Example of Why Senators Continue the Monsanto Protection Act

I’ve been an annoying little constituent lately and have been calling and emailing my Representatives and Senators about two main issues: the sneaky War on Syria and the continuation of the Monsanto Protection Act. Since one of these Reps and my Senator required me to use an online form to contact them instead of just sending the petition electronically, I decided to click “yes” when asked if I wanted a response, in part as tit for tat, but also because really, I want to know what in the world these people are thinking!!

I received a letter from Rep. Jackie Walorski saying that she’s “not on the committee” but would “keep your thoughts in mind” should it ever come to a House vote again. The letter very carefully does not reveal any indication of her stance on GMO’s, stating instead “it’s a complicated issue.” Um, yeah! Runaway, poisonous genes in plants that have been shown to cause cancer, endocrine disruption, colony collapse disorder, exploding cow stomachs, and severely impaired human digestion … vs. ??? Money? Yep, pretty complicated. But I digress …

Today, I received an email from Senator Joe Donnelly respectfully indicating why he would (presumably) continue to support the Monsanto Protection Act whenever it comes to vote. I understand his concerns in that he doesn’t want Indiana farmers to be forced to destroy their crops should a court determine a crop is toxic or dangerous.

Sort of. I get that it’s money, and a farmer’s livelihood, and we have a lot of farmers in Indiana.

On the other hand, if a company wanted to release a chemical or biological weapon and call it “aspartame” and that substance appeared in everything from say, children’s food to “health” foods until people wised up enough to try to avoid it, causing a movement to try to change the definition of “milk” so that customers of that company could secretly include it without putting it on a label, even though many, many studies have proven how toxic that substance is, hypothetically speaking … oh, wait! That scenario’s already happened… Pardon me for not having much faith in the USDA.

Long term effects of GMO’s are unknown, but the actual independent studies (as opposed to the self regulatory “assurances” of Monsatan, et. al.) show shocking tumors, pesticide and herbicide residues in people who eat “Roundup resistant” crops, as well as GMO DNA appearing in newborns. To me, the future of the human species and the health of the planet are a wee bit more important than whether a farmer might be forced to destroy a crop found to kill, cause cancer or destroy agriculture by destroying bees. I mean, doesn’t the US government try to orchestrate WW3 over “chemical weapons”?

Anyway, I’m posting Senator Donnelly’s response, because it gives some insight into what we’re dealing with. Perhaps we need to educate farmers or appeal to their conscience. Do they really want to be personally responsible for poisoning humanity and causing an international refusal to buy US agricultural products, as happened when illegal GMO wheat grew in fields where it was never planted? Are they morally comfortable with protecting their income at the expense of possibly giving hundreds of thousands of consumers cancer? Are they morally comfortable with ruining organic farmers’ livelihoods due to uncontrolled genetic drift?

Maybe they are. I’ve read that most GMO farmers won’t consume their own “food.” I don’t know the answer to this issue. I support labeling actions but fear they may be too little, too late. How do we get to farmers other than boycotting their toxic crops and growing our own? How do we get lawmakers to recognize the sanctity of human DNA and health over the almighty dollar?

September 24, 2013

Dear Ms. Bruno,

I appreciate the time you took to contact me about the “Farmer Assurance Provision” in H.J. Res. 59, the continuing resolution for fiscal year 2014. Like you, I believe that consumers should have complete confidence in the food they purchase.

As you may know, H.R. 933, or the continuing resolution for fiscal year 2013, was passed into law on March 26, 2013. In H.R. 933, the section referred to as the “Farmer Assurance Provision,” gives the USDA the ability to temporarily allow farmers to continue producing previously approved crops should the crop’s approval be invalidated in court. The temporary allowance is only applicable during the period necessary for either the USDA to complete any court required analysis, or for the court challenges to be resolved. After the USDA completes its review, production of the challenged crop could only continue according to the conditions established in the additional review.

This provision ensures that farmers who decide to plant an approved crop are not ordered to destroy their fields and left without a year’s income in the event that one court disagrees with the USDA’s approval decision.

H.R. 933 extended the continuing resolution temporarily. It is set to expire on September 30, 2013. On September 19, 2013, the House of Representatives passed H.J. Res. 59, which contains the same “Farmer Assurance Provision” included in H.R. 933. Should this legislation come before the full Senate for a vote, I will be sure to keep your concerns in mind.
It is a privilege to represent you and all Hoosiers in the U.S. Senate. Your continued correspondence is welcome and helps me to better represent our state. I encourage you to write, call, or email if my office can ever be of assistance. You can also check out my Facebook page and follow me on Twitter by visiting my website .

6 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by bob jones on September 24, 2013 at 4:20 pm

    They are very tough decisions for cowardly, corrupt and treasonous politicians. For decent, honorable and freedom loving people, not so much. Maybe that’s why their approval ratings are in the single digits.

    Like

  2. Indeed! That’s why I’ve decided to become annoying. Why should they get a free pass and get to weenie out of responsibility? We pay their salaries. If they’re not up to snuff, they should be let go. Thanks to them and their consistently awful choices, it’s a “tough economy.” Too bad, so sad, we’re going to have to let them go….

    Like

  3. Posted by vega1013 on September 24, 2013 at 9:03 pm

    It’s very telling that many GMO farmers won’t eat their own crops. Reminds me of cancer doctors who say they wouldn’t take chemotherapy or radiation if they got cancer. In both cases, apparently it’s ok as long as they’re making money selling the stuff, regardless of the hypocrisy.

    Like

  4. […] out of it once the shackles are on. The TPP takes NAFTA, CAFTA, Codex Alimentarius, Agenda 21, the Monsanto Protection Act, and the Bankers Manifesto of 1892 and puts all of these on GMO steroids to become the Frankenstein […]

    Like

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: