“Monsanto Protection Act” H.R. 933

On July 23, 2016, we discontinued our forums. We ask our members to please join us in our new community site, The Hartmann Report. Please note that you will have to register a new account on The Hartmann Report.

8 posts / 0 new

Liberty-Pac : Once again we the people have failed to hold our elected Representatives accountable. I would ask the readers of this venue.... what have you done lately to make difference? But we already know the answer to that question don't we? To the few brave souls we do have out on the field, once again we have to tow the line. Thanks to all the patriots for all your sacrifices and hard work. If you haven't already, please sign the Petition today opposing “Monsanto's Protection Act” H.R.933 page: 34 section 735

By: Connor Adams Sheets International Business Times | March 28 2013

“A national chorus of rage is rising over the "Monsanto Protection Act," a provision of the H.R. 933 spending bill that was passed by (Congress) this month and signed into law Tuesday by President Barack Obama.

Many voters will be wondering how their members of Congress voted on The H.R. 933 continuing resolution. This article provides a brief primer on the criticisms of Section 735 of the bill -- a provision that opponents have dubbed the "Monsanto Protection Act" -- followed by a breakdown of how each member of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives voted on it.

The language in Section 735 effectively bars federal courts from being able to halt the sale or planting of genetically modified crops and seeds, no matter what health consequences from their consumption may come to light in the future, according to interpretations of the law included in a petition against the provision that was circulated by the advocacy group Food Democracy Now.

"This provision is simply an industry ploy to continue to sell genetically engineered seeds even when a court of law has found they were approved by USDA illegally," the petition stated. "It is unnecessary and an unprecedented attack on U.S. judicial review. Congress should not be meddling with the judicial review process based solely on the special interest of a handful of companies. Many food safety advocates maintain that there have not been enough studies into the potential health risks of GMO and GE seeds and crops, and the judicial power to stop companies from selling or planting them was one key recourse they were relying on to stop them from being sold if health risks come to light."

The petition was signed by more than 200,000 people during a drive aimed at getting Obama to veto the bill that Congress sent to his desk. But their effort was not able to sway Obama, and the provision is now in force for the six months during which the continuing provision will remain the law of the land.

Now protesters, food advocates, organic farmers and others are coming together in a push either for Section 735 to somehow be repealed, or at least for it to be struck from any permanent legislation that will likely arise as the period of the continuing resolution draws to a close later this year.

Below is a breakdown of the congressional voting record on HR 933, which provides insight into just how the bill, Section 735 included, made it from the Capitol to the White House: Here is the 73-26-1 Senate roll call vote breakdown on HR 933, as compiled by the Senate's clerk office.”

Video Food INC.

Liberty-Pac's picture
Liberty-Pac
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 9:55 pm

Comments

Adding Section 735 to the continuing resolution was very clever by the Monsanto Legislators. Since no President has a line item veto they new it would be the perfect bill to attach this horrible rider.

I agree with Liberty-Pac that our elected officials should be held accountable.

AND, that the discussion on "line item veto" be ignited again.

I urge you to not lose heart, Monsanto will be defeated, it will just take time.

Please support any effort in your state to label GMO.... 14 states now have legislation pending:

AlaskaHJR.5 Opposes AquaBounty’s petition to commercialize GE salmon, requests further examination of GE salmon, and proposes a label of “genetically modified” to accompany the fish if approved. Introduced January 28, 2013 by Representatives Tarr, Kawasaki, Austerman, Reinbold, Tuck, and Kerttula.

ArizonaSB.1180 Considers any food entirely or partially produced by genetic engineering without the label “genetically engineered” or implies that the food is naturally grown or all natural as misbranding. Introduced January 24, 2013 by Senator Ableser.

ColoradoHB.1192 The bill defines “genetically engineered” and requires a person selling, distributing, or offering for sale food in Colorado that he or she is aware contains genetically engineered material or was produced with genetically engineered material to label the food as follows: “This product contains genetically engineered material or was produced with genetically engineered material”. The bill exempts certain foods from the labeling requirement. Introduced January 31, 2013 by Representative Labuda.

Hawaii – There are seven (7) bills:

HB.174 Requires specific labeling for any food or raw agricultural commodity sold in Hawaii that contains or was produced with a genetically engineered material. Introduced January 18, 2013 by Representatives Carroll, Lowen, Mizuno, Evans, and Souki.

HB.348 Requires genetically engineered food products that are sold, offered for sale, or distributed in this State to be labeled as such, with certain exceptions. Introduced January 22, 2013 by Representatives Lowen and C. Lee.

HB.733/SB.1290 Requires the labeling of genetically engineered whole food sold in Hawaii. Introduced January 24, 2013 by Representatives Wooley, Hanohano, Ing, Lowen, Belatti, Brower, C. Lee, Luke, McKelvey, Morikawa, and Nishimoto and Senators Gabbard, English, Green, Ruderman, Shimabukuro, Chun Oakland, and L. Thielen.

SB.468 Establishes labeling requirements for any food or raw agricultural commodity sold in Hawaii that contains a genetically engineered material or was produced with a genetically engineered material. Introduced January 18, 2013 by Senators English, Chun Oakland, Gabbard, Keith-Agaran, Ruderman, Shimabukuro, Solomon, Galuteria, Green, Kahele, and L. Thielen.

SB.615 Prohibits the sale of genetically engineered fish or genetically engineered fish products in Hawaii unless appropriately labeled as genetically engineered or produced or partially produced with genetic engineering. Introduced January 18, 2013 by Senators Gabbard, Ruderman, Chun Oakland, Shimabukuro, and L. Thielen.

SB.934 Requires genetically engineered food products that are sold, offered for sale, or distributed in Hawaii to be labeled as such, with certain exceptions, and establishes penalties for violations. Introduced January 24, 2013 by Senators Green, Chun Oakland, Ruderman, and Shimabukuro.

SB.1329 Requires labeling of foods that have been genetically engineered, provides a penalty for violations, and authorizes private civil enforcement of the Act. Introduced January 24, 2013 by Senator Gabbard.

Indiana HB.1196 Provides that any food that is offered for retail sale is misbranded if it is not disclosed that the food is or may have been entirely or partially produced with genetic engineering and that a food that is genetically engineered or a processed food may not state or imply that the food is natural. Introduced January 10, 2013 by Representatives Forestal and Shackelford.

Minnesota – Two bills were submitted in February 2013. Here is what I could get on them from NaturalNews: H.F. 850 and S.F. 821 would require that all food products containing GM ingredients bear the words "Produced with Genetic Engineering." H.F. 850 was introduced by Representative Karen Clark; and S.F. 821 by Senator John Marty.

Missouri – There are two (2) bills:

HB.245 Requires all food and food products sold in Missouri that are or contain genetically modified products to be labeled indicating that the food is or contains genetically modified products. Introduced January 30, 2013 by Representatives Ellington, Webb, Montecillo, Hummel, Newman, Rizzo, Ellinger, Gardner, Dunn, LaFaver, and Walton Gray.

SB.155 This act requires all genetically modified meat and fish that is raised and sold in Missouri to be identified on its label as genetically modified. Introduced January 16, 2013 by Senator Nasheed.

New HampshireHB.660 Requires the labeling of genetically engineered foods and agricultural commodities. Introduced January 3, 2013 by Representatives Mann, Massimilla, Perry, Smith, and Raymond.

New Jersey – There are two (2) bills:

AB.2955/SB.1367 Requires labeling of foods containing genetically modified material. Introduced May 21, 2012 by Representatives Wolfe, Kean, and Caride and February 6, 2012 by Senators Singer, Vitale, A.R.Bucco, Cardinale, Lesniak, Turner and Bateman.

AB.3192 Requires labeling of all foods containing genetically modified material. Introduced July 30, 2012 by Representatives Stender and Eustace.

New YorkAB.3525 Provides for the labeling of food or food products that contain a genetically modified material or that are produced with a genetically modified material, imposes penalties for false labels and misbranding, and sets forth exemptions. Introduced January 28, 2013 by Representative Rosenthal and Peoples-Stokes.

Oregon – Two (2) Bills:

HB.2175 Makes foods that contain or are produced using genetically engineered material subject to labeling requirements and declares that such foods that do not conform with labeling requirements to be misbranded. Introduced January 13, 2013 by Representative Boone.

HB.2532 Makes foods that contain or are produced using genetically engineered material subject to labeling requirements. Introduced January 13, 2013 by Representatives Holvey, Buckley, and Keny-Guyer.

Tennessee SB.894 Provides for the labeling of genetically engineered foods. Introduced February 4, 2013 by Senator Nicely.

VermontHB.112 Provides for the labeling of genetically engineered foods. Introduced January 2013 by Representatives Webb, Bartholomew, Zagar, Partridge, McCullough, Bissonnette, Burke, Buxton, Carr, Cheney, Christie, Cross, Dakin, Deen, Devereux, Donahue, Northfield, Donovan, Ellis, Emmons, Frank, French, Head, Hooper, Keenan, Krowinski, Lanpher, Lenes, Marek, Martin, Martin, Masland, McCarthy, McCormack, Miller, Mrowicki, Nuovo, Pearson, Peltz, Rachelson, Ram, Sharpe, Spengler, Stevens, Stuart, Till, Toleno, Townsend, Waite-Simpson, Wizowaty, and Woodward.

Washington – An Initiative and a Bill:

Initiative I-522, the People’s Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act.

SB.5073 Provides for the labeling of genetically engineered foods and prescribes penalties for violation. Introduced January 17, 2013 by Senators Chase, Kline, Keiser, Rolfes, and Hasegawa.

Source for List

northlander
Joined:
Feb. 14, 2013 2:23 pm

I beleive if TPP passes states and localities will have to pay damages to Monsatan if any of those laws pass and are in fact implemented.

Perhaps Obama should replace the Monsatan VP who is currently the US 'Food Czar'.

I'd like to see even One nominee who isn't a pro corporate fracking, nuke power, gmo, coal or oil driller in the Oilybomber admin.

Hope those bills pass!

Scappoose's picture
Scappoose
Joined:
Mar. 30, 2012 6:49 am

4/2/13 -

from the article on the link:

Top senator apologizes for 'Monsanto Protection Act' after public outrage

"It was originally part of the Agriculture Appropriations bill that the House Appropriations Committee reported in June 2012, and it became part of the joint House-Senate agreement completed in the fall of 2012 before Senator Mikulski became Appropriations Chairwoman,” it reads.

...

Even so, however, O’Neil added that a person in Mikulski’s place would usually be expected to stop such provisions from being put into law. "The American public have relied on Senate Democrats to be a backstop against dangerous policy riders like this," he said. "We call on [Mikulski] to ensure that this rider is stricken from any future appropriations bills."

...

As RT noted last week, Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Missouri) has been credited with crafting the language of H.R. 933 by working directly alongside Monsanto. Blunt has received $64,250 from Monsanto towards his campaign committee between 2008 and 2012.

http://rt.com/usa/protection-act-monsanto-apologizes-229/

***

That is not enough for me. Barb has lost my vote and any financial support I might be able to scrape together during future campaigns.

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 11:13 am

From above:

As RT noted last week, Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Missouri) has been credited with crafting the language of H.R. 933 by working directly alongside Monsanto. Blunt has received $64,250 from Monsanto towards his campaign committee between 2008 and 2012.

poly replies: That doesn't surprise me. Poverty-ridden Missouri is a hot-bed of conservatism. The state motto should be, "Corporations and Finance Over All".

I'm surprised the state doesn't execute people for stealing a loaf of bread. There is probably more profit to be gained by sending them to a private prison.

Heaven help the Missouri farmer who can't keep a bee from pollinating his crop with a Monsanto patented gene.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

It's absurd to use the vote on the must pass Continuing Resolution as a measure of whether you support the Monsanto Protection Act and absurd to think that Obama would veto the bill over it. This provision was inserted behind closed doors by the GOP House and Senate members led by Jack Kingston of GA who had included it in the House Ag Appropriations bill in 2012. The bill, of course, was about much more than this. You should focus your attention on the people responsible, i.e. Kingston and the Republicans who put it in there. Elections do matter. But, the bottom line is that no-one who voted on HR933 did so because of this provision; most of them were unaware it was even in there.

TechProf's picture
TechProf
Joined:
Apr. 3, 2013 8:46 am

Amen!

And, as Art so defly pointed out in this post #38 on Democrats Win 2012 Election.... :

Quote: He is signing bills like the Monsanto immunity laws

Here's the Snopes article on the Monsanto Protection bill. It turns out that the act, which nobody even knew was in the appropriations bill, expires in 6 months and simply codifies a law that has already been passed and adjudicated by the Supreme Court. In the interest of fairness, the contrary account is this:

Quote:The provision codifies existing USDA practices and elements of a 2010 Supreme Court ruling that lower courts should not automatically prohibit the planting of biotech crop varieties, or the harvest and sale of biotech crops already planted, when their commercial approval is revoked for procedural reasons. Activists have mischaracterized the rider’s actual effect and have called on Congress to have it terminated.

northlander
Joined:
Feb. 14, 2013 2:23 pm

Now, I thought that this is very funny. (Could have gone in any thread, but this one seemed to be most related to science.) Hey, it came from The Guardian. That ought to give it some gravitas.

Art's picture
Art
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

"The Saddest Thing Is This Won't Be Breaking News"

Thom plus logo As the world burns, and more and more fossil fuels are being used every day planet-wide, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels passed 416 ppm this week at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii. In the 300,000 years since the emergence of modern humans, carbon dioxide levels have never been this high.
Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system