Marti Oakley (c)copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved
___________________________________
“Instead, FDA, just as the USDA, is pulling out all the stops in its efforts to terrorize and harass domestic producers and suppliers, and to end anything but industrialized corporate agriculture. After all, these corporations keep the FDA and USDA awash in funds.”
__________________________________________________
If food safety were the real issue…we would close down the USDA and FDA corporations immediately. S.510 is not intended to, and will not do anything other than stifle economic growth, kill off the domestic agricultural sector and hand that sector over to corporate predators.
S.510, just as the CLEAR Act, Cap & Trade, and a host of other offensive pieces of legislation is nothing more than a system of fees, fines and royalties meant to generate revenue while at the same time forcing individuals to keep records intended to be used for no other purpose than compiling a criminal case against themselves. These records can be seized on the whim of the “secretary” who can at his/her leisure, decide that they “believe” you represent a risk: no evidence needed.
Just as the appointment of Michael Taylor, the Monsanto hired gun, to the post of “food czar” in the White House was no coincidence, neither is the pandering to Monsanto and other multi-national corporations intent upon owning and controlling food prodution and supply in the US in the text of S. 510.
Both the USDA and FDA were created using the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) of 1946. Even if this act were constitutional, the federal government is precluded from entering into agriculture as it is not in the enumerated powers of the federal government. Agriculture is non-positive Code & Tile (7) and cannot be codified into law as it is a right reserved to the states. Creating fictional public service agencies, which are in reality privately chartered corporations, held by the federal government to by-pass Constitutional restraints, on the federal government makes them no less unlawful.
Contrary to comments from various national organizations and groups, the last thing we need to see happen is the expansion of power and reach of either the USDA or, the FDA.
Both of these corporate federal agencies have a long history of harming the public while deferring to corporate contracted partners who make sure both agencies are profitable even if the public is harmed.
On the other hand, it is no surprise to see national food organizations of all kinds jumping on the bandwagon to support this coup, hoping, I guess, that if they throw the rest of us under the bus they might be able to secure special treatment for themselves. The organics producers did.
Having struck from the bill nearly every provision that would have required inspection and certification of imports from foreign countries, the US food supply will be more vulnerable than ever to contaminated food products from countries such as China, which has imported so many contaminated products into the country that its difficult to keep up with what might be the latest threat. These contaminations will of course be ignored as they have been in the past by both FDA and USDA and all attention will be focused on harassing and terrorizing domestic producers in an effort to force them out of business.
While the FDA highlighted some of the most recent outbreaks of food borne illnesses, it failed to mention that the jalapeno pepper scare was the result of peppers from Mexico which entered the country under the self-inspection guidelines. The contaminated milk products were from China and contained massive amounts of melamine. FDA’s response was to set an allowable level of melamine contamination in our food, apparently unaware that it is hazardous at any level.
In almost every instance that FDA highlighted as the cause and need for more power, the source of the threat came from outside the US and was allowed to enter the food supply un-inspected. Instead, FDA, just as the USDA, is pulling out all the stops in its efforts to terrorize and harass domestic producers and suppliers, and to end anything but industrialized corporate agriculture. After all, these corporations keep the FDA and USDA awash in funds.
Considering the FDA’s long history of approving toxic and deadly medications for public use, I think it is safe to say the FDA cannot be, and should not be, empowered at all. This is an agency that represents a national threat as it will approve any deadly medication if the price is right. As this agency is so derelict in its duty to objectively test pharmaceuticals and to identify potential hazards and lethal medications and prevent them from coming into the market, why in the world would anyone consider giving this corporation more power and greater reach especially over any sector of food production?
The USDA, which is intent upon ending raw/fresh milk sales as it colludes with New Zealand Agri-tech to end private dairy operations in the US is the same agency that manipulates milk prices across the US to make sure there is no profit in dairy operations unless a massive corporation is allowed to monopolize the market. Thousands upon thousands of dubious regulations implemented without congressional oversight have been foisted onto the public; most of which have no other use or purpose than to make food production so untenable that generational farms and ranches collapse as a result. This is the intended result of those regulations: ending anything but corporate agriculture.
The USDA, charged with inspection of imports, inspects less than 1% of containers coming into the US. Yet it spends an estimated 70% of its taxpayer funded budget, conducting raids, doing surveillance, and co-opting state agricultural departments and other departments, in its efforts to seize control of the US food production and supply to benefit multi-national corporations.
The FDA may be the most lethal of the two agencies, both of whom perpetrate a deceptive fraud on the public, portraying themselves as “public service” agencies when in fact, they are privately chartered corporations, operating for profit at any cost. The idea that taxpayers are forced to fund either of these agencies through congressional edicts is tantamount to having to pay for your own executioner and the blade too.
The last thing we need to be considering is the expansion and empowering of these two agencies which are for sale to the highest corporate bidders.
________________________________________________________
Non-Positve Code & Title Title (7) Agriculture
Tainted Chinese Imports Common
Keywords search: Drugs withdrawn from US markets
So our laws shouldn’t matter as long as the government takes care of everything? I didn’t support either of these agencies…I simply pointed out that they can and do change the rules (laws) at will and have done so regularly.
No people don’t ignore these “obscure” legal issues. Just because you weren’t aware of them, does not make them obscure. In fact, there is a huge movement of individuals and organizations who utilize these obscure legal points everyday to defend themselves from further harm form govenrment.
No one is advocating, nor do I, that we get rid of the government. We just want the limited government we were supposed to have and not the incorporated monstrosity that we have now.
It is apparent that you are somewhat in the dark about law, taxation, funding, and how this whole system works. I will lay that off to you being young. You’ll learn!
Thanks for the coversation. I appreciate your thoughts.
Marti
Marti, on one hand you use negative terms to describe the FDA and the USDA and on the other you decry this bill as not giving them the mandate to inspect foreign facilities? Make up your mind. Do you want their help or not? I’m pretty sure you’re not going to personally inspect all the food that you eat, so who would you presume to assist you?
Or are you committed to blindly consuming without any regard? And meanwhile, would you assail a spirit of altruism that exists outside of yourself?
I see that arguing law with you will have no effect. The obscure thought is obscure indeed, although also a reality as you point out. The reason that it is obscure is that if we hinged our society on your legalese and ignored everything that has not been codified and enacted, everything coming out of Congress would be tripe. No one pursues your legal argument because it is pointless and will only lead to the dissolving of the majority of government. You demonize the federal government in favor of what? Forget thee that this is a government made up of people?
I imagine if these agencies you speak of did not operate as private endeavors, you’d be screaming about higher taxes out of one side of your mouth and shouting that they are not protecting our borders out of the other.
Moving on from your deconstructionist attitude. I assure you I have read the bill completely and “reading a little further in” is not necessary.
‘‘SEC. 807. INSPECTION OF FOREIGN FOOD FACILITIES.
‘‘(a) INSPECTION.—The Secretary (1) may enter into arrangements and agreements with foreign governments to facilitate the inspection of foreign facilities registered under section 415; and (2) shall direct resources to inspections of foreign facilities, suppliers, and food types, especially such facilities, suppliers, and food types that present a high risk (as identified by the Secretary), to help ensure the safety and security of the food supply of the United States.
‘‘(b) EFFECT OF INABILITY TO INSPECT.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, food shall be refused admission into the United States if it is from a foreign factory, warehouse, or other establishment of which the owner, operator, or agent in charge, or the government of the foreign country, refuses to permit entry of United States inspectors or other individuals duly designated by the Secretary…”
I hear you though. You want to further a line based on convoluted legal justifications for a dismantlement of federal government.
But you want more oversight of our nation’s borders.
But you don’t trust the FDA, the USDA, the corporations, or third-party auditors.
Whoever is left after that, you try to stir up into a fervor in opposition.
You fail to see that S. 510 is a perfectly sensible extension of food safety. You do this by misrepresenting the facts and citing partial quotes from S. 510, ignoring its remaining text.
http://ppjg.wordpress.com/2010/08/02/h-r-5577-the-genetically-engineered-food-right-to-know-act-and-the-organics-loophole/
You might want to read this article concerning the adulteration of “organics” with gmo contamination and other non-organic materials …
you might also want to check on Manta.com for a complete list of all privately held government corporations operating as agencies or branches of government.
marti
‘‘SEC. 805. FOREIGN SUPPLIER VERIFICATION PROGRAM.
11 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—
12 ‘‘(1) VERIFICATION REQUIREMENT.—Each im13
porter shall perform risk-based foreign supplier
14 verification activities for the purpose of verifying that
15 the food imported by the importer or its agent is—
16 ‘‘(A) produced in compliance with the re17
quirements of section 418 or 419, as appropriate;
18 and
19 ‘‘(B) is not adulterated under section 402 or
20 misbranded under section 403(w).
21 ‘‘(2) IMPORTER DEFINED.—For purposes of this
22 section, the term ‘importer’ means, with respect to an
23 article of food—
please note that the opening statement of section III says that the suppliers and importers will conduct verification….not us. later this section says that one annual inspection, which can consist of the foreign producer or importer supplying only records and test results they themselves compiled as proof of compliance will do.
Every agency of the United States government is listed on dunn & Bradstreet, is issued a credit rating, and contracts privately for profit not only with the states, but with other private corporations.
there is nothing old or antiquated about our current food system….. again I refer you to the massive number of laws and regulations updated many times each year. This is done through rulemaking (law making) posted on the federal register with great frequency and which you can respond to ..if in fact you stumble across the latest law making attempt.
The pride of our country WAS our productive and relatively safe food system. Our ability to adapt was readily apparent in that system. The flood of uninspected and repeated imports of contaminated foods from foreign countries is the bane of our food supply along with CAFO farms where disease is rampant as a result of the horrid conditions these animals and fouls live in. Yet, even with the horrendous history of these corporate farming operations, HACCP (self-inspection) is the rule of the day. Hence, the over use of antibiotics, vaccines, hormones and whatever other garbage they can find to keep these animals going until slaughter. All of these toxins remain residually in the meats and other products. The manure from these animals is so toxic from GMO feeds, and the over use of pharma, that it can no longer be used as fertilizer and mountains of it pile up around these facilities. All of these things perfectly allowable and condoned and promoted by USDA and FDA.
There is a new book out called (I think) Hungry for Profits..I will try to find you a link for that….which lays out the continual subsidizing of CAFO farms and huge multi-national frankenfood corporations who profit handsomely from grants and subsidies…both of which are considered “corporate contracts” controlled by code & statute.
Any power the congress has is derived from the Constitution.
” obscure clerical aspects of law” ? Clerical aspects? It has nothing to do with clerical aspects. I realize that its very important to put that idea out in the public as so many have identified these corporate codes & titles, all based on the international law of contracts and in many cases, an abrogation of your protected rights, as some how some kind of quaint notion. what do you think “administrative courts” are? They administer code and statute…..not the common LAWS guarded by constitutional rights.
neither is this some “obscure” line of thought. it is a legal reality, but one many people are unaware of just as you seem to be.
Sect. 419. (d) Enforcement: The secretary may coordinate with the Secretary of AG, and as appropriate, shall CONTRACT and coordinate with the agency or department designated by the governor of each state to perform activities to ensure compliance with this section.
Because the USDA nor FDA can enter into agriculture as a government representative agency, they present to the states as what they in fact are….private corporate contractors. They enter into an MOU then the co-operative agreement (contract) then supply the co-operative funding (bribery) to gain access to the state and begin implementing what is now openly referred to as their “business plan”. It is contract business between federally held private corporations, and state held private corporations all of which operate as a deception…public service agency. Everything down to your local swimming pool and library is a privately held, operating for profit, corporation.
I prefer the actual unedited bill. You need to read a little further into the “inspections” section. Yes they can be denied entry,,,,,but only in certain situations and still will not be required to be inspected by any of our agents. They only have to certify through their own agents that they meet any of our requirements in order to registered and certified. HACCP for foreign producers and importers.
Marti
“I’m just guessing..would you have a vested interest in organics…the very sector that just secured special treatment in exchange for supporting this bill?”
I’m just a graduate student, ma’am. My only vested interest is in being correct.
I think you might be looking at an old copy of the bill.
Foreign food is given lengthy coverage under Title III. Of particular interest to you might be section 306, where inspections of foreign facilities are called for and the denial of entry into the US of any food deriving from a country or facility that refuses inspections.
Additionally, section 305 under Title III shows that Codex harmonization is only to be considered.
You allude to subsidies given by the FDA. Can you point to any?
You also repeatedly refer to the USDA and FDA as corporate entities when in fact they are public agencies.
“If congress is not in fact, positive law…..then there is no valid argument for moving forward with this legislation on any level.”
You use positive law as a justification to not pay attention to Congress, and yet you soon thereafter use laws passed by Congress to justify the current state of regulations. You’re going around in legal circles and citing (it is cite, not “site” as you wrote!), citing obscure clerical aspects of law.
Marti, the existing food safety regulations are based on an old food system. The pride of our country is our ability to adapt. As science enables inspections to be more effective, more inspections will help protect our food supply.
Mike.
P.S. – Here’s an updated version of the bill. I hope it clears up your confusion. http://help.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/WHI10337.pdf
P.P.S.- The organic sector had secured “special treatment” in regards to S. 510 long before your original post.
I have the latest version version as introduced….pages 1-104 have been struck out in full……these were all of the provisions for foreign inspection, testing, import inspection,
The front page reads:
STRIKE OUT ALL AFTER THE ENACTING CLAUSE AND INSERT THE PART PRINTED IN TALIC>
The bill picks up in Italic on page 105 Title II Improving the safety of foreign food….This section details the self -inspection, obtaining certificates declaring self inspection regarding everything from producing, through manufacture and import……the only place where anyone steps in is in “labeling” which is the only real area FDA has any rule in.
Furthermore..due to illegal trade agreements, harmonization agreements, the Transatlantic harmonization agreement and WTO mandates and the UN CODEX agenda……The first 104 pages had to be struck out as written as they would have violated each and every one of those illegal agreements.
If this bill was in fact about food safety….USDA and FDa would not be giving subsidies to the very industrialized corporate operations that create the most lethal problems in food production. They would have moved immediately to end imports from China say after the 10th or 20th time they intentionally shipped contaminated goods into the country. But that never happened did it? They are allowed to continue to ship unimpeded.
The only people who are going to suffer the ill affects of this bill are domestic family and independent producers. The entire bill, other than the special treatment provisions for foreign traders, is aimed at collecting fees, fines, royalties and information; and pointless regulations, forfeiture of rights, denial of access to the courts for redress, any and all of these things subject to change at moments notice on the whim of the “secretary or administrator”. Special deals may or may not be made for various operations…again at the whim of the secretary or adminstrator. Rules (laws) will be written within one year…..in other words, congress is just ceding more of their authority to private corporate entities.
Your Claim:
“Also, your claim that that prima facie law is not law is nothing more than legal obstruction. We both know that won’t hold water. Congress itself is not positive law.”
Non positive code (agriculture Title 7) can be sited only as existing…but cannot be used to bring criminal charges or to criminalize what had previosuly been a right and can only be sited as being in existence (prima facie). It cannot and is not codified into law.
If congress is not in fact, positive law…..then there is no valid argument for moving forward with this legislation on any level.
You dribbling:
Your legal dribbling obscures the issue. The issue is that your aim seems to be detrimental to the people of the United States.”
The issue is: this bill is detrimental to the United States…
The bill has nothing to do with making the food supply safe….we have thousands of laws codes, regulations, enforcement regs, inplace already. If this massive amount of over regulation by the government wasn’t able to secure the food supply…what makes you think another more oppressive and unnecessary bill would?
I’m just guessing..would you have a vested interest in organics…the very sector that just secured special treatment in exchange for supporting this bill?
Marti
PS: There is no enacting clause sited…..because no authority exists for the federal government to enter into agriculture.
The current version does indeed call for an increase in foreign inspections. Your language makes it seem as if they are opening the borders to China with no stopgaps.
Your so intent on showing the damages done by foodborne illness, and yet you are not supporting increased defenses?
Also, your claim that that prima facie law is not law is nothing more than legal obstruction. We both know that won’t hold water. Congress itself is not positive law.
Your legal dribbling obscures the issue. The issue is that your aim seems to be detrimental to the people of the United States.
[...] S.510 Fake Food Safety: Forcing the collapse of domestic agriculture [...]
The latest version of this bill…..the version that will be taken up by the Senate in September as shown of govTrack, shows several pages of strike outs relating to the inspection of foreign facilities.
I only mentioned a few of the recent food contamination reports as examples and included a keyword term search in the resources below the article. We do not have enough space to show the long, long list of contaminated foods from other countries.
The peanut contamination was well known by the head of the USDA peanut council…..who coincidentally also owned Georgia Peanut company and who intentionally sold and shipped what he knew to be a contaminated product. Several deaths resulted……..but of course he was never prosecuted.
Agriculture Title 7 of the US Code & Title…….is listed as NON-POSITIVE code, just as COMMERCE, PUBLIC HEALTH and EDUCATION are NON-POSITIVE codes and canot be codified into law.
I am very familiar with Cornell, use them consistently. Nowhere do they imply that these codes and titles mentioned, are anything other than corporate US code.
Agriculture is NOT in the enumerated powers and anything not specifically denied nor implicitly given to the federal governemnt…….is a right reserved to the states or the people.
Every bill must have enabling clauses showing under what consitutional authority the bill woudl be enacted. These bills, all of them representing the attempts by the federal government to overtake agriculture, are passed as “voluntary” as no Constitutional source can be cited. The voluntary bills are then sold to the states as what they actually are: the BUSINESS PLANS” of the USDA, FDA or whatever agency is buying access to the state through MOU’s, cooperative contract agreements and the subsequent “cooperative funding” more commonly known as bribery.
I did not misprepresent anything. I left that to the USDA and FDA……they are doing a fine job of it.
Marti
It seems you have misinterpreted this bill. Where has the foreign facility inspection aspect of the bill grown weaker? (See Title III) http://help.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/WHI10337.pdf
Additionally, isolating two outbreak sources hardly accounts for the incidences spurring the proposal of this bill. More aptly cited are the recent domestic salmonella outbreaks, including the Peanut Corporation of America sourced-ilnesses.
Also, where in USC, Title 7 do you find agricultural laws being reserved exclusively as state’s mandate? Here is a link to Title 7: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/7/
This bill does not seem as nefarious as you are understanding it to be..
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Craig Holmes, MJ Oak. MJ Oak said: S.510 Fake Food Safety: Forcing the collapse of domestic agriculture: http://t.co/tuVUFXJ [...]