• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

5 Minutes With Johanns

Mike

Well-known member
CattleNetwork_Today 3/26/2007 7:28:00 AM


Mike Johanns: Reasons Behind Keeping Canada Border Open



Canada’s BSE cases continue to raise hackles among many in the U.S. cattle industry who claim the open border might mean we’re at a risk of importing their problems. Senators Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., and John Thune, R-S.D. recently sent a letter to you saying, “Increasing U.S. imports of Canadian cattle and beef at this time would have a significant negative impact on the economic well-being of American cattle producers and could seriously disrupt our efforts to expand U.S. beef exports overseas…Furthermore, expanding Canadian cattle imports increases the possibility that a future case of BSE in a Canadian animal may be found in the United States. Three of Canada’s nine BSE cases occurred in cattle born long after the March 1, 1999 date proposed in the rule.” You’re on record as a proponent of keeping the border open. Can you talk about the scientific and political reasons behind your stance?



A. In drafting our proposal, we followed the latest scientific guidelines as defined by the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), to prevent the introduction of animal diseases such as BSE while avoiding unjustified trade barriers. We cannot expect our trading partners to follow these same science-based standards if we do not lead by example. Ultimately we believe other countries will follow our lead, and that is good for America’s ranchers.



USDA is committed to ensuring that our regulatory approach keeps pace with the body of scientific knowledge about BSE and to including the public in our decision-making process. USDA has included an economic analysis in its proposal to allow additional cattle from Canada. We requested comments and additional information from the public.



The public comment period on the minimal risk rule closed March 12 and we are carefully analyzing all comments received.



We believe in fair, science-based trade practices. We already have in place a comprehensive set of safeguards to protect animal and human health, including import controls, an effective feed ban, and most importantly, the removal of the specified risk materials that can carry BSE, which protect American agriculture and help maintain confidence in U.S. beef.



Source: Jolley – Five Minutes With Mike Johanns
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Johanns, "A. In drafting our proposal, we followed the latest scientific guidelines as defined by the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), to prevent the introduction of animal diseases such as BSE while avoiding unjustified trade barriers. We cannot expect our trading partners to follow these same science-based standards if we do not lead by example. Ultimately we believe other countries will follow our lead, and that is good for America’s ranchers."

Good God, Mike, do you ever look back to see if anybody is following? You've used that line before. It didn't work then, it won't work now! The only example you're leading is lowering standards so the US multinationals can move beef, and nobody is following! They're not doing that because it isn't good for anybody - and certainly not US ranchers.

Johanns, "USDA is committed to ensuring that our regulatory approach keeps pace with the body of scientific knowledge about BSE and to including the public in our decision-making process. USDA has included an economic analysis in its proposal to allow additional cattle from Canada. We requested comments and additional information from the public."

You did your dog and pony show, but opening the border was decided in May, 2003. The only thing that is hard to keep pace on is the USDA making the scientific knowledge of BSE a moving target. Strange how the science behind BSE isn't changing, but the policies supposedly based on that science is. :shock:

Johanns, "The public comment period on the minimal risk rule closed March 12 and we are carefully analyzing all comments received."

Anybody want to bet on the conclusions? I'm prepared to give odds.

Johanns, "We believe in fair, science-based trade practices. We already have in place a comprehensive set of safeguards to protect animal and human health, including import controls, an effective feed ban, and most importantly, the removal of the specified risk materials that can carry BSE, which protect American agriculture and help maintain confidence in U.S. beef."

You believe in whatever makes Tyson, Cargill, et al money. Has anybody informed you of the loopholes in the feed ban? How the hell can having the lowest import standards in the world give anybody confidence is US beef? Our customers already think you're hiding something when you stepped out of bounds in banning private BSE testing.

I'm sorry, but being BSed is one of the fastest ways to fire me up... Johanns statement has more crap in it than a California spinich field.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
The Clinton and Bush administrations know where there bread is getting buttered. Political donations by big corporations is running the "science" bull we are all fed. It is running the justice department also.

Our government is whoring itself out to the lies that the big money buys.

No wonder Congress has the lowest ratings of all time. There are reasons.

The truth trickles out day by day.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Good God, Mike, do you ever look back to see if anybody is following? You've used that line before. It didn't work then, it won't work now! The only example you're leading is lowering standards so the US multinationals can move beef, and nobody is following! They're not doing that because it isn't good for anybody - and certainly not US ranchers.

Don't shoot me. I'm only the messenger! :lol:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Mike said:
Good God, Mike, do you ever look back to see if anybody is following? You've used that line before. It didn't work then, it won't work now! The only example you're leading is lowering standards so the US multinationals can move beef, and nobody is following! They're not doing that because it isn't good for anybody - and certainly not US ranchers.

Don't shoot me. I'm only the messenger! :lol:

Sorry, Mike, I meant MIKE JOHANNS. You know I'd never bad-mouth a fellow Husker fan such as yourself!
 
Top