Patch of Silver: 04.2009

The Message

Stop HR875/S425 US Congress' attempt to Illegalize Organic Farming!
Stop Congress from taking away our rights to grow organic food!

Positions:
Right to nutrition and health
Right to freedom
Right to privacy
Category:
Environment - Service and Other
Description:
HR 875 and S 425 are the pieces of legislation that would criminalize organic farming, even having a garden in your back yard!

PLEASE contact your representitives and Senators about this!

We can NOT allow this to happen to food!

There will no longer be ORGANIC food... they will be required to spray pesticides and insectisides on the "organic" food... hence, making it no longer organic

S.425
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s425/text

H.R.875
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h875/text

I Love to Play Researcher!

I'm a blog junkie, and I've been pondering this one for a couple of weeks now since I've been reading about it via a lot of blog posts. (There are even some FB groups addressing this issue, naturally... see http://www.facebook.com/s.php?init=q&q=HR875&ref=ts&sid=b798156ac07435b67c26450e8f1ce1f9)

My first instinct is to check to see what hype might be involved, since the language of posts related to HR 875 & S 425 seem somewhat alarmist.

Also, the language seems to fly in the face of what I presume would be the values of President Obama (http://organicgardening.about.com/b/2009/04/01/big-ag-white-house-organic-garden-makes-us-shudder.htm & http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/3/29/714315/-Big-Ag-Writes-Michelle-Opposing-WH-Organic-Garden & http://my.kitchengardeners.org/forum/topics/hr-875-and-white-house-gardens), as well as policies and programs that have been historically promoted by the USDA via the NRCS and FSA (I have recently been working as an Admin Asst for the St Joe Cty Soil & Water Conservation District. We are a partner with/share an office with the NRCS, and we kind of share an office with the FSA: http://stjoseph.iaswcd.org/). The majority of the work that NRCS and FSA do seems to revolve around the latest Farm Bill, which is actually quite supportive or organic farming (I'm sure I can dig up some anti-Farm Bill points of view...I'll save this for a later date! I love me some research!) (RE: Farm Bill and Organic Ag, see for instance: http://www.mosesorganic.org/attachments/broadcaster/other16.6costshare.html ; http://www.rodaleinstitute.org/20081120/nf4 ; http://www.in.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/eqip/eqiphomepage.html)

Back to the Possible Hype in Posts Like "Stop HR875/S425 US Congress' attempt to Illegalize Organic Farming!"

Snopes.com is one tool for peeling back the fact from the hype, and while there are legitimate concerns as far as always keeping the legislators in check by making your voice heard, there seems to be a viral alarmism at play, as well . Still, some say Snopes can be a bit biased (for instance, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2039929/posts), so another good source is TruthorFiction.com. I also sifted thru Google results to find discussions where similar fact-checking measures seemed to be occuring:

Some Links that Appear to "Check the Facts"

Snopes.com: http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/organic.asp

TruthorFiction.com http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/h/hr875organicban.htm which links you to http://delauro.house.gov/files/HR875_Myths_Facts1.pdf

Grist.org: http://www.grist.org/article/Food-scare

TheDailyGreen.com: http://www.thedailygreen.com/healthy-eating/blogs/healthy-food/organic-farming-440320604

But the Language of HR 875 & S 425 is Very Vague... In the Wrong Hands... Well You Know...

Besides, you can keep digging, and draw further conclusions from the checking of the facts and read in between the lines and come to conclusions like: http://blog.puppetgov.com/2009/03/14/a-solemn-walk-through-hr-875/

So, writing your legislators to keep them in check is always a good idea!

(You could probably find something to write to a legislator about every day, but would that end up in your FBI file? ... http://www.getmyfbifile.com/)

Oh, and What About H 759 H 814?

According to http://smallfarm.about.com/b/

Fact Check: What Might HR 875 Mean for Small Farms?

Wednesday April 1, 2009

There's still a lot of confusion swirling around HR 875, the food safety bill that was introduced in the House of Representatives. First of all, note that: the bill was introduced. It hasn't even hit the floor yet, and it's unclear when or if it will actually hit the floor for consideration. It's in committee. Secondly, the rumor that it will "outlaw organic farming" just isn't supported by anything that's actually in the bill currently.

But, FactCheck.org highlights one serious concern for any small-scale farmer considering selling food for public consumption. Specifically, "there's always a worry that government regulation of food production will adversely affect small farms, which can't absorb the possible costs of abiding by regulation as easily as big food producers can." That's the big-deal part of HR 875 for small farms. It would create a Food Safety Administration and establish rules and regulations for producing food for public sale, and small- and micro-scale farming operations -- not a hobby farm or homestead, but a small farmer trying to sell at the farmer's market or local food co-op or even "bigger" small farms -- might not survive the financial impact of those requirements.

Food and Water Watch points out that HR 759 is actually a much scarier bill than HR 875, and urges folks to focus on all the related bills currently introduced that could potentially affect small-scale agriculture. Their take on the situation is this:

There is plenty of evidence that one-size-fits-all regulation only tends to work for one size of agriculture – the largest industrialized operations. That’s why it is important to let members of Congress know how food safety proposals will impact the conservation, organic, and sustainable practices that make diversified, organic, and direct market producers different from agribusiness. And the work doesn’t stop there – if Congress passes any of these bills, the FDA will have to develop rules and regulations to implement the law, a process that we can’t afford to ignore. But simply shooting down any attempt to fix our broken food safety system is not an approach that works for consumers, who are faced with a food supply that is putting them at risk and regulators who lack the authority to do much about it.

So, what's a small farmer to do? Exactly what Food And Water Watch suggests. Contact your local representative in Congress and make your views known now! We need food safety legislation, but we need good legislation that will protect our local food supply and our small farmers.

Also regarding HR 759 (and touching on HR875 or S425), http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/food/foodsafety/background-on-h-r-875 states:

Background on H.R. 875
The dilemma of how to regulate food safety in a way that prevents problems caused by industrialized agriculture but doesn’t wipe out small diversified farms is not new and is not easily solved. And as almost constant food safety problems reveals the dirty truth about the way much of our food is produced, processed, and distributed, it’s a dilemma we need to have serious discussion about.

Most consumers never thought they had to worry about peanut butter and this latest food safety scandal has captured public attention for good reason – a CEO who knowingly shipped contaminated food, a plant with holes in the roof and serious pest problems, and years of state and federal regulators failing to intervene.

It’s no surprise that Congress is under pressure to act and multiple food safety bills have been introduced.

Two of the bills are about traceability for food (S.425 and H.R. 814). These present real issues for small producers who could be forced to bear the cost of expensive tracking technology and recordkeeping.

The other bills address what FDA can do to regulate food.

A lot of attention has been focused on a bill introduced by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (H.R. 875), the Food Safety Modernization Act. And a lot of what is being said about the bill is misleading.

Here are a few things that H.R. 875 DOES do:

It addresses the most critical flaw in the structure of FDA by splitting it into 2 new agencies –one devoted to food safety and the other devoted to drugs and medical devices.
It increases inspection of food processing plants, basing the frequency of inspection on the risk of the product being produced – but it does NOT make plants pay any registration fees or user fees.
It does extend food safety agency authority to food production on farms, requiring farms to write a food safety plan and consider the critical points on that farm where food safety problems are likely to occur.
It requires imported food to meet the same standards as food produced in the U.S.

And just as importantly, here are a few things that H.R. 875 does NOT do:

It does not cover foods regulated by the USDA (beef, pork, poultry, lamb, catfish.)
It does not establish a mandatory animal identification system.
It does not regulate backyard gardens.
It does not regulate seed.
It does not call for new regulations for farmers markets or direct marketing arrangements.
It does not apply to food that does not enter interstate commerce (food that is sold across state lines).
It does not mandate any specific type of traceability for FDA-regulated foods (the bill does instruct a new food safety agency to improve traceability of foods, but specifically says that recordkeeping can be done electronically or on paper).

Several of the things not found in the DeLauro can be found in other bills – like H.R. 814, the Tracing and Recalling Agricultural Contamination Everywhere Act, which calls for a mandatory animal identification system, or H.R. 759, the Food And Drug Administration Globalization Act, which overhauls the entire structure of FDA. H.R. 759 is more likely to move through Congress than H.R. 875. And H.R. 759 contains several provisions that could cause problems for small farms and food processors:

It extends traceability recordkeeping requirements that currently apply only to food processors to farms and restaurants – and requires that recordkeeping be done electronically.

It calls for standard lot numbers to be used in food production.

It requires food processing plants to pay a registration fee to FDA to fund the agency’s inspection efforts.

It instructs FDA to establish production standards for fruits and vegetables and to establish Good Agricultural Practices for produce.

There is plenty of evidence that one-size-fits-all regulation only tends to work for one size of agriculture – the largest industrialized operations. That’s why it is important to let members of Congress know how food safety proposals will impact the conservation, organic, and sustainable practices that make diversified, organic, and direct market producers different from agribusiness. And the work doesn’t stop there – if Congress passes any of these bills, the FDA will have to develop rules and regulations to implement the law, a process that we can’t afford to ignore.

But simply shooting down any attempt to fix our broken food safety system is not an approach that works for consumers, who are faced with a food supply that is putting them at risk and regulators who lack the authority to do much about it.