Monsanto Protection Act - Gives Monsanto power over the guberment

[General of Darkness]

Just google Monsanto Protection Act and it was passed. This is fucking frightening.


'Monsanto Protection Act' slips silently through US Congress

THIS IS HOW POLITICS WORK .

The US House of Representatives quietly passed a last-minute addition to the Agricultural Appropriations Bill for 2013 last week - including a provision protecting genetically modified seeds from litigation in the face of health risks.

The rider, which is officially known as the Farmer Assurance Provision, has been derided by opponents of biotech lobbying as the “Monsanto Protection Act,” as it would strip federal courts of the authority to immediately halt the planting and sale of genetically modified (GMO) seed crop regardless of any consumer health concerns.

The provision, also decried as a “biotech rider,” should have gone through the Agricultural or Judiciary Committees for review. Instead, no hearings were held, and the piece was evidently unknown to most Democrats (who hold the majority in the Senate) prior to its approval as part of HR 993, the short-term funding bill that was approved to avoid a federal government shutdown.

Senator John Tester (D-MT) proved to be the lone dissenter to the so-called Monsanto Protection Act, though his proposed amendment to strip the rider from the bill was never put to a vote.

As the US legal system functions today, and largely as a result of prior lawsuits, the USDA is required to complete environmental impact statements (EIS) prior to both the planting and sale of GMO crops. The extent and effectiveness to which the USDA exercises this rule is in itself a source of serious dispute.

The reviews have been the focus of heated debate between food safety advocacy groups and the biotech industry in the past. In December of 2009, for example, Food Democracy Now collected signatures during the EIS commenting period in a bid to prevent the approval of Monsanto’s GMO alfalfa, which many feared would contaminate organic feed used by dairy farmers; it was approved regardless.

Previously discovered pathogens in Monsanto’s Roundup Ready corn and soy are suspected of causing infertility in livestock and to impact the health of plants.

So, just how much of a victory is this for biotech companies like Monsanto? Critics are thus far alarmed by the very way in which the provision made it through Congress -- the rider was introduced anonymously as the larger bill progressed through the Senate Appropriations Committee. Now, groups like the Center for Food Safety are holding Senator Mikulski (D-MD), chairman of that committee, to task and lobbing accusations of a “backroom deal” with the biotech industry.

As the Washington Times points out, the provision’s success is viewed by many as a victory by companies like Syngenta Corp, Cargill, Monsanto and affiliated PACs that have donated $7.5 million to members of Congress since 2009, and $372,000 to members of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

It remains unclear whether the bill’s six-month expiration means that the provision will be short-lived. Regardless, Food Democracy Now has begun a campaign calling on US President Barack Obama to veto the Continuing Resolution spending bill, which seems unlikely as HR 933 includes a sweeping amount of government funding.


http://edge.liveleak.com/80281E/s/s/20/media20/2013/Mar/26/LiveLeak-dot-com-93dca0baf3e8-monsanto-congress-silently-slips_si.jpg.resized.jpg?d5e8cc8eccfb6039332f41f62 49e92b06c91b4db65f5e99818bad1924e41d9d33dc1&ec_rate=200 (http://edge.liveleak.com/80281E/s/s/20/media20/2013/Mar/26/LiveLeak-dot-com-93dca0baf3e8-monsanto-congress-silently-slips_si.jpg?d5e8cc8eccfb6039332f41f6249e92b06c91b 4db65f5e99818bad1924e41d9d33dc1&ec_rate=200)

Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a30_1364344973#pSeTHC8d4v2jhhQZ.99


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16M_0EXqF9w

[vacuum]

Whoever voted for this needs to hang from a tree

[vacuum]

'Monsanto Protection Act': 5 Terrifying Things To Know About The HR 933 Provision


The "Monsanto Protection Act" is the name opponents of the Farmer Assurance Provision have given to this terrifying piece of policy, and it's a fitting moniker given its shocking content.

President Barack Obama signed a spending bill (http://www.agri-pulse.com/Obama-signs-FY-2013-funding-bill-into-law-03262013.asp), HR 933 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:h.r.933:), into law on Tuesday that includes language that has food and consumer advocates and organic farmers up in arms over their contention that the so-called "Monsanto Protection Act" is a giveaway to corporations that was passed under the cover of darkness.

There's a lot being said about it, but here are five terrifying facts about the Farmer Assurance Provision -- Section 735 of the spending bill -- to get you acquainted with the reasons behind the ongoing uproar:

1.) The "Monsanto Protection Act" effectively bars federal courts from being able to halt the sale or planting of controversial genetically modified (aka GMO) or genetically engineered (GE) seeds, no matter what health issues may arise concerning GMOs in the future. The advent of genetically modified seeds -- which has been driven by the massive Monsanto Company (http://www.monsanto.com) -- and their exploding use in farms across America came on fast and has proved a huge boon for Monsanto's profits.

But many anti-GMO folks argue there have not been enough studies into the potential health risks of this new class of crop. Well, now it appears that even if those studies are completed and they end up revealing severe adverse health effects related to the consumption of genetically modified foods, the courts will have no ability to stop the spread of the seeds and the crops they bear.


2.) The provision's language was apparently written in collusion with Monsanto. Lawmakers and companies working together to craft legislation is by no means a rare occurrence in this day and age. But the fact that Sen. Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, actually worked with Monsanto (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/food-oversight-curbs-spending-bill-outrage-article-1.1298967) on a provision that in effect allows them to keep selling seeds, which can then go on to be planted, even if it is found to be harmful to consumers, is stunning. It's just another example of corporations bending Congress (http://www.congress.org) to their will, and it's one that could have dire risks for public health in America.


3.) Many members of Congress were apparently unaware that the "Monsanto Protection Act" even existed within the bill they were voting on. HR 933 was a spending bill aimed at averting a government shutdown and ensuring that the federal government would continue to be able to pay its bills. But the Center for Food Safety maintains (http://www.takepart.com/article/2013/03/22/monsanto-protection-act-sneaks-through-spending-bill) that many Democrats in Congress were not even aware that the provision was in the legislation:
“In this hidden backroom deal, Sen. [Barbara] Mikulski turned her back on consumer, environmental and farmer protection in favor of corporate welfare for biotech companies such as Monsanto,” Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety (http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/), said in a statement. “This abuse of power is not the kind of leadership the public has come to expect from Sen. Mikulski or the Democrat Majority in the Senate.”


4.) The President did nothing to stop it, either. On Tuesday, Obama signed HR 933 while the rest of the nation was fixated on gay marriage, as the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument concerning California's Proposition 8. But just because most of the nation and the media were paying attention to gay marriage doesn't mean that others were not doing their best to express their opposition to the "Monsanto Protection Act." In fact, more than 250,000 voters signed a petition (https://leaksource.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/tell-president-obama-to-veto-the-monsanto-protection-act/) opposing the provision. And Food Democracy Now (http://www.fooddemocracynow.org/) protesters even took their fight (http://www.inquisitr.com/591630/farmers-protest-monsanto-protection-act-at-white-house/) straight to Obama, protesting in front of the White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov) against Section 735 of the bill. He signed it anyway.


5.) It sets a terrible precedent. Though it will only remain in effect for six months until the government finds another way to fund its operations, the message it sends is that corporations can get around consumer safety protections if they get Congress on their side. Furthermore, it sets a precedent that suggests that court challenges are a privilege, not a right.


“I think any time you tweak with the ability of the public to seek redress from the courts, you create a huge risk,” Seattle attorney Bill Marler -- who has represented victims of foodborne illness in successful lawsuits against corporations -- told the New York Daily News (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/food-oversight-curbs-spending-bill-outrage-article-1.1298967#ixzz2OldeqNAq).

[palani]

When the federal government acts to reduce or eliminate the liability of anyone it means that they take on the responsibility themselves.

So you sue the federal government rather than Monsanto should you have a bona fide cause of action.

California drastically limited the liability of the family of young drivers. Should you be injured by one of these you collect what you can and then sue the state for the rest.