Skip to main content

View Diary: Monsant-Oh No! (20 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  A Democratic Senator (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jrooth, paradise50, blue91

    inserted the Monsanto Protection Act into the bill when it was in the Senate, but I just can't figure out which one!

    "Societies strain harder and harder to sustain the decadent opulence of the ruling class, even as it destroys the foundations of productivity and wealth." — Chris Hedges

    by Crider on Thu Mar 28, 2013 at 12:10:17 PM PDT

    •  Barbara Mikulski would know (6+ / 0-)

      since it happened in the Appropriations Committee, which she chairs.

      By the way, the text of HR 933 is available is available here (pdf document).  The "Farmer Assurance Provision" is section 735, which can be found on page 78:

      SEC. 735. In the event that a determination of non-regulated status made pursuant to section 411 of the Plant Protection Act is or has been invalidated or vacated, the Secretary of Agriculture shall, notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon request by a farmer, grower, farm operator, or producer, immediately grant temporary permit(s) or temporary deregulation in part, subject to necessary and appropriate conditions consistent with section 411(a) or 412(c) of the Plant Protection Act, which interim conditions shall authorize the movement, introduction, continued cultivation, commercialization and other specifically enumerated activities and requirements, including measures designed to mitigate or minimize potential adverse environmental effects, if any, relevant to the Secretary’s evaluation of the petition for non-regulated status, while ensuring that growers or other users are able to move, plant, cultivate, introduce into commerce and carry out other authorized activities in a timely manner: Provided, That all such conditions shall be applicable only for the interim period necessary for the Secretary to complete any required analyses or consultations related to the petition for non-regulated status: Provided further, That nothing in this section shall be construed as limiting the Secretary’s authority under section 411, 412 and 414 of the Plant Protection Act.
      Note that word "shall".  I've seen some industry types claim this only gives the secretary that option - but this looks like there is no choice.

      The text of the Plant Protection Act referenced in the above can be found here (pdf document.)

      “What’s the use of having developed a science well enough to make predictions if, in the end, all we’re willing to do is stand around and wait for them to come true?” - Sherwood Rowland

      by jrooth on Thu Mar 28, 2013 at 12:35:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sen. Mikulski doesn't support it, couldn't stop it (9+ / 0-)

        http://www.baltimoresun.com/...

        "The American public have relied on Senate Democrats to be a backstop against dangerous policy riders like this," said Colin O'Neil, director of government affairs for the Center for Food Safety. "We call on [Mikulski] to ensure that this rider is stricken from any future appropriations bills."

        But, O'Neil added, the language did not originate with Mikulski. Rather, it was included in legislation that had been developed before she took the chairmanship. Democratic leaders, including Mikulski, were under pressure to pass a funding a bill quickly as Democrats and Republicans in Congress were eager to demonstrate they could deal with a budget deadline without creating the type of fiscal showdown that has defined the last several years.

        Congress had until March 27 to pass a funding bill or shut down the government.

        Mikulski picked up the previously agreed-to language and attached it, largely unchanged, to the funding legislation. Sen. Jon Tester, a Montana Democrat, offered an amendment to strike the language from the bill but that amendment never received a vote.

        "Her hands were tied by the negotiations that had previously happened," O'Neil said of Mikulski. "We recognize that the tough spot she was in."

        O'Neil said food safety groups nevertheless hope to keep the pressure on Mikulski to get the language removed later this year, when the government must pass its next round of funding legislation.

        In a statement, Mikulski's office said the senator "understands the anger over this provision. She didn’t put the language in the bill and doesn’t support it, either."

        "Senator Mikulski has a strong food safety record," the statement read. "As chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, Senator Mikulski's first responsibility was to prevent a government shutdown. That meant she had to compromise on many of her own priorities to get a bill through the Senate that the House would pass."

        Bolding mine.

        Least thanks to the GOP House holding the economy hostage, Sen. Mikulski can correct the error when the spending bills have to be passed again.

        •  Maybe so ... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          citisven, paradise50

          although I question why Senator Tester's amendment didn't get a vote (surely that would be in her power as chair to accomplish.)

          And at any rate - she still would know who did put the language in.  Or is the claim that that Appropriations Committee doesn't keep records of its proceedings?

          “What’s the use of having developed a science well enough to make predictions if, in the end, all we’re willing to do is stand around and wait for them to come true?” - Sherwood Rowland

          by jrooth on Thu Mar 28, 2013 at 01:17:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  A caveat to the above (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Eyesbright, paradise50

            I may have misunderstood - it's unclear from the story whether Tester's amendment was offered in committee or on the floor.  If the latter, then it's on Harry Reid, not Mikulski.

            Don't get me wrong - I like Mikulski for the most part.

            “What’s the use of having developed a science well enough to make predictions if, in the end, all we’re willing to do is stand around and wait for them to come true?” - Sherwood Rowland

            by jrooth on Thu Mar 28, 2013 at 01:22:53 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Roy Blount, Monsanto sponsored senator, did it (0+ / 0-)
    •  I am also (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      paradise50, Debby

      very curious to know which Senator inserted this into the bill. A lot of the random things I am seeing floating around give blame alternatively to Obama (presumably just for signing it) and Mikulski.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site