a leaky roof that was dripping on to the production line?

Tainted food affects not only the guilty producer, but whole industries. People stop buying peanut butter from any producer, because they don't know who they can trust.

Now, there's plenty of room to discuss the little details and to consider whether a clause here or there has an unintended consequence. I have been concerned about regulations favoring large over small producers, and I think that has been addressed. This bill has been working its way through for some time, and many amendments address that. I'd point out that Senator Tester IS a family farmer.

Here are some perhaps less alarmist links to consider.

http://www.fresnobee.com/2010/11/30/2179638/senate-food-safety-bill-leaves.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/29/AR2010112903881.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelo...how-the-new-food-safety-bill-might-affect-you​

 

[poltroon]

Quote:
Something to keep in mind is that often the words that you're reading are defined in federal law already. Thus, you might read something about a 'confined animal feeding operation' in a bill and think, "Hey, I've got animals. I've got fence. That's me!"

What is not obvious when reading text like that is that a CAFO is a specific term, and that for example you need at least 9,000 laying hens to even be in the ballpark.

Many bills that come through aren't stand-alone legislation, but are amending current law. This makes them even harder to read, because you can't see the context. Some of the pages are simply removing current laws, for example, to replace them with something different, and it's possible that even a thousand page bill makes the resulting federal law have fewer words/pages.

 

[poltroon]

The START treaty was proposed and first negotiated by Ronald Reagan, of course.

 

[NorTracNY]

poltroon,
As long as the Tester amendment is in the final bill is wouldn't affect the garden of someone that sells at a farmers market, but right now Big Ag is looking to kill the current bill and try to get the amendment removed. If the amendment doesn't stand the interpretation will be up to the current head of the FDA.

 

[PortageGirl]

The FDA doesn't have time to make sure factories get inspected properly, without a lot of money added in, they certainly won't be looking over your back fence.