Home

S. 510 and Codex Alimentarius Link: Tracking, Tracing, and Monitoring Independent Food Production

7 Comments

December 04-10 

Brandon Turbeville

Live Link: Activist Post

“If Grandma wants to sell her famous raspberry jam at the county fair (within 275 miles of her canning kitchen) she will indeed be a small producer exemptions, but not before she forks over 3 years of financials, documentation of hazard control plans, and local licenses, permits, and inspection reports. She must submit this documentation to the satisfactory approval of the Secretary; and if she fails to do so, the entirety of S.510 can be enforced on her. That’s hardly what I call an exemption.” More

The end of America’s farms? This could be the future of farming under S.510

3 Comments

 

Paul Griepentrog (c)copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved

_____________________________________________

This is a futuristic, fictional piece that seeks to bring forward a reality that could occur under  the provisions of S 510, and the potential downside of the rules yet to be written.  The citing’s either exist or have existed in previous forms of the bill.  Only you have the power to change it, time to go down the rabbit hole Alice. 

________________________________________ More

S 510 : Testor Amendment Means Nothing

3 Comments

Lynn Swearingen (c) copyright 2010 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

The Testor Amendment.  – It’ll free my direct sales to consumers. Or so the “opposition” to S. 510 seems to be saying now.

Once I started reading this,  “shock kept me up all night” would be an understatement.

Attempting to understand the logic behind the argument that somehow Legislators and AgriBusiness lobbyists are now “backing down” from the onerous control methods that have been written, fought for, and negotiated since the introduction of S. 510 in March of 2009 – I became even more confused.

Why suddenly would Sally Sunshine be allowed to sell her Strawberries to Safeway with no “involvement” under S 510?

The answer in short is she won’t. The “Grocery Store” will be required to keep records of Sally Sunshine. And in the event of “reasonable belief” or  “reasonable possibility” – Sally Sunshine is going down first.

The language is included here below (partial pages 122 and 123):

(G) GROCERY    STORES.—With    respect to a
17 sale of a food described in subparagraph (H) to
18 a grocery store, the Secretary shall not require
19 such grocery store to maintain records under
20 this subsection other than records documenting
21 the farm that was the source of such food.
The
22 Secretary shall not require that such records be
23 kept for more than 180 days.
24      (H) FARM     SALES TO CONSUMERS.—The
25 Secretary shall not require a farm to maintain
1       any distribution records under this subsection
2       with respect to a sale of a food described in
3       subparagraph (I) (including a sale of a food
4       that is produced and packaged on such farm),
5       if such sale is made by the farm directly to a
6       consumer. More

s.510….The Testor Amendment added to the Managers Amendment

Leave a comment

NOTE: Infected eggs are in the news as we send this message. This once again demonstrates our contention that industrial farms are riskier than small farms. That’s one reason we work so hard to protect small farms from federal regulations that industrial farms can afford, but small farms cannot. Speaking of which . . .

The routine is getting familiar . . .

1. We tell you that Senate bill S.510, the so-called Food Safety bill, could be coming up for a vote.

2. You ask your Senators to oppose the bill, or to offer amendments to protect small businesses and farms.

3. Panicked by the public opposition, the Senate postpones the vote.

4. Several weeks later we all repeat steps 1 through 3.

Well, it’s happening again. We understand that S.510 will likely be put to a vote in September.

But this time, the bill will have many of the changes we demanded!

Although S.510 should still be opposed, we should also encourage Congress to retain the good changes that have been made to the bill, just in case it passes. Please send Congress a letter about this using our Preserve the Freedom to Farm campaign.

You may borrow from or copy this letter . . .

I oppose S.510 because we need FEWER regulations. A free market backed by criminal and civil penalties for fraud and negligence will hold food producers to the highest standards. That’s because in a free market, consumers will avoid producers with bad reputations.

I am, however, pleased with the changes made in the Manager’s Amendment to S.510. With these changes . . . http://help.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/WHI10337.pdf

* Only foods already regulated by the FDA will be subject to S.510 — the firewall between the FDA and USDA-regulated foods will be maintained
* Farms, restaurants, and other businesses that were not already designated food “facilities,” as defined by the Bio-terrorism Act of 2002, will not need to register with the FDA. http://thehill.com/images/stories/blogs/smallfarms.pdf
* Farms engaged in low or no risk activities will be exempted from new regulatory requirements
* The compliance burden for small producers has been minimized
* The FDA is prohibited from requiring farms and other food facilities to hire consultants to write food safety plans
* Food that is direct marketed from farmers to consumers and stores will be exempt from the tracking and record keeping requirements, as will food that has labeling that preserves the identity of the farm that produced the food
* The FDA cannot require farms to keep records beyond the point where the product leaves the farm More

%d bloggers like this: