US Senate Bill S 510: The Food Safety Modernization Act

This section is specifically for serious non-footbag debate and discussion.
Post Reply
User avatar
QuantumBalance
100-Watt Warlock
Posts: 5092
Joined: 22 Apr 2002 14:24
Location: fractal tyedye nebulae
Contact:

US Senate Bill S 510: The Food Safety Modernization Act

Post by QuantumBalance » 16 Aug 2010 12:30

I am interested on your take on US Senate Bill S510 the so called Food Safety Modernization Act. Some say it is a move by Mansanto to outlaw people from growing their own food or using their own seed. I believe the flip side would be people saying that unregulated seed and food growing could be dangerous, but I think that is bullshit because corporatists have always showed that they value profit more than safety. I don't like it! Right when I am getting into organic gardening too!

Thoughts?

User avatar
Jeremy
"Really unneccesary"
Posts: 10178
Joined: 08 Jan 2003 00:20
Location: Tasmania

Post by Jeremy » 16 Aug 2010 16:51

A quick google search an a perusal of the actual text shows that the claim that it outlaws people growing their own food or using their own seeds is completely false. There are hundreds of blogs repeating the falsehood though.

User avatar
Jeremy
"Really unneccesary"
Posts: 10178
Joined: 08 Jan 2003 00:20
Location: Tasmania

Post by Jeremy » 16 Aug 2010 16:52

Here's a good article about it from what I assume is an environmental and pro-organic farming website;

http://www.thedailygreen.com/healthy-ea ... -440320604

User avatar
HighDemonslayer
Egyptian Footgod
Posts: 1070
Joined: 17 Jun 2003 19:34
Location: Arizona

Post by HighDemonslayer » 02 Sep 2010 10:51

I haven't seen any arguments based on specific sections of the bills.

H.R.875 was the old version of the bill. thedailygreen's article Jeremy linked to is pretty old also.

note: Nowhere in S.510 ( or hr875) could I find the words,"seed" or seeds".


Here's the latest version I could find, enjoy!:


http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtex ... l=s111-510
It looks like the first half of the bill was "struck down". (thank god) I had to scroll 20 or 50 pages down to find the table of contents, and the "beginning".


Best to start at the beginning, records and registration requirements.

Does QuantumBalances' "facility" fit the definition below to require the registration of his hypothetical garden?



Section 102 is about registration of food facilities.

The bill refers to: (21 U.S.C. 350 D) for the definition of facility.

<..>
(b) Facility
For purposes of this section:
(1) The term “facilityâ€
Is Wayne Brady gonna have to choke a bitch?


-----------------------------------
-nathan

User avatar
HighDemonslayer
Egyptian Footgod
Posts: 1070
Joined: 17 Jun 2003 19:34
Location: Arizona

Post by HighDemonslayer » 28 Sep 2010 10:54

I started an analysis of SB. 510 several weeks ago, doing a little bit at a time.

The paragraphs in between stars are my comments, immediately after the relevant sections of the bill.

I jump around alot, so find a text-searchable version of the bill if you doubt the wording.




My summary:
---------------------

This bill gives:

Dictatorial power over every area of the food life cycle to the executive branch.

It has:

Secret plans and strategies.
Secret law enforcment infrastructures and secret goals.
Organizing and equipping and training, in secret, to further secret defense strategies.
"Food emergency "teams.
The full force of homeland security to enforce the above.


The entire food "system" will be joined at the hip with homeland security.

This bill will raise the cost of food, and will limit availability of food.

The bill will cost at least 875 million dollars in the first year, according to the funding section.
Adding thousands of new staff will increase the yearly cost even higher.


There are many sections where " the secretary shall promulgate regulations....." look for yourself to decide if they are dangerously vague.





--------------------------------------
Under proposed rulemaking:


‘(C) consider hazards that occur naturally, may be unintentionally introduced, or may be intentionally introduced, including by acts of terrorism;

*********************
Every step of the food production/transportation/consumption life cycle has potential for terrorist attack, or so the propagandists would have you believe.
Perhaps to be in compliance, every food related facility will need a union-ized ,TSA screening agent shoving a metal-detector probe up every ass that comes within 1000 yards of your facility.
*********************



(D) take into consideration, consistent with ensuring enforceable public health protection, conservation and environmental practice standards and policies established by Federal natural resource conservation, wildlife conservation, and environmental agencies; and


****************
Good thing their enforceable powers will be influenced by these agendas.

Food production and transport will become more expensive.
****************


‘(E) in the case of production that is certified organic, not include any requirements that conflict with or duplicate the requirements of the national organic program established under the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.), while providing for public health protection consistent with the requirements of this Act.

**********
This looks somewhat positive, does anyone have an opinion about (OFPA of 1990) ? What is the certification body who decides what things are organic?
***********


Section 420.
‘SEC. 420. PROTECTION AGAINST INTENTIONAL ADULTERATION.

‘(a) In General- Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Agriculture, shall promulgate regulations to protect against the intentional adulteration of food subject to this Act.

‘(b) Applicability- Regulations under subsection (a) shall apply only to food--

‘(1) for which the Secretary has identified clear vulnerabilities (including short shelf-life or susceptibility to intentional contamination at critical control points);

***********
Short shelf life? who determines that? Everything has shelf life.
***********

‘(2) in bulk or batch form, prior to being packaged for the final consumer; and

**********
How much constitutes bulk? how large of batches?. At every point prior to being packaged for the final consumer?
**********

‘(3) for which there is a high risk of intentional contamination, as determined by the Secretary, that could cause serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or animals.




-----------

‘SEC. 743. AUTHORITY TO COLLECT AND USE FEES.

***********
Another layer on top of all the other fees already burdening food producers. extra fees, 100% of all expenses borne for re-inspections should, a facility fail the first.
Will that include first-class travel costs, and luxury hotel stays, large per diems for inspectors. More hidden costs, passed on the the poorest and hungriest.
**********





SEC. 108. NATIONAL AGRICULTURE AND FOOD DEFENSE STRATEGY.

********
Binds the food system to and increased surveillance and policing powers of Homeland security
********



(5) CONSISTENCY WITH EXISTING PLANS- The strategy described in paragraph (1) shall be consistent with--

(A) the National Incident Management System;

(B) the National Response Framework;

(C) the National Infrastructure Protection Plan;

(D) the National Preparedness Goals; and

(E) other relevant national strategies.


************
How much of the taxpayers funding for this bill will be bled off to further these bureaucracies?
************


<...>
(C) EMERGENCY RESPONSE GOAL- Ensure an efficient response to agriculture and food emergencies by--

(i) immediately investigating animal disease outbreaks and suspected food contamination;

(ii) preventing additional human illnesses;

(iii) organizing, training, and equipping animal, plant, and food emergency response teams of--

(I) the Federal Government; and

(II) State, local, and tribal governments;

***********

Will the teams be armed?, how heavily? Will those teams have the authority and protections of federal agents, or DHS agents?
"plant emergency response teams"?? How many teams? how many men? Will standard equipment include ski-masks and assault rifles?

***********

(iv) designing, developing, and evaluating training and exercises carried out under agriculture and food defense plans; and

(v) ensuring consistent and organized risk communication to the public by--

(I) the Federal Government;

(II) State, local, and tribal governments; and

(III) the private sector.


<...>


(ii) conducting exercises of the plans described in subparagraph (C) with the goal of long-term recovery results;

-----------

(iii) rapidly removing, and effectively disposing of--

(I) contaminated agriculture and food products; and

(II) infected plants and animals; and

(iv) decontaminating and restoring areas affected by an agriculture or food emergency.

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

************
Who decides what is contaminated, and what is an infection?

************



(c) Limited Distribution- In the interest of national security, the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Secretary of Agriculture, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, may determine the manner and format in which the National Agriculture and Food Defense strategy established under this section is made publicly available on the Internet Web sites of the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of Agriculture, as described in subsection (a)(1).




***************
Anything embarrasing or alarming, no doubt will be "determined" out of the public release of the strategy.
How many men..... if, and how many weapons... how many police agencies......, the number and size and cost of their exercises, all will be SECRET.
****************



TITLE III
IMPROVING THE
SAFETY OF IMPORTED FOOD
---------------------

*******************************
Contains provisions for large numbers of 3rd party auditors to certify foreign food facilities as safe.

Lying to one these auditors can carry a penalty of 5 years in prison.

Will that mean 5 years in prison for foreigners who tell lies at their foregn production facility, or only U.S. citizens at home?

Where will they be imprisoned, and who will pay the cost?
***************************************



SEC. 306. BUILDING CAPACITY OF FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS
WITH RESPECT TO FOOD.
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall, not later than
2 years of the date of enactment of this Act, develop a com
prehensive plan to expand the technical, scientific, and reg
ulatory capacity of foreign governments, and their respec
tive food industries, from which foods are exported to the
United States.

***********************
This sounds like massive theft from the U.S. people, to be given away to build foreign technology and police powers.


The "and their respective food industries" part looks like it was added as an afterthought, to make the section look like it has to do with food.

This paragraph is very vague. it could include handing over nuclear weapons designs, in order to "expand" the technical, and scientific capacities of foreign gov'ts.



*************************







***********
This bill is an expensive, dangerous, crock of shit.

My analysis jumps around alot, but contains more useful bits than any summary i've seen online.

Look further into the bill, you will probably find more stuff you don't like.

************



-hds
Is Wayne Brady gonna have to choke a bitch?


-----------------------------------
-nathan

User avatar
Jeremy
"Really unneccesary"
Posts: 10178
Joined: 08 Jan 2003 00:20
Location: Tasmania

Post by Jeremy » 29 Sep 2010 20:23

Wow you're mental. Half the stuff you're complaining about is just pre-amble.

Legislation is typically written like this;

1. General aims of the legislation;

2. Actual defined action

3. Appendix etc.

You've taken general statements that don't have any bearing on what the legislation actually does, and tried to use them to infer some bizarre conspiracy. You *really* need to participate in some kind of government class.

User avatar
HighDemonslayer
Egyptian Footgod
Posts: 1070
Joined: 17 Jun 2003 19:34
Location: Arizona

Post by HighDemonslayer » 06 Oct 2010 13:48

Quantum asked about the bill.

I combed through, and pointed out parts of the bill we should be wary of.

Your post is useless to the discussion.

You *really* need to keep your responses on-topic.


The rest of you can be the judge, was Jeremy's post relevant, or was he just being a douche-bag again?


-hds
Is Wayne Brady gonna have to choke a bitch?


-----------------------------------
-nathan

Frank_Sinatra
Avenging Disco Godfather
Posts: 1660
Joined: 09 Jan 2007 12:43
Location: Chicago, IL

Post by Frank_Sinatra » 08 Oct 2010 09:40

HighDemonslayer wrote:The rest of you can be the judge, was Jeremy's post relevant, or was he just being a douche-bag again?
Jeremy wrote:You've taken general statements that don't have any bearing on what the legislation actually does, and tried to use them to infer some bizarre conspiracy.
I'd say this statement was entirely on topic, and on-point.

I'm glad that there aren't many people nuttier than you, hds.

User avatar
HighDemonslayer
Egyptian Footgod
Posts: 1070
Joined: 17 Jun 2003 19:34
Location: Arizona

Post by HighDemonslayer » 12 Oct 2010 10:25

Image
.
Is this who you want in charge of your food supply??
.
.
.


Image

A raid on Quantum's garden













-hds
Is Wayne Brady gonna have to choke a bitch?


-----------------------------------
-nathan

User avatar
cd
Egyptian Footgod
Posts: 1071
Joined: 03 Aug 2003 18:47
Location: Portland, OR

Post by cd » 17 Oct 2010 16:44

HighDemonslayer wrote:
Image

A raid on Quantum's garden

-hds
Well, if Sam's going to start a garden in someone's car in Japan, maybe that's what he gets.

crazylegs32
Egyptian Footgod
Posts: 1341
Joined: 02 Sep 2005 19:45
Location: Palatine/Chicago Burbs

Post by crazylegs32 » 15 Dec 2010 23:20

it looks like a positive thing to me. i t moves food producers underground, where they also avoid taxes. The dickheads will figure it out when they cant shop for anything but corn at their supermarket.

User avatar
Jeremy
"Really unneccesary"
Posts: 10178
Joined: 08 Jan 2003 00:20
Location: Tasmania

Post by Jeremy » 16 Dec 2010 12:31

In what way does it do that? All it tries to do is ensure that the same food health standards that are applied to processed food are also applied to whole-foods in a national standardised manner. This would help prevent large and serious [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fo ... ted_States]salmonella[url] outbreaks etc.

Pinkus
Shredalicious
Posts: 115
Joined: 18 Jan 2008 11:34
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Post by Pinkus » 19 Apr 2011 19:50

Jeremy wrote:In what way does it do that? All it tries to do is ensure that the same food health standards that are applied to processed food are also applied to whole-foods in a national standardised manner. This would help prevent large and serious [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fo ... ted_States]salmonella[url] outbreaks etc.
This can be a bad thing depending on what these standards are. If for example, one of these standards is "must have X amount of restrooms and have handicap access to all employees", then it could sometimes be seen as wasted resources that make it difficult for new businesses in small towns.

Some places have better food safety and standards than larger producers, yet are finding it more and more difficult to stay in business, so they keep having to increase the prices on their food.

I don't know enough about the bill to make any statement for or against it, I'm just saying that the definition of "healthy" is different from "FDA standards".

Post Reply