Thread: GMO Labeling Bill Voted Down In Senate

GMO Labeling Bill Voted Down In Senate


Friday, May 24, 2013 5:27

The United States Senate decided again Thursday that it simply does not want to let states tell people whether or not they are eating genetically modified food.
The Senate voted overwhelmingly – 71 to 27 – against an amendment to the sweeping farm bill, squashing a measure that would not have required labeling of genetically modified organisms, but merely would have let states decide if they wanted to require such labeling.

“The concept we’re talking about today is a fairly commonsense and non-radical idea,” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the sponsor of the amendment, said shortly before the vote. “All over the world, in the European Union, in many other countries around the world, dozens and dozens of countries, people are able to look at the food that they are buying and determine through labeling whether or not that product contains genetically modified organisms.”
Sanders has noted that more than 3,000 ingredients are required to be labeled, but genetically modified ingredients are not part of that list. His state and Connecticut have passed laws to require such labeling, but Sanders said local leaders fear that large biotech corporations such as Monsanto could sue the states on the grounds that they are preempting federal authority. He said his bill would make clear that states can do what they want on the issue.

But Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), the chair of the Agriculture Committee, argued that the measure “is not germane to the farm bill” in the first place. She also said the labels run counter to science and the public interest in healthy food.
“This particular amendment would interfere with the FDA’s science-based process to determine what food labeling is necessary for consumers,” Stabenow said.


“It’s also important to note that around the world now we are seeing genetically modified crops that have the ability to resist crop diseases and improve nutritional content and survive drought conditions in many developing countries,” she added. “We see wonderful work being done by foundations like the Gates Foundation and others, that are using new techniques to be able to feed hungry people,” she said, although it was not clear how labeling would affect such efforts.
Sanders’ office pointed out that 64 countries around the world require GMO labeling.
“I believe we must rely on the FDA’s science-based examination before we make conclusions about food ingredients derived from genetically modified foods,” Stabenow said. “They currently do not require special labeling because they’ve determined that food content of these ingredients does not materially differ from their conventional counterparts.”
While Stabenow seemed assured of the safety of genetically modified food, there is in fact significant debate about whether or not it will prove safe in the long run. There are also growing concerns about the environmental impacts.
The lack of labeling also makes it much harder for consumers who oppose GMOs — whether they think they are healthy or not — from voting against them in the marketplace. Most of the processed food on U.S. store shelves contains genetically modified ingredients, including corn and soybeans.
Sanders put forth a similar amendment last year, but it was voted down as well. He promised on Thursday to keep trying. “The people of Vermont and the people of America have a right to know what’s in the food that they eat,” he said in a statement after the vote.
Source:
huffingtonpost.com

Source: http://worldtruth.tv/gmo-labeling-bill-voted-down-in-senate/


Interestingly the people we voted in to office to protect us don't think so, are we awake yet !!!!

The change in the global diet

The End of Food





Journalist Paul Roberts, Author of "The End of Food" cautions us about the demise of the modern food economy.

About the book (from theendoffood.com):

In this carefully researched, vividly recounted narrative, Roberts lays out the stark economic realities beneath modern food�and shows how our system for making, marketing, and moving what we eat is growing less and less compatible with the billions of consumers that system was built to serve.

At the heart of The End of Food is a grim paradox: the rise of large-scale, hyper-efficient industrialized food production, though it generates more food more cheaply than at any time in history, has reached a point of dangerously diminishing returns. Our high-volume factory systems are creating new risks for food-borne illness�from E. coli and Salmonella to avian flu. Our high-yield crops and livestock generate grain, vegetables, and meat of declining nutritional quality. Overproduction is so routine that nearly one billion people are now overweight or obese worldwide�and yet those extra calories are still so unevenly distributed that the same number of people�one billion, roughly one in every seven of us�can't get enough to eat. In some of the hardest-hit regions, such as sub-Saharan Africa, the lack of a single nutrient�vitamin A�has left more than 3 million children permanently blind.

Meanwhile, the shift to heavily mechanized, chemically intensive farming has so compromised the soils, water systems, and other natural infrastructure upon which all food production depends that it's unclear how long such output can be maintained. And just as we've begun to understand the limits of our industrialized superabundance, the burgeoning economies of Asia, where newly wealthy consumers are rapidly adopting Western-style, meat-heavy diets, are putting new demands on global food supplies.

Comprehensive and global, with lucid writing, dramatic detail and fresh insights, The End of Food offers readers new, accessible way to understand the vulnerable miracle of the modern food economy. Roberts presents clear, stark visions of the future and helps us prepare to make the decisions -- personal and global -- we must make to survive the demise of food production as we know it.


In recent history, scientists have attempted
to fix problems in the food supply without
looking at the system as a whole.

When approached this way, what we thought
were solutions later turn into problems.

Journalist Paul Roberts tells us how this cycle
is doomed to failure, illustrated with the tale
of how antibiotics came to be used in feed
for livestock.

Video (9:59):

http://www.therealfoodchannel.com/page/11262.html

- Traci Styner
The Real Food Channel

Revolting.

The Monsanto 71 - Sellout senators shame themselves by siding with Monsanto on GMO labeling bill

NaturalNews) The U.S. Senate recently had an opportunity to vote on a farm bill amendment that would have supported the rights of states to mandate GMO labeling laws. The amendment, S.AMDT.965, was introduced by Sen. Bernie Sanders with the aim "...to permit States to require that any food, beverage, or other edible product offered for sale have a label on indicating that the food, beverage, or other edible product contains a genetically engineered ingredient."

This amendment quickly separated the wheat from the chaff, so to speak, on which U.S. senators believe in the rights of the people vs. the domination of corporations like Monsanto. Astonishingly, it also revealed that the two darling senators of the liberty movement -- Sen. Rand Paul and Sen. Ted Cruz -- were willing to sell out the people and vote in favor of Monsanto. (They both voted against the amendment to allow states to set GMO labeling laws.)

n all, seventy-one U.S. Senators, both democrats and republicans, voted against that amendment, selling out the American people to the interests of Monsanto. Many said they did so because they didn't want food labeling to be fragmented state by state. Food labeling is an issue the FDA should tackle, they explained. Yet the FDA is just another corporate sellout, we all know.

Waiting around for the FDA to mandate GMO labeling is as foolish as waiting around for the Democratic party to endorse the Bill of Rights and follow the Constitution. Or waiting around for Republicans to endorse gay marriage of illegal immigrants on food stamps. It ain't gonna happen, folks. The FDA has long sold out to corporate interests, and it is involved in making sure the American people have no real clue what they're eating.

71 senators betray the people and sell out to Monsanto

The only way to get GMOs labeled is to get it done state by state, and these 71 U.S. Senators have now thrown down the gauntlet, stating they believe states have no right to mandate GMO labeling at the local level!

Keep that in mind the next time Rand Paul or Ted Cruz talks about "liberty and justice" Where was their justice on the issue of GMO labeling? How does keeping people in the dark on what they're eating create a more free society?

For God's sake, what does it take to get somebody in Washington D.C. to consistently and unswervingly vote on the side of liberty and freedom every single time? (Bring back Ron Paul!)

The "Monsanto 71"

Today, Natural News publishes the list of these 71 U.S. senators, and we will re-publish this list several times leading up to the 2014 elections. Our goal is to make sure these senators change their position on GMO labeling or lose their seats if they don't change.

Yes, it is true that many of these senators have done commendable work on other issues. Sen. Grassley, for example, has a solid track record of investigating the FDA and blowing the whistle on other federal fiascos.

But there is no excuse for betraying the American people on this issue. There is no excuse for selling out to Monsanto and the GMO industry. Don't the American people deserve to know what they are eating? Don't moms of autistic children deserve to have accurate food labels so they can avoid bt toxin when shopping for their kids?

And my message to the Monsanto 71 is that you'd better rethink your positions very carefully (especially Cruz, Paul and Grassley). Your vote puts you on the wrong side of history... and the wrong side of public opinion. We expect better of you. We expect you to be champions for the People, not puppets for Monsanto.

Sure, for senators like McCain and McCaskill, we expect them to be sellouts. Their souls are already slated to rot in Hell for their conscious commitment to evil. But for those who offer real hope for liberty -- like Cruz and Ryan -- we expect you to do better!

If you continue to disappoint us on this issue, we will fight like mad to remove you from office at the next voting opportunity. And for me personally, as the editor of Natural News, there are only two issues that really determine our endorsements for the next election: GMO labeling and Second Amendment. We the People want our food labeled and our rifles protected. We want the freedom that comes from government getting out of our private lives but the accountability that comes from government forcing large corporations to at least tell the truth about what's in the food they're selling us.

Yes, government has a role in a free society: Protect liberties from tyranny and protect consumers from corporate deceptions. Regardless of party affiliation, Senators who endorse GMO labeling while protecting the Bill of Rights will receive support from Natural News. Those who do not will be publicly shamed for selling out.

Here's the list of the Monsanto 71:
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Baldwin (D-WI)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Brown (D-OH)
Burr (R-NC)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Coons (D-DE)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Cowan (D-MA)
Crapo (R-ID)
Cruz (R-TX)
Donnelly (D-IN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Enzi (R-WY)
Fischer (R-NE)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Heller (R-NV)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kaine (D-VA)
Kirk (R-IL)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lee (R-UT)
Levin (D-MI)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Moran (R-KS)
Nelson (D-FL)
Paul (R-KY)
Portman (R-OH)
Pryor (D-AR)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Scott (R-SC)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Shelby (R-AL)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Thune (R-SD)
Toomey (R-PA)
Udall (D-CO)
Vitter (R-LA)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Wicker (R-MS)

How to contact your senators:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contac...nators_cfm.cfm

Sources for this article:
http://www.realfarmacy.com/list-of-senators-who-voted-against-gmo-ame...

http://eatlocalgrown.com/article/11524-the-monsanto-71-senators-who-b...

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/gmo-labeling-bill-shot-down-in-senate-...

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040523_Mo...#ixzz2Un4hmmR4

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040523_Mo...#ixzz2Un4bRETh

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040523_Mo...#ixzz2Un4WsBOi

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040523_Mo...#ixzz2Un4QVqLF

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040523_Mo...#ixzz2Un40tCvD

USDA: Non-approved genetically modified wheat found in Oregon field

By Associated Press Published: May 29, 2013 at 11:53 AM PDT Last Updated: May 29, 2013 at 3:06 PM PDT



Wheat growing in Eastern Oregon. (Photo from Oregon State University)

WASHINGTON (AP) — Unapproved genetically engineered wheat has been discovered in an Oregon field, a potential threat to trade with countries that have concerns about genetically modified foods.

The Agriculture Department said Wednesday that the genetically engineered wheat is safe to eat and there is no evidence that modified wheat entered the marketplace. But the department is investigating how it ended up in the field, whether there was any criminal wrongdoing and whether its growth is widespread.

"We are taking this very seriously," said Michael Firko of the Agriculture Department's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.

A farmer discovered the genetically modified plants on his farm and contacted Oregon State University, which notified USDA early this month, Firko said.

No genetically engineered wheat has been approved for U.S. farming. USDA officials said the wheat is the same strain as a genetically modified wheat that was legally tested by seed giant Monsanto a decade ago but never approved. Monsanto stopped testing that product in Oregon and several other states in 2005.

The discovery could have far-reaching implications for the U.S. wheat industry if the growth of the engineered product turns out to be far-flung. Many countries around the world will not accept imports of genetically modified foods, and the United States exports about half of its wheat crop.

Oregon Department of Agriculture Director Katy Coba said in a statement that the discovery is "a very serious development that could have major trade ramifications." The state exports about 90 percent of its wheat.

"I am concerned that a highly regulated plant material such as genetically modified wheat somehow was able to escape into a crop field," Coba said.

USDA officials declined to speculate whether the modified seeds blew into the field from a testing site or if they were somehow planted or taken there, and they would not identify the farmer or the farm's location. The Oregon Department of Agriculture said the field is in the eastern part of the state.

The discovery also could have implications for organic companies, which by law cannot use genetically engineered ingredients in its foods. Organic farmers have frequently expressed concern that genetically modified seed will blow into organic farms and contaminate their products.

U.S. consumers have shown increasing interest in avoiding genetically modified foods. There has been little evidence to show that modified foods are less safe than their conventional counterparts, but several state legislatures are considering bills that would require them to be labeled so consumers know what they are eating.

While most of the corn and soybeans grown in the United States are already modified, the country's wheat crop is not.

USDA said the unidentified farmer discovered the modified wheat when farm workers were trying to kill some wheat plants that popped up between harvests. The farmer used the herbicide glyphosate to kill the plants, but they did not die, prompting the tests at Oregon State to find out if the crops were genetically engineered to resist herbicides.

The tests confirmed that the plants were a strain developed by Monsanto to resist its Roundup Ready herbicides and were tested between 1998 and 2005. At the time Monsanto had applied to USDA for permission to develop the engineered wheat, but the company later pulled its application.

The Agriculture Department said that during that seven-year period, it authorized more than 100 field tests with the same glyphosate-resistant wheat variety. Tests were conducted in in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington and Wyoming.

During that testing and application process, the Food and Drug Administration reviewed the variety found in Oregon and said it was as safe as conventional varieties of wheat.

In a statement issued Wednesday, Monsanto noted that this is the first report since its program was discontinued.

"While USDA's results are unexpected, there is considerable reason to believe that the presence of the Roundup Ready trait in wheat, if determined to be valid, is very limited," the company said.

USDA officials confirmed they have received no other reports of discoveries of genetically modified wheat. Firko and Acting Deputy Secretary of Agriculture Michael T. Scuse said they have already been in touch with international trading partners to try and assuage any concerns.

"Hopefully our trading partners will be understanding that this is not a food or feed safety issue," Scuse said.

___

Associated Press writers Nigel Duara and Tim Fought in Portland, Ore., contributed to this report.

___

Follow Mary Clare Jalonick on Twitter at http://twitter.com/mcjalonick

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.