While Gay marriage debate rages, Obama signs into law Monsanto protection act

Well this is fantastic.......Mr.Copperfield does it again.....

While everyone was focused on gay marriage, Mr Obama signs into law a protection act for monsanto....

Slipped into the Agricultural Appropriations Bill, which passed through Congress last week, was a small provision that’s a big deal for Monsanto and its opponents.
The provision protects genetically modified seeds from litigation in the face of health risks and has thus been dubbed the “Monsanto Protection Act” by activists who oppose the biotech giant.

President Barack Obama signed the spending bill, including the provision, into law on Tuesday

Fantastic so even tho he was aware of this.......he decides THIS is the best thing for Americans....even tho there are PROVEN health risks and cancer risks with these GMO ticking time bombs......THIS is whats best for America......

Of course its SO good for America that we have to SNEAK it in......in another bill, and THEN at the same time everyones attention is directed somewhere else........

This president has done this for the last 4 years at every turn......he is a master at slight of hand..

More info here...

Since the act’s passing, more than 250,000 people have signed a petition opposing the provision and a rally, consisting largely of farmers organized by the Food Democracy Now network, protested outside the White House Wednesday.
Not only has anger been directed at the Monsanto Protection Act’s content, but the way in which the provision was passed through Congress without appropriate review by the Agricultural or Judiciary Committees. The biotech rider instead was introduced anonymously as the larger bill progressed — little wonder food activists are accusing lobbyists and Congress members of backroom dealings.

The Food Democracy Now and the Center for Food are directing blame at the Senate Appropriations Committee and its chairman, Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md. According to reports, many members of Congress were apparently unaware that the “Monsanto Protection Act” even existed within the spending bill, HR 933; they voted in order to avert a government shutdown.

“It sets a terrible precedent,” noted the International Business Times. “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.”

Source
So whats his excuse? He didnt read the bill? or he agreed with it? Neither is acceptable......

Thoughts?

My thoughts are that we have ourselves to blame and to thy own self be true. We should have known...by now especially, we should have expected that something BAD was afoot and going to pass while the media was wall-to-wall coverage on a social policy dispute which has a history of several Presidents. Damn... Sneaky on that one. Didn't even get much more than passing mention earlier on ..and now? Well, forgiveness rather than permission, right?

Or... We gotta pass it before you see what your screwed with....as it's sure coming to be more often, huh?

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
My thoughts are that we have ourselves to blame and to thy own self be true. We should have known...by now especially, we should have expected that something BAD was afoot and going to pass while the media was wall-to-wall coverage on a social policy dispute which has a history of several Presidents. Damn... Sneaky on that one. Didn't even get much more than passing mention earlier on ..and now? Well, forgiveness rather than permission, right?

Or... We gotta pass it before you see what your screwed with....as it's sure coming to be more often, huh?

I absolutely agree with you.....

Anytime the media spends SO much time and resources on something like this , I ALWAYS ask, whats going on, what are they not telling us......whats happening behind the scenes........

Its sickening but as you say, we should know, so much cloak and dagger we should be vigilant but so many arent, and im sure this wont even really get media coverage...

After all the threads on Monsanto on ATS im surprised not more people have even looked at this thread, people should be appalled.....

Weve seen so many other countries give Monsanto the finger........and we have seen the studies that this crap is basically a slow death sentence.......

Yet Obama finds it acceptable to sign basically immunity , over to Monsanto?

Thanks for being for the people Mr.President.......

There are at least 2 other active threads on this topic, however... as far as I'm concerned, the more the better. This is the most disturbing news I've heard yet.

I knew they were doing this. I knew the overwhelming coverage on the gay marriage thing was just camouflage for something more sinister.

I wrote to my state congressman begging him not to vote for this. Here is what I got from him:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the production and distribution of genetically modified (GM) foods. I appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this matter.

The United States enjoys the safest and most plentiful food supply in the world. Key to our successes are production and safety processes rooted in sound scientific practices. Among these practices, biotechnology has the potential to help keep U.S. agriculture at the world's forefront.

As you know, food containing GM plant varieties is now commonplace. The Congressional Research Service estimates that nearly 70 percent of the U.S. food supply contains some form of GM crop variety—most notably corn and soy-based ingredients used in many processed foods. However, only one GM food product derived from animals has been approved to date. GM food products are subject to all U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) food safety and ingredient labeling standards.

Multiple federal agencies play a role in the development, production, and marketing stages of the entire U.S. food supply—whether traditional or GM foods. Before planting, the USDA must review and approve all GM crop varieties—subject to further examination by the Environmental Protection Agency. Additionally, any plant or animal product intended for human consumption must then undergo strict scrutiny for food safety by the USDA and the FDA.

Another topic of interest is food from animal clones. Following an extensive study of meat and dairy products derived from cloned animals, the FDA concluded that these products are as safe as meat and dairy products derived from naturally-born animals. However, the USDA has determined that cloned animals will not qualify for the USDA Organic marketing label, even if the animal is raised on an organic diet.

I appreciate having the opportunity to represent Texas in the United States Senate, and you may be certain that I will work to ensure that decisions concerning the development, production, and marketing of our food supply continue to be rooted in sound and safe scientific practice. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.

Sincerely,

JOHN CORNYN

United States Senator

This was last December. They knew ahead of time how they were going to vote, they just didn't want a lot of press over it.

Any questions as to who those liars in Washington DC represent anymore?

Now, for all those who claim that GM foods are perfectly OK for you and that there are no known side effects etc...

Why on Earth, would you require immunity from litigation, if there is no health risks or environmental risks from the product you provide?

The answer is simple, you know there is something wrong with your product and your greedy corporate mentality and bottomless pockets allow you to operate above the law.

Disgusting.

Dismantle Monsanto, divest them of their assets and legislate synthetic food. As in, make it illegal.

~Tenth

If you want to know how your representative voted, check here: thedcpost.com...

Mine voted yes. Big surprise.....

Why on Earth, would you require immunity from litigation, if there is no health risks or environmental risks from the product you provide?

The Act doesn't grant that immunity. It tells the Sec. of Ag. to grant a limited, temporary, approval to allow the farmer to continue using whatever it is that is contested, only after it had originally been determined that there was no need to regulate it. It also requires the Sec. of Ag. to restudy the problem, and quickly, because the approval is only for as long as necessary to conduct the restudy.