Skip to main content

View Diary: Senate Passes Landmark Food Safety Over GOP Objections (183 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  hopefully the seed thing won't be an issue (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ivote2004, happymisanthropy

    I'd hat eto lose heirlooms

    •  One would hope that they would not go after seeds (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ivote2004, happymisanthropy, Eddie L

      except those grown to be eaten.

      That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt -

      by enhydra lutris on Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 12:04:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm very concerned about that (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Would like someone to decipher the bill's provisions regarding saving seeds and "backyard"/local farming, both of which I think are keys to sustainable food development

      There comes a time when every team must learn to make individual sacrifices.

      by Jaxpagan on Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 12:17:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  There is no mention of seeds... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        greenbird, ivote2004

        ...anywhere in the bill.

        I believe in a god that doesn't require financing. - Erwin M. Fletcher

        by gunny6247 on Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 12:21:46 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Here is what Dick Lugar said: (7+ / 0-)

        Lugar said the bipartisan bill "reflects a broad compromise agreement among producers, processors and food safety advocates and will improve our food safety system. Contrary to some rumors, the bill specifically exempts small farmers and does not provide any authority to regulate home food production."

      •  Also, the FDA... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eddie L, sjterrid

        ...being a federal agency has no jursidiction over food that is produced and sold within a state.  However, if your seeds are from another state that can be considered interstate commerce putting in our jurisdiction.

        The Tester amendment seems to exempt farms that make less than $500K, sell within a state or a 275 mile radius from where it is produced.

        I believe in a god that doesn't require financing. - Erwin M. Fletcher

        by gunny6247 on Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 12:26:50 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Wouldn't Wickard v Filburn disagree? (nt) (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Those who support banning cocaine are no better than those who support banning cheeseburgers

          by EthrDemon on Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 01:53:04 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  From Wikipedia... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            The Supreme Court, interpreting the United States Constitution's Commerce Clause under Article 1 Section 8 (which permits the United States Congress "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;") decided that, because Filburn's wheat growing activities reduced the amount of wheat he would buy for chicken feed on the open market, and because wheat was traded nationally, Filburn's production of more wheat than he was allotted was affecting interstate commerce, and so could be regulated by the federal government.

            It all comes down to interstate commerce.  

            I believe in a god that doesn't require financing. - Erwin M. Fletcher

            by gunny6247 on Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 03:04:17 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Urban legend (0+ / 0-)

        Spread by Glenn Beck and other morans.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site