It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

BREAKING: Senate Votes Cloture On S 510 – Must Now Be Voted On In 60 Days

page: 1
22
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   

BREAKING: Senate Votes Cloture On S 510 – Must Now Be Voted On In 60 Days


theintelhub.com

By a vote of 74 to 25, at noon today, the U.S. Senate voted for cloture on S 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act, which means it must now be voted on in the full Senate within 60 days. All amendments to the controversial food control bill must be completed by that time.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Most people I talk with don't even know about S510. There seems to be little opposition from the natural foods industry which is surprising.

I think it's interesting that the Senate is pushing S510 through just as the bill is starting to get more media attention. By the time enough protest is built up, S510 will have already passed into law.

theintelhub.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 17-11-2010 by CodeRed3D because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:11 PM
link   
Yep saw that this morning.

That's another bad bill.

Also going out of committee tomorrow : COICA bill, or chinese style censorship of the internet.

Also during the lame duck congress... the DREAM ACT, aka AMNESTY for illegals.


Lame duck congress should be ABOLISHED PRONTO.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:27 PM
link   
Should this ridiculous bill become law, I'll be interested to see how it is enforced. No way in hell they will shut down Farmer's Markets and the like.

If they plan to shut down my garden, things will really get interesting.

Keep in mind that the US is run by a cadre of criminals hell bent on controlling every aspect of the lives of those living in the US. I'm sure Jefferson would be quite proud of what this nation has become.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by CodeRed3D
 


$10 they try to force unlawful FDA regulations and pass this before the new session with the Representatives the "people" chose in a hope to put a stop to ridiculous measures like this. Just a last ditch effort.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:58 PM
link   

“It would allow the government, under Maritime Law, to define the introduction of any food into commerce (even direct sales between individuals) as smuggling into “the United States.” Since under that law, the US is a corporate entity and not a location, “entry of food into the US” covers food produced anywhere within the land mass of this country and “entering into” it by virtue of being produced.”


Yet another subsidy and established monopoly over the production and distribution food products in this country as the small farmer who sells his products to his neighbors and in his town will have his farm presumably raided and him arrested.

The free market of goods and services will be abolished and replaced with a bureaucratically selected market and services provided by government sponsored corporations. They will effectively eliminate all competition and all freedom of food selection. It will be limited to foods that are grown and sold by corporate farmers and farmers that work for the government.

This will guarantee that all people will have to eat food that has been tainted with pesticides by such glorious corporations as Monsanto who just happen to have employees working within the Food and Drug Administration.

Any trade of food between citizens in this country without a license will be a violation of Maritime Law. Christmas cookies will not be permitted to be sold, no brownies will be sold, nothing will be sold by individual to individual. You can still give these things away legally but not for profit.

Aren’t you delighted we now reside in a nation which believes that competition should take the backseat to restrictions, regulations, subsidy, and monopolization? But they have a justification for their actions which millions of Americans seem to believe, “We are doing this to protect you”.


They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~ Benjamin Franklin



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


People aren't giving up their freedom for safety. They elect on of two criminals, 3 or more in my country, who do whatever they want while they're in, and people are either expected to take it or stage a huge rebellion. I don't see freedom or choices here.
edit on 17-11-2010 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 07:34 PM
link   
Yeah it's a horrendous bill, but just think about all of the new government jobs this will produce!

I feel sorry for the poor guy who is assigned as inspector in rural central Texas...



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   
This is B.S. Whats next, ban driving vehicles so we can't get to work and provide our family with shelter and food.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by bozzchem
 





If they plan to shut down my garden, things will really get interesting.

That won't happen. Nowhere in the bill is there any wording which refers to home gardens. In fact, even small farmers and small farms that sell to local farmers markets will probably be excluded, as Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont. has proposed an amendment to S510 which would exclude them from this bill.


Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., takes issue with the way the government would regulate small food companies, the ones who stock farmer's markets and community groceries Tester has proposed an amendment to exempt small food producers from the bill. Small producers do not contribute to the problem, he said. "When I looked at this bill, I looked at it and it really does do some things to small processors and family agriculture that would be negative and further concentrate the food industry in the hands of a few guys," Tester said in a telephone news conference Wednesday. "I don't think that is healthy or good for the country." Tester's amendment would exclude small food producers who fall under the Food and Drug Administration's definition of a "very small business." To qualify for the exclusion, small food producers would have to sell a majority of their product directly to consumers, restaurants or retailers within the same state or 400 miles and make less than $500,000 annually from the business.

billingsgazette.com...

This amendment has wide support and will likely become part of the bill. If you are concerned, I would write your Senator and ask them to support Tester's amendment.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Section 5 -
Exempts food and facilities regulated by the Secretary of Agriculture under specified acts from the requirements of this Act.

Section 6 -
Exempts specified alcohol-related facilities from the requirements of this Act.
Title I - Food Safety

Subtitle A - Prevention
Section 101 -

Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) to deem a food to be misbranded if it was manufactured, processed, packed, or held in a facility that is not registered. Declares that a facility under the FFDCA does not include private residences of individuals. Requires annual registration of food facilities, including food facilities that export food. Authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to suspend the registration of any food facility for a violation of the FFDCA that could result in serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or animals. Sets forth procedures for such a registration suspension. Directs the Secretary to collect an annual fee for registration of a food facility to defray the costs of food safety activities. Terminates the authority to collect such fees after FY2014.

Section 102 -
Deems a food to be adulterated if it has been manufactured, processed, packed, transported, or held under conditions that do not meet the requirements for hazard analysis and risk-based preventive controls. Requires the owner, operator, or agent of a food facility to: (1) conduct a hazard analysis; (2) identify and implement effective preventive controls; (3) monitor preventive controls; (4) institute corrective actions as necessary; (5) conduct verification activities; and (6) maintain records of monitoring, corrective action, and verification. Authorizes the Secretary to: (1) identify hazards that are reasonably likely to occur in the absence of preventive controls; and (2) establish preventive controls for specific product types to prevent unintentional contamination throughout the supply chain. Requires the owner, operator, or agent of a food facility to implement a food safety plan before introducing any shipment of food into interstate commerce. Directs the Secretary to establish science-based standards for conducting a hazard analysis, documenting hazards, identifying and implementing preventive controls, and documenting the implementation of the preventive controls. Authorizes the Secretary to require the submission of finished product test results documenting the presence of contaminants in food posing a risk of severe adverse health consequences or death for certain high-risk food facilities after completion of pilot projects and a feasibility study. Requires the owner, operator, or agent of a food facility to implement a food defense plan that includes: (1) an identification of conditions and practices that may permit a hazard to be intentionally introduced; and (2) a description of preventive measures implemented. Authorizes the Secretary to establish by regulation or guidance preventive measures for specific product types to prevent intentional contamination throughout the supply chain. Requires the owner, operator, or agent of a facility to implement any preventive measures identified by the Secretary.

Section 103 -
Deems a food to be adulterated if it has been manufactured, processed, packed, transported, or held under conditions that do not meet performance standards. Requires the Secretary to: (1) issue science-based performance standards applicable to foods or food classes to minimize to an acceptable level, prevent, or eliminate the occurrence of the most significant foodborne contaminants and the most significant resulting hazards; and (2) publish a list of foodborne contaminants that have the greatest adverse impact on public health. Authorizes the Secretary to make recommendations to industry for conducting product sampling.

Section 104 -
Deems a food to be adulterated if it has been grown, harvested, processed, packed, sorted, transported, or held under conditions that do not meet safety standards for raw agricultural commodities. Requires the Secretary to establish scientific and risk-based food safety standards for the growing, harvesting, packing, sorting, transporting, and holding of raw agricultural commodities: (1) that are a fruit, vegetable, nut, or fungus; and (2) for which the Secretary has determined that such standards are reasonably necessary to minimize the risk of serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or animals. Requires the Secretary to provide for effective implementation of education and compliance activities. Requires the Secretary to update existing guidance related to minimizing microbial food safety hazards for fresh fruits and vegetables.


Here's a brief summary of the Bill, maybe a bit outdated, but interesting none the less.

~Keeper

edit on 11/17/2010 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 10:06 PM
link   
So let me get this right...I'm not in favor of the bill regardless..and I've already wrote to my Senator. A worthless bureaucrat of course, who has responded that she is in favor of the bill. Nevermind that, the bill itself is forbidding people to sell foods produced in their own backyards to their neighbors. Am I getting this right?



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Nonsense that no one cares... This is Monsanto's total control bill for Amerika... Here are some contact points so you can get involved and informed...

The best chance to defeat S. 510 is to defeat
the cloture and prevent a vote.

Email
your Senators now and urge them to oppose cloture for S. 510.

The threat S. 510
represents for the local food movement. It greatly expands the
FDA's jurisdiction over intrastate commerce and imposes one-size-fits-all
regulations that will make it more difficult for small farms and food processors
to remain in business. The bill must be stopped and our concerns addressed
before it can be considered for a vote.
www.citizens.org...



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by laiguana
 


Well you summed it up very nicely. So the answer is yes you are getting it correct.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 11:25 PM
link   
But it's already happening. Organic stores, ma and pa dairy farms being raided at gunpoint. It's already here, and it will only get worse.

And you know when the government aggressively pushes a bill like this, they -literally- mean business.



Not to mention this tactic of passing controversial bills around the holiday season has been done before, because they know this is the time of the year a bill such as this would be less debated and more likely to pass.
edit on 17-11-2010 by laiguana because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Here's to hoping that the short time span will kill this crooked bill because all the constituents are all too busy squabbling over their little additions to the bill to line their respective pockets. Scum bags..



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
reply to post by bozzchem
 





If they plan to shut down my garden, things will really get interesting.

That won't happen. Nowhere in the bill is there any wording which refers to home gardens. In fact, even small farmers and small farms that sell to local farmers markets will probably be excluded, as Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont. has proposed an amendment to S510 which would exclude them from this bill.


It seems you have a lot of faith in the word "probably" - as in "will probably be excluded".

Not good enough for me. I imagine also not good enough for a lot of people.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 01:21 AM
link   
Cigarettes are still legal and medical cannabis is still a Federal offense.

The FDA should be getting less power for their incompetence.

Blatant hypocrisy is worth a letter to your Senator.
edit on 18-11-2010 by xiphias because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Everyone please email your Senator, Congressman and Governor and tell them to vote against this vile piece of legislation. They can all bring political pressure to bear on this issue. Do not write a letter as it takes 3 to 4 months to process snail mail because of security measures. I have read this really makes a difference because they now use the number of emails to judge their constituents attitude towards issues and they many times change their positions based on this. Write one letter and copy and paste it to all your recipients. Here is a link to find your Senator, Congressman and Governor: contact email:
Contact Senator
Contact Congressman
Contact Govenor



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by thewanger
 


I'd love to read some of the responses people get. We might find another trail to follow. As busy as a Senator is, I've always wondered how some of them quadruple their net worth each year.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<<   2 >>

log in

join