Senate Poised to Pass Bill Taking Away Your Right to Know What's in Your Food

El_KabongEl_Kabong Posts: 4,141
edited January 2007 in A Moving Train
http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizationsORG/oca/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=2752

Senate Poised to Pass Bill Taking Away Your Right to Know What's in Your Food
Tell your Senator to vote "No" on the "National Uniformity for Food Act"


The House of Representatives has passed a controversial "national food uniformity" labeling law that would take away local government and states' power to require food safety food labels such as those required in California and other states on foods or beverages that are likely to cause cancer, birth defects, allergic reactions, or mercury poisoning. This bill would also prevent citizens in local municipalities and states from passing laws requiring that genetically engineered foods and ingredients such as Monsanto's recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) be labeled.

The Senate will soon be voting on this bill which would gut state food safety and labeling laws. The "National Uniformity for Food Act," lowers the bar on food safety by overturning state food safety laws that are not "identical" to federal law. Hundreds of state laws and regulations are at risk, including those governing the safety of milk, fish, and shellfish. The bill is being pushed by large supermarket chains and food manufacturers, spearheaded by the powerful Grocery Manufacturers of America.

Big food corporations and the biotech industry understand that consumers are more and more concerned about food safety, genetic engineering, and chemical-intensive agriculture, and are reading labels more closely. They understand that pesticide and mercury residues and hazardous technologies such as genetic engineering and food irradiation will be rejected if there are truthful labels required on food products. This industry-sponsored bill is gaining momentum and must be stopped! Act now! Preserve local and regional democracy and protect yourself and your family from unsafe food by sending an email or calling your Senator.

Read full text of the bill here) and Take action below the following news headlines...
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    El_Kabong wrote:
    http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizationsORG/oca/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=2752

    Senate Poised to Pass Bill Taking Away Your Right to Know What's in Your Food
    Tell your Senator to vote "No" on the "National Uniformity for Food Act"


    The House of Representatives has passed a controversial "national food uniformity" labeling law that would take away local government and states' power to require food safety food labels such as those required in California and other states on foods or beverages that are likely to cause cancer, birth defects, allergic reactions, or mercury poisoning. This bill would also prevent citizens in local municipalities and states from passing laws requiring that genetically engineered foods and ingredients such as Monsanto's recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) be labeled.

    The Senate will soon be voting on this bill which would gut state food safety and labeling laws. The "National Uniformity for Food Act," lowers the bar on food safety by overturning state food safety laws that are not "identical" to federal law. Hundreds of state laws and regulations are at risk, including those governing the safety of milk, fish, and shellfish. The bill is being pushed by large supermarket chains and food manufacturers, spearheaded by the powerful Grocery Manufacturers of America.

    Big food corporations and the biotech industry understand that consumers are more and more concerned about food safety, genetic engineering, and chemical-intensive agriculture, and are reading labels more closely. They understand that pesticide and mercury residues and hazardous technologies such as genetic engineering and food irradiation will be rejected if there are truthful labels required on food products. This industry-sponsored bill is gaining momentum and must be stopped! Act now! Preserve local and regional democracy and protect yourself and your family from unsafe food by sending an email or calling your Senator.

    Read full text of the bill here) and Take action below the following news headlines...

    I knew this would happen once those blasted Dems took control. ;)
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • know1 wrote:
    I knew this would happen once those blasted Dems took control. ;)


    D or R, it's all the same.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • i surely hope that something can be done to stop this from happening.
    I'll dig a tunnel
    from my window to yours
  • hippiemomhippiemom Posts: 3,326
    I sent the email. I'll send a couple of snail mail letters if I have time before the end of the day. This needs to be stopped.
    "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
  • MrBrianMrBrian Posts: 2,672
    Now why would they wanna do that? hmmmmm.
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    I don't view it as them taking away a right anyway. If you want to find out what's in your food, you can still do it. It's only setting a standard for how much the manufacturer must disclose on packaging.

    Furthermore, if all the states currently have their own regulations, then you're already just seeing what is required by those laws to be provided.

    Perhaps in some cases the national law might actually require MORE info than certain states already do...?
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • know1 wrote:
    I don't view it as them taking away a right anyway. If you want to find out what's in your food, you can still do it. It's only setting a standard for how much the manufacturer must disclose on packaging.

    Furthermore, if all the states currently have their own regulations, then you're already just seeing what is required by those laws to be provided.

    Perhaps in some cases the national law might actually require MORE info than certain states already do...?

    well, it's cheaper...there some federal laws which require the state law to demonstrate their law achieves the goal of the federal law...or does it better...when it comes to food labeling, i am sure this is the case.

    i want to know what is in my food. there should not be a standard limiting what is to be disclosed...there should be a standard requiring the disclosure of ALL things.
    I'll dig a tunnel
    from my window to yours
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    El_Kabong wrote:
    take away local government and states' power

    The Federal Government - Our babysitter


    Fuck that!!
  • 1970RR1970RR Posts: 281
    While I can understand a corporations difficulty in conforming to potentially thousands of local labeling laws, I am a firm believer in states rights and their right to pass whatever label laws their citizens deem necessary.
  • 1970RR wrote:
    While I can understand a corporations difficulty in conforming to potentially thousands of local labeling laws, I am a firm believer in states rights and their right to pass whatever label laws their citizens deem necessary.

    we are forced to know the laws of the states which we are in...there is no room to say that corporations cannot investigate the laws to which they must conform. as it stands, the state laws are nearly identical to the federal law...that means, generally, that the only thing different is wording...the outcome is still the same...

    this is something that the federal government should control...because of the mobility of our citizenry...this should be consistent...and not haphazardly different among states.
    I'll dig a tunnel
    from my window to yours
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    D or R, it's all the same.


    all sold to the highest bidder
  • my2hands wrote:
    all sold to the highest bidder

    going once...going twice...SOLD!
    I'll dig a tunnel
    from my window to yours
  • 1970RR1970RR Posts: 281
    we are forced to know the laws of the states which we are in...there is no room to say that corporations cannot investigate the laws to which they must conform. as it stands, the state laws are nearly identical to the federal law...that means, generally, that the only thing different is wording...the outcome is still the same...

    this is something that the federal government should control...because of the mobility of our citizenry...this should be consistent...and not haphazardly different among states.
    Arent many local laws haphazard from state to state? Should we federalize all those too?
    I would think that, if anything, state laws will tend to be more strict than the federal one and they should certainly have the right to require more info on labels sold in their state than the feds require. If there was some state that somehow managed to pass a law lessening label requirements - so be it, thats their choice.
  • JamMastaEJamMastaE Posts: 444
    population reduction through food supply.they already legalized cloned meat and milk....yummy
    "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot". Mark Twain


    "I would rather die on my feet than to live on my knees."
    Emiliano Zapata
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    i want to know what is in my food. there should not be a standard limiting what is to be disclosed...there should be a standard requiring the disclosure of ALL things.

    But there already are standards. They are defined by the states.

    That's why I don't understand what's wrong with this bill. Just because there will now be an overriding Federal standard, does not mean that there suddenly won't be any info on the packaging. Heck, there might be more info in a lot of situations.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • 1970RR wrote:
    Arent many local laws haphazard from state to state? Should we federalize all those too?
    I would think that, if anything, state laws will tend to be more strict than the federal one and they should certainly have the right to require more info on labels sold in their state than the feds require. If there was some state that somehow managed to pass a law lessening label requirements - so be it, thats their choice.

    the problem is cost...if the federal law lessens the requirements, the states will follow...if the states are not guided by the federal law via cooperative federalism...

    i clearly said that this is one of those situations where the federal government needs to maintain high standards because of the nature of the regulation.

    we're talking about the health and welfare of the population...if a state wants to impose a fine for murder instead of jail-time then that's their business. but, we're talking about something that effects the nation as a whole as opposed to the state. why? if the federal standard minimizes that which is to be disclosed, then the states follow...all food shipped interstate will lack disclosure...the nation is left in the dark about what is or is not in their food.

    i'm sorry...you have a lot more faith in people if you want to trust your state to disclose such information when they are not directed to do so by some higher overseeing entity.
    I'll dig a tunnel
    from my window to yours
  • know1 wrote:
    But there already are standards. They are defined by the states.

    That's why I don't understand what's wrong with this bill. Just because there will now be an overriding Federal standard, does not mean that there suddenly won't be any info on the packaging. Heck, there might be more info in a lot of situations.

    it's the classic race to the bottom...it's about cost...without true oversight, the states will shirk their responsibility to their citizens.
    I'll dig a tunnel
    from my window to yours
  • 1970RR1970RR Posts: 281
    the problem is cost...if the federal law lessens the requirements, the states will follow...if the states are not guided by the federal law via cooperative federalism...

    i clearly said that this is one of those situations where the federal government needs to maintain high standards because of the nature of the regulation.

    we're talking about the health and welfare of the population...if a state wants to impose a fine for murder instead of jail-time then that's their business. but, we're talking about something that effects the nation as a whole as opposed to the state. why? if the federal standard minimizes that which is to be disclosed, then the states follow...all food shipped interstate will lack disclosure...the nation is left in the dark about what is or is not in their food.

    i'm sorry...you have a lot more faith in people if you want to trust your state to disclose such information when they are not directed to do so by some higher overseeing entity.
    I think the whole reason this was posted is because the current state laws out there are more strict than the federal requirements and the industry wants to standardize it so they wont have to conform to the wishes of a state like CA, which wants much more info on their labels.
    You seem to have too much faith that the feds will maintain a high standard, rather than caving to special interests as is usual.
  • JamMastaEJamMastaE Posts: 444
    know1 wrote:
    But there already are standards. They are defined by the states.

    That's why I don't understand what's wrong with this bill. Just because there will now be an overriding Federal standard, does not mean that there suddenly won't be any info on the packaging. Heck, there might be more info in a lot of situations.



    wrong!! the law lets them lie on the label and omit what they please,also they can label non-organic food as organic,also the FDA would MAKE STATES comply with the company making said product.California has some of the best labeling laws and people are up in arms.
    "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot". Mark Twain


    "I would rather die on my feet than to live on my knees."
    Emiliano Zapata
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    JamMastaE wrote:
    wrong!! the law lets them lie on the label and omit what they please,also they can label non-organic food as organic,also the FDA would MAKE STATES comply with the company making said product.California has some of the best labeling laws and people are up in arms.

    Read the original post a little slower and think about what it says and what it doesn't say (remember, it's presenting only 1 side).
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • 1970RR wrote:
    I think the whole reason this was posted is because the current state laws out there are more strict than the federal requirements and the industry wants to standardize it so they wont have to conform to the wishes of a state like CA, which wants much more info on their labels.
    You seem to have too much faith that the feds will maintain a high standard, rather than caving to special interests as is usual.

    i don't have faith in them...i want the states to decide...i think there is a norm now which must be reached and some states go above that...but, with a new standard set, such as the one proposed, states will race to that standard...and leave us in the dark.
    I'll dig a tunnel
    from my window to yours
  • hippiemomhippiemom Posts: 3,326
    If the voters in California have decided that they want to be informed about arsenic levels in bottled water, whether their fish is farmed or wild-caught, whether their produce was irradiated, whether their cereal contains genetically modified organisms, where the hell does the federal government get off saying they can't demand that products be so labeled in their state?

    Any company that finds the California rules too cumbersome is, of course, free to refrain from doing business in California.
    "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
  • fanch75fanch75 Posts: 3,734
    MrBrian wrote:
    Now why would they wanna do that? hmmmmm.

    Somebody's getting paid some serious bling
    Do you remember Rock & Roll Radio?
  • hippiemom wrote:
    If the voters in California have decided that they want to be informed about arsenic levels in bottled water, whether their fish is farmed or wild-caught, whether their produce was irradiated, whether their cereal contains genetically modified organisms, where the hell does the federal government get off saying they can't demand that products be so labeled in their state?

    Any company that finds the California rules too cumbersome is, of course, free to refrain from doing business in California.

    thank you...i'm starting to get angry...i want to know what's in my food...the federal government should be placing higher standards on food labeling...not limiting the standard.
    I'll dig a tunnel
    from my window to yours
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    fanch75 wrote:
    Somebody's getting paid some serious bling

    Are you saying big business runs our government? That's not true, is it? :rolleyes: :p
  • 1970RR1970RR Posts: 281
    hippiemom wrote:
    If the voters in California have decided that they want to be informed about arsenic levels in bottled water, whether their fish is farmed or wild-caught, whether their produce was irradiated, whether their cereal contains genetically modified organisms, where the hell does the federal government get off saying they can't demand that products be so labeled in their state?

    Any company that finds the California rules too cumbersome is, of course, free to refrain from doing business in California.
    This issue is very similar to the medical marijuana laws being passed. Except in those cases, the feds send in the stormtroopers to override it.
  • El_KabongEl_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    know1 wrote:
    I don't view it as them taking away a right anyway. If you want to find out what's in your food, you can still do it. It's only setting a standard for how much the manufacturer must disclose on packaging.

    Furthermore, if all the states currently have their own regulations, then you're already just seeing what is required by those laws to be provided.

    Perhaps in some cases the national law might actually require MORE info than certain states already do...?

    perhaps, but are products labeled that have gmo's? rgbh? sure, i can research and find out if certain brands do but what's wrong w/ just making it clear? i don't see the reason in not labeling such things, i'm sure lots of ppl would like to know
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
Sign In or Register to comment.