Tester Amendment to food 'safety' bill puts lipstick on a pig
"The FDA is the single most deadly agency that has ever existed in the history of the United States. Over the last 20 years the FDA has killed more Americans than the total number who died in World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War and even the Civil War — combined!"
Consider the title of S 510: "Food Safety Modernization Act." By modernize, the FDA intends to force everyone to adulterate the entire US food supply with drugs (like antibiotics), chemicals (like chlorine), genes from other organisms, and whatever new profit-making adulterant that corporations create. Food producers will be forced to use pesticides, which we then ingest to our detriment. Forced irradiation and pasteurization will be the "safe" standard under which all producers must comply.
S 510's traceability requirements suggest foods can be injected with nano-tracers and other technologies to follow food back to its source. Even if that dystopic scenario isn't immediately implemented, the paperwork for food tracing will wipe out medium sized producers and distributors. Imagine having to turn over your private food club client list to your competitors (represented by the FDA). How easy will it be for acts of sabotage from multi-billion dollar corporations to wipe out your small business?
Natural, normal food will be criminalized by S 510, and we know this because of all the current food raids on natural producers and distributors, while allowing giants like Wright County Egg to sell contaminated food for decades. This war on normal food is ongoing– even before giving the FDA an additional $1.6 billion and complete control over all food.
Rest of story at: http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2010/11/23/tester-amendment-to-food-safety-bill-put
HAVE SOME SENATORS BEEN PAID OFF TO SUPPORT S.510 - THE 'FOOD SAFETY MODERNIZATION ACT'?
11-18-2010 11:16 pm - John W. Wallace
The following is a list of U.S Senators and the Bribes (I mean campaign contributions) that these Senators received from Special Interest Groups to either support or oppose S.510 - The FDA Food Safety and Modernization Act. I have listed the names of the Senators, the Party and State, and the amount of Special Interest Bribes (I mean campaign contributions) that they received:
Name of Senator - Party & State - Bribe For S.510 or Bribe Against S.510
Daniel Akaka - D HI - Bribe For: $27,690 - Against: $700
Lamar Alexander - R TN - Bribe For: $190,421 - Against: $4,850
John Barrasso - R WY - Bribe For: $31,350 - Against: $27,500
Max Baucus - D MT - Bribe for: $123,803 - Against: $55,980
Evan Bayh - D IN - Bribe For: $45,200 - Against: 8,250
Mark Begich - D AK - Bribe For: $23,050 - Against: $2,000
Michael Bennet - D CO - Bribe For: $38,509 - Against: $22,050
Robert Bennett - R UT - Bribe For: $105,530 - Against: $10,000
Jeff Bingaman - D NM - Bribe For: $31,498 - Against: $8,450
Christopher Bond - R MO - Bribe For: $49,550 - Against: $5,200
Barbara Boxer - D CA - Bribe For: $120,000 - Against: $13,650
Sherrod Brown - D OH - Bribe For: $57,800 - Against: $6,600
Samuel Brownback - R KS - Bribe For: $20,950 - Against: $13,500
Jim Bunning - R KY - Brobe For: $20,700 - Against: $2,000
Richard Burr - R NC - Bribe For: $328,086 - Against: $32,292
Roland Burris - D IL - Bribe For: $0 - Against: $0
Maria Cantwell - D WA - Bribe For: $93,541 - Against: $2,750
Benjamin Cardin - D MD - Bribe For: $72,200 - Against: $0
Thomas Carper - D DE - Bribe For: $83,150 - Against: $0
Robert Casey - D PA - Bribe For: $80,576 - Against: $4,600
Saxby Chambliss - R GA - Bribe For: $557,694 - Against: $108,041
Thomas Coburn R OK - Bribe For: $64,400 - Against: $14,200
Thad Cochran - R MS - Bribe For: $50,144 - Against: $22,000
Susan Collins - R ME - Bribe For: $157,438 - Against: $7,800
Kent Conrad - D ND - Bribe For: $41,650 - Against: $29,612
Bob Corker - R TN - Bribe For: $298,639 - Against: $8,850
John Cornyn - R TX - Bribe For: $286,648 - Against: $254,730
Michael Crapo - R ID - Bribe For: $64,199 - Against: $14,350
Jim DeMint - R SC - Bribe For: $149,935 - Against: $5,000
Christopher Dodd - D CT - Bribe For: $36,400 - Against: $4,500
Byron Dorgan - D ND - Bribe For: $28,200 - Against: $6,000
Richard Durbin - D IL - Bribe For: $151,050 - Against: $19,000
John Ensign - R NV - Bribe For: $76,297 - Against: $10,500
Michael Enzi - R WY - Bribe For: $87,394 - Against: $21,450
Russell Feingold - D WI - Bribe For: $53,854 - Against: $2,200
Dianne Feinstein - D CA - Bribe For: $168,189 - Against: 25,314
Kirsten Gillibrand - D NY - Bribe For: $98,210 - Against: $10,650
Lindsey Graham - R SC - Bribe For: $101,272 - Against: $5,700
Charles Grassley - R IA - Bribe For: $112,150 - Against: $25,500
Judd Gregg - R NH - Bribe For: $26,000 - Against: $0
Kay Hagan - D NC - Bribe For: $36,250 - Against: $3,500
Thomas Harkin - D IA - Bribe For: $138,135 - Against: $40,600
Orrin Hatch - R UT - Bribe For: $102,215 - Against: $11,600
(See comment received from Senator Hatch's Office below)
Kay Hutchison - R TX - Bribe For: $127,811 - Against: $103,386
James Inhofe - R OK - Bribe For: $66,744 - Against: $36,430
Daniel Inouye - D HI - Bribe For: $26,350 - Against: $11,200
John Isakson - R GA - Bribe For: $280,995 - Against: $10,100
Mike Johanns - R NE - Bribe For: $159,259 - Against: $59,785
Tim Johnson - D SD - Bribe For: $26,850 - Against: $15,000
Edward Kaufman - D DE - Bribe For: $0 - Against: $0
John Kerry - D MA - Bribe For: $14,406 - Against: $250
Amy Klobuchar - D MN - Bribe For: $149,778 - Against: $16,250
Herbert Kohl - D WI - Bribe For: $300 - Against: $0
Jon Kyl - R AZ - Bribe For: $363,660 - Against: $58,906
Mary Landrieu - D LA - Bribe For: $73,622 - Against: $2,250
Frank Lautenberg - D NJ - Bribe For: $37,883 - Agqinst: $3,550
Patrick Leahy - D VT - Bribe For: $13,800 - Against: $2,750
Carl Levin - D MI - Bribe For: $49,900 - Against: $2,000
Joseph Lieberman - I CT - Bribe For: $121,075 - Against: $0
Blanche Lincoln - D AR - Bribe For: $347,526 - Against: $125,297
Richard Lugar - R IN - Bribe For: $153,579 - Against: $21,000
John McCain - R AZ - Bribe For: $118,070 - Against: $21,525
Claire McCaskill - D MO - Bribe For: $48,950 - Against: $7,650
Mitch McConnell - R KY - Bribe For: $439,593 - Against: $42,244
Robert Menéndez - D NJ - Bribe For: $183,850 - Against: $250
Jeff Merkley - D OR - Bribe For: $27,350 - Against; $3,300
Barbara Mikulski - D MD - Bribe For: $52,165 - Against: $1,000
Lisa Murkowski - R AK - Bribe For: $164,713 - Against: $5,800
Patty Murray - D WA - Bribe For: $136,500 - Against: $3,150
Ben Nelson - D NE - Bribe For: $254,906 - Against: $44,950
Bill Nelson - D FL - Bribe For: $205,471 - Against: $35,748
Mark Pryor - D AR - Bribe For: $115,550 - Against: $16,565
John Reed - D RI - Bribe For: $29,350 - Against: $0
Harry Reid - D NV - Bribe For: $133,985 - Against: $10,000
James Risch - R ID - Bribe For: $56,750 - Against; $36,050
Pat Roberts - R KS - Bribe For: $167,294 - Against: $65,186
John Rockefeller - D WV - Bribe For: $21,250 - Against: $1,000
Bernard Sanders - I VT - Bribe For: $7,800 - Against: $4,200
Charles Schumer - D NY - Bribe For: $175,185 - Against: $14,200
Jefferson Sessions - R AL - Bribe For: $65,303 - Against: $16,800
Jeanne Shaheen - D NH - Bribe For: $17,090 - Against: $7,300
Richard Shelby - R AL - Bribe For: $73,616 - Against: $10,000
Olympia Snowe - R ME - Bribe For: $78,136 - Against: $2,000
Arlen Specter - D PA - Bribe For: $209,124 - Against: $9,400
Debbie Ann Stabenow - D MI - Bribe For: $84,941 - Against: $14,482
Jon Tester - D MT - Bribe For: $21,250 - Against: $61,550
John Thune - R SD - Bribe For: $218,900 - Against: $55,625
Mark Udall - D CO - Bribe For: $34,435 - Against: $45,050
Tom Udall - D NM - Bribe For: $27,102 - Against: $51,900
David Vitter - R LA - Bribe For: $188,225 - Against: $8,500
George Voinovich - R OH - Bribe For: $103,850 - Against: $185
Mark Warner - D VA - Bribe For: $116,450 - Against: $8,600
Jim Webb - D VA - Bribe For: $25,300 - Against: $7,700
Sheldon Whitehouse- D RI - Bribe For: $27,025 - Against: $1,500
Roger Wicker - R MS - Bribe For: $147,650 - Against: $16,250
Ron Wyden - D OR - Bribe For: $58,700 - Against: $4,900
Here's a list of the Special Interest Groups that support S.510 and how much they bribed (I mean donated) to Senators:
Restaurants & drinking establishments $3,217,767
Food and kindred products manufacturing $1,753,503
Milk & dairy producers $1,717,687
Food stores $1,473,532
Beverages (non-alcoholic) $744,551
Vegetables, fruits and tree nut $709,238
American Veterinarian Medical Association $551,750
Beverage bottling & distribution $289,725
Food wholesalers $284,900
Food & Beverage Products and Services $281,137
Fishing $277,984
Chambers of commerce $219,234
Manufacturing $207,740
Food catering & food services $171,835
Confectionery processors & manufacturers $96,438
Consumer groups $6,100
Farm bureaus $0
Here's a list of Here's a list of the Special Interest Groups that sopposed S.510 and how much they bribed (I mean donated) to Senators:
Milk & dairy producers $1,717,687
Livestock $1,561,207
Farm organizations & cooperatives $412,976
Consumer groups $6,100
Farmers, crop unspecified $0
I wonder how the Senators will Vote when the bill reaches the floor of the Senate?
I gotta say that Saxby chambliss and johnny isakson both supported the original bill but it has been modified since they first cosponsored it and both have voted against this current version. I got a letter from both stating this. It has changed so much from the original bill which only was supposed to reign in the agencies responsible for our food quality.
Well, you know that campaign contributions to Senators could be eliminated by abolishing the 17th Amendment.
With abolishment of the 17th, we would no longer be electing the Senators by popular vote. That way, the States,
instead of certain people and groups, could be re-established as having the "special interests" just like the founding fathers intended.
Quote from: redcliffsw on December 06, 2010, 12:42:07 PM
Well, you know that campaign contributions to Senators could be eliminated by abolishing the 17th Amendment.
With abolishment of the 17th, we would no longer be electing the Senators by popular vote. That way, the States,
instead of certain people and groups, could be re-established as having the "special interests" just like the founding fathers intended.
The state governments and legislatures have proven to be even more corrupt than our current Senators, I doubt that would remove the money from the system and would help to disenfranchise the masses even more. Typical neocon hot button issue.
Quote from: jerry wagner on December 06, 2010, 03:44:42 PM
The state governments and legislatures have proven to be even more corrupt than our current Senators, I doubt that would remove the money from the system and would help to disenfranchise the masses even more. Typical neocon hot button issue.
Maybe so but you can control the states much easier locally than you can the feds in dc.
Repeal of the 17th Amendment would mean much more local control and certainly Senators
would be much less beholden to out-of-staters and special interest groups.
DiLorenzo speaks about it in this short video: