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

NAIS is coming.............

Mike

Well-known member
Under this Bill:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-875

Mar 6, 2009 8:44 PM

Does this bill give any power or help to corporations like Monsanto? -

A1: Yes, it gives corporations like Monsanto a monopoly on the food industry by making it extremely expensive for small farmers to afford to grow organic. The bill also states as it's purpose "promulgate regulations to establish science-based minimum standards for the safe production of food by food production facilities." so basically if it is declared that GMO foods are scientifically "safer" than organic, then it will be illegal to grow non-GMO seeds and sell them to the public. These "food safety" bills in Congress were written by Monsanto, Cargill, Tysons, ADM, etc., companies that practice and promote the opposite of food safety.

A2: The bill sponsor, Rosa Delauro (D-CT) is married to Stanley Greenberg. One of his corporate clients is Monsanto. Draw your own conclusions.


http://www.greenbergresearch.com/index.php?ID=403


Big farm industries will be better equipped to deal with the bureaucratic requirements and penalties (in the Bills current form); potentially squeezing out smaller operations.

NAIS will be implemented under this Bill under the guidelines of "Animal Health" and "Food Traceability".

"COOL" is still in the game, but NAIS comes with it.............
 

Tex

Well-known member
Mike said:
Under this Bill:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-875

Mar 6, 2009 8:44 PM

Does this bill give any power or help to corporations like Monsanto? -

A1: Yes, it gives corporations like Monsanto a monopoly on the food industry by making it extremely expensive for small farmers to afford to grow organic. The bill also states as it's purpose "promulgate regulations to establish science-based minimum standards for the safe production of food by food production facilities." so basically if it is declared that GMO foods are scientifically "safer" than organic, then it will be illegal to grow non-GMO seeds and sell them to the public. These "food safety" bills in Congress were written by Monsanto, Cargill, Tysons, ADM, etc., companies that practice and promote the opposite of food safety.

A2: The bill sponsor, Rosa Delauro (D-CT) is married to Stanley Greenberg. One of his corporate clients is Monsanto. Draw your own conclusions.


http://www.greenbergresearch.com/index.php?ID=403


Big farm industries will be better equipped to deal with the bureaucratic requirements and penalties (in the Bills current form); potentially squeezing out smaller operations.

NAIS will be implemented under this Bill under the guidelines of "Animal Health" and "Food Traceability".

"COOL" is still in the game, but NAIS comes with it.............

I think it will take "pitchforks" to stop the control these families have over our food supply. We sure don't have a political system that will.

George Orwell and 1984, here we come!!!!

What the government couldn't do to ensure food safety in this country they use as an excuse to help consolidate the food industry into the hands of a few families who are as bad as they come.

What audacity!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tex said:
Mike said:
Under this Bill:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-875

Mar 6, 2009 8:44 PM

Does this bill give any power or help to corporations like Monsanto? -

A1: Yes, it gives corporations like Monsanto a monopoly on the food industry by making it extremely expensive for small farmers to afford to grow organic. The bill also states as it's purpose "promulgate regulations to establish science-based minimum standards for the safe production of food by food production facilities." so basically if it is declared that GMO foods are scientifically "safer" than organic, then it will be illegal to grow non-GMO seeds and sell them to the public. These "food safety" bills in Congress were written by Monsanto, Cargill, Tysons, ADM, etc., companies that practice and promote the opposite of food safety.

A2: The bill sponsor, Rosa Delauro (D-CT) is married to Stanley Greenberg. One of his corporate clients is Monsanto. Draw your own conclusions.


http://www.greenbergresearch.com/index.php?ID=403


Big farm industries will be better equipped to deal with the bureaucratic requirements and penalties (in the Bills current form); potentially squeezing out smaller operations.

NAIS will be implemented under this Bill under the guidelines of "Animal Health" and "Food Traceability".

"COOL" is still in the game, but NAIS comes with it.............

I think it will take "pitchforks" to stop the control these families have over our food supply. We sure don't have a political system that will.

George Orwell and 1984, here we come!!!!

What the government couldn't do to ensure food safety in this country they use as an excuse to help consolidate the food industry into the hands of a few families who are as bad as they come.

What audacity!

Yep Tex-- George Bush and Vennaman and Johanns created this huge bureaucratic monster-combined with the Tysons and Monsantos they were in the pockets of then-- that they've paid out millions of $ out of taxpayer money to NCBA ( who at one time thought they would get the monopoly on the system ) , AAA, Dairy Associations, the Pork Folks, etc. etc. of to lobby and "voluntarily" mandate this-- and the handwriting was on the wall-but these folks got more than what they wanted because of their BS- and the current crew in power are going to get/mandate M-COOL and traceback pasture to plate....

And the sad part is- it hasn't even been researched or totally cost evaluated in the real world of commercial cattle in much of the country...And will cost producers big dollars.......

BUT Bring it on- I have nothing to hide, probably the reason I saw the Bush big government promotion handwriting on the wall and went to registered replacements and tattooing and ID ing everything if I have to show that type recordkeeping (which I have kept anyway for 40+ years)...I'll just spend a little more- and even tell them who the multi sire group sire was.....
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
OT it wasn't only Bush in bed with Monsanto. Read this

Monsanto has even penetrated the ranks of a non-profit consumer group, the Safe Food Campaign. The Safe Food Campaign is represented by Carol Tucker Foreman, the managing partner of Foreman and Heidepreim. Foreman founded the Safe Food Campaign, an organization which lobbies for tougher food inspection standards, after serving as an assistant secretary of Agriculture during the Carter administration. A native of Arkansas, Foreman is the sister of Jim Guy Tucker, recently convicted of fraud in one of the Whitewater trials. Foreman, however, also represents the Beef Council, Proctor & Gamble, and Monsanto. In her efforts for Monsanto, Foreman works closely with Dr. Virginia Weldon, the company's chief public relations officer. Foreman used her close ties with the Clinton administration to get Weldon appointed to Clinton's Committee of Scientific Advisors and Al Gore's Sustainable Development Roundtable--entities which recommended that the Delaney Clause be replaced with more flexible legislation.

But the company may have secured its biggest coup in 1997, when it brought onto its board Mickey Kantor, the former Secretary of Commerce and one of Bill Clinton's closest advisors. Kantor joined long-time Monsanto board members who are Washington insiders: William Ruckleshaus, former director of the EPA, and Gwendolyn King, head of Social Security Administration from 1989 to 1993. Monsanto compensates its directors handsomely. For his services, Kantor will receive nearly $100,000 a year. Even so, it's a good investment for the company. It was Kantor who opened the doors to the White House and got the administration to threaten the European Union on the matter of Monsanto's genetically engineered grain.

Kantor's new law firm, Mayer, Brown & Platt, watches out for the company's interests in matters of international trade, food safety and product labeling. Prior to Kantor's arrival at the firm in 1997, one of Mayer, Brown & Platt's top lobbyists was William Daley. Daley was tapped by Bill Clinton to fill Kantor's spot in the cabinet as Secretary of Commerce. In that capacity, he has led the charge for Monsanto on several continents. When you've got friends like this," says Michael Colby of the Vermont-based Food & Water, "you don't have to concern yourself with your enemies."
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Yep-- Clinton and Tyson/Monsanto/Swift/Dow/etal were all in bed together. Same as Bush and the Boys....

But tell me who's Secretary of Agriculture developed and brought forward the current NAIS program-which they tried to mandate (even trying to make it law thru the Patriot Act)- and which they also tried to give NCBA monopoly single entity control (profiteering like they did with the checkoff) over :???:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Big Muddy, OT still doesn't get it. :roll:

He voted for "Change" but got none...........

Except for that small amount jingling in his pocket.............. :lol:
 

mrj

Well-known member
OT, you may refuse to believe the FACT that the Beef Checkoff puts NO money into NCBA's coffers if you choose. That lie is yours to choose, if that is your preference over the FACTS!

Beef Checkoff contracts are awarded on a COST RECOVERY ONLY basis. What is it you cannot understand about such a contract? The contracts, work, and financial interchanges are audited thoroughly by more than one company.

The FOIA surely is used by the outfits that seek to cripple NCBA by hook or by crook! Where is their expose'???

I've been told by more than one staff person that NCBA actually lost money at times because some of expenses they deemed necessary to properly fulfill a contract were denied for one reason or another.

Difficult as the concept may be for you and others, there are cattle producers who want to work together for the good of the industry without feathering their own organizational coffers in the process.

Then, there is the fact that the Act and Order creating the Beef Checkoff was written so as to make it illegal to do so, There are strict checks and balances to assure adherence to that law.

The first president of the Cattlemens' Association, predecessor of NCBA, come up with a very interesting comment way back in 1889 in Denver. It holds more truth than ever, yet today, IMO.

"The men, or set of men, who are continually looking backward for inspiration; who are chuck full of calamity forebodings' who thrive on opposition to any and all measures; who are constantly quoting ancient history; are not fit to lead progressive, enterprising 20th Century Americans".....John Springer stated in Denver in 1889.

mrj
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
mrj said:
The first president of the Cattlemens' Association, predecessor of NCBA, come up with a very interesting comment way back in 1889 in Denver. It holds more truth than ever, yet today, IMO.

"The men, or set of men, who are continually looking backward for inspiration; who are chuck full of calamity forebodings' who thrive on opposition to any and all measures; who are constantly quoting ancient history; are not fit to lead progressive, enterprising 20th Century Americans".....John Springer stated in Denver in 1889.

mrj

Yep- the NCA was a progressive outfit- and moved to keep up with the times- the same as many cattlemen are trying to do now, instead of the 20th Century thinking now still promoted by the NCBA ....

21st century ideas like listening to the consumers- and identifying for the consumer the country of origin of their food products (as consumers have asked for) - and using the US producers beef tax to promote those US beef products and thats products identity as the producers have requested....
And putting the US consumer and their wishes first- rather than answering to the pocketbook of the multinational meat mafia your cult has crawled in bed with...

You just never fit the mold of someone that believed in Socialist ideas like the Bush USDA's NAIS mandate, Maxine... :???: You might not be allowed into the womens social at the next Bankers convention :wink: :lol: :p
 

mrj

Well-known member
You are so full of that stuff you claim to have to walk around in taking care of your cattle! Did you stagger, fall down and get a big mouthfull???

NCBA has LED in LISTENING TO CONSUMERS while your outfit joined up with some so called consumer groups that are more strongly involved in liberal poliical action and placed ads nationwide telling consumers beef in US stores might be full of 'Mad Cow disease' (when you didn't know how to spell Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy!) and that "crap" (quoting your fearless leader, Johnny Smith) imported from "47 different countries.

Long before your bunch knew BSE might affect the USA, the NCBA had scientists and well informed leaders studying the problem in England to prepare for the possibility of it breaking in the USA.

At the same time, they were working desperately to get our government to depopulate cattle which had been imported from high risk areas of Europe & the UK in quite successful attempts to prevent it from getting here, if possible. That well may be a major reason for the minuscule number here.

BTW, I've been told that Canada did not have as good luck in getting that chore of depopulation of imported cattle accomplished, which may be the reason they have suffered so much more.

Canadians, do any of you know the hard facts on that story? I was told it by people in positions to know, who had worked with APHIS, but haven't had contact with those individuals in some years, so don't know the final assessment of the problem.

I don't state this to give you problems, but to shed light on a difficult, complex, and largely unknown subject, BSE and the affect on our nations.

Back to OT, your premise that advertising beef generically does not advertise USA produced beef is so far the left wall it is unbelievable. Just how much imported beef do you believe is sold at retail, where the advertising is targeted??? Isn't it about 5% of the total sold at retail?? Do the math! That means 95% of the advertising supports USA beef!

There is far more valuable work done with Beef Checkoff money that advertising. THat may be the frosting on the cake, so to speak, but new product development, nutrient content, fatty acid health benefits, and so much more shouldn't be hung out to dry on such a flimsy excuse to hate the Beef Checkoff as what is or is not advertised. You are mighty short sighted.

Regarding my politics, I am so far to the right of you, you coudln't match me if you tried! Your buddy Obama should have you convinced of that by now with where his Senate an his Presidential actions have and are moving this country!

COOL cannot and will not work like consumers truly want it to without trace back such as NAIS.

If NAIS goes through, I want the control of the information not related to food safety to be in hands other than the government, and anyone so suspicious of USDA as you certainly should, too.

I don't know, and you CERTAINLY do not know, that NCBA was actually interested in that job, one reason being that the costs looked daunting compared with any (possible) returns.

NDBA members DO know that the worlds' consumers do want such information available quickly for HEALTH REASONS. COOL canonly FAIL to provide what they want!

mrj
 

MoGal

Well-known member
Mrj...... let me tell you exactly what USA consumers want. We want USA only meat, vegetables and produce or at least the ability to buy it. It ticks me off that all the stores label pork a product of USA and Canada and all beef is labelled "a product of USA, Canada, and Mexico" ...........

You all can laugh and snicker all you want to but you all better keep this in mind............... WHEN we get a global currency (its coming, read your Bible) the only way a nation can get money is to put up their assets as collateral against borrowing. When a nation runs out of assets of its own, they will confiscate private property and you will have allowed them to do that by signing up your "premise". The patriot act already allows them to confiscate all agriculture if they declare martial law. Maybe you can't see it coming in the next five years but open your eyes to farther down the road.
 

Ben H

Well-known member
I have begun the process to un-register my "premise" ID's. The original instructions I was given from my state organization was to log into my account and delete the premises. I tried but all you can do is make them inactive. You have to choose a reason such as "new owner", "moved", "developed" and so on. There was no choice for withdrawing voluntary participation. I emailed them back and they are contacting the USDA about deleting my account in total.

I was on board with NAIS until a few months ago, as the political environment is rapidly changing I want to unplug.

I was also talking to my Soil Conservationist from USDA NRCS, I asked the question, "couldn't the USDA force you to participate in NAIS to be eligible for programs like EQIP in the future".

He said he didn't see why they couldn't, he said there was nothing he could do about it but for me to make sure I voice my concerns with my Senators. Unfortunately that would be Snowe and Collins.
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
Big farm industries will be better equipped to deal with the bureaucratic requirements and penalties (in the Bills current form); potentially squeezing out smaller operations.

HACCP was and is being used to shut down small processor competition. As of April 1, I can no longer have an animal over 30 months old processed...even for my own consumption! the end may be coming even quicker than Ben thought!!!!!

BMR, OT is so full of Kool-aid he should be declared legally blind...but then you knew that! :wink:
 

mrj

Well-known member
RobertMac, does MS have state inspection of plants, or is your plant under Federal Inspection?

How many head per week are processed in that plant?

SD has both state and federal inspected small plants and state inspection has to be at least as good as the federal inspection.

mrj
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
mrj said:
RobertMac, does MS have state inspection of plants, or is your plant under Federal Inspection?

How many head per week are processed in that plant?

SD has both state and federal inspected small plants and state inspection has to be at least as good as the federal inspection.

mrj
MS has both, but none that do processing for individual producers. The processor I used quit USDA inspection of beef last year and shut his doors in Dec.(retired). I now use the only custom beef processor in this part of the state. I could soon be a producer with a market and no way to access it. Actually I have stores asking for my beef, but can't sell to them without a state or USDA inspection label. The only way to keep the beef industry honest is for producers to have the ability direct market to consumers. I realize that's not a problem for you in "cattle country", but then, you don't have the population to direct market to.
 

mrj

Well-known member
My point is, it may be more a MS problem than anything else.

I believe that in SD we can market our beef if the state inspects it, which it does in all local locker plants and maybe larger ones as well.

Population density is definitely a problem unless one wants to sell the beef a hundred or miles for home, in most cases. Some do.

mrj
 

Tex

Well-known member
mrj said:
My point is, it may be more a MS problem than anything else.

I believe that in SD we can market our beef if the state inspects it, which it does in all local locker plants and maybe larger ones as well.

Population density is definitely a problem unless one wants to sell the beef a hundred or miles for home, in most cases. Some do.

mrj

mrj, it is a problem all over the south.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
mrj said:
My point is, it may be more a MS problem than anything else.

I believe that in SD we can market our beef if the state inspects it, which it does in all local locker plants and maybe larger ones as well.

Population density is definitely a problem unless one wants to sell the beef a hundred or miles for home, in most cases. Some do.

mrj

To me if there is no competition allowed anywhere with the NCBA/AMI Meat Mafia backing- that is not a MS or any state issue-- its a nationwide issue.....
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
mrj said:
My point is, it may be more a MS problem than anything else.

I believe that in SD we can market our beef if the state inspects it, which it does in all local locker plants and maybe larger ones as well.

Population density is definitely a problem unless one wants to sell the beef a hundred or miles for home, in most cases. Some do.

mrj
mrj, you don't have a clue, but don't feel bad...the majority of cattle producers don't know sh!t from Shinola past their farm gate!!!! And that's exactly the way AMI wants it and NCBA is complicant in keeping producers ignorant.

By law, state inspected meat has to be equivalent to USDA inspected meat.
The inspectors that inspect state plants are the very same ones that inspect USDA plants.
The only difference between the meat coming out of a state inspected plant and a USDA inspected plant(other than the fact that state inspected meat is probably less likely to have safety problems according to inspectors that have worked both) is that state meat can't be sold across state lines. WHY DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD BE? Can you say, "market protection!!!!"

Small plants are held to the same regulations as large plants.
On the face of that statement, we would all say that's the way it should be...but here is the reality of it.
My small plant killed, on average, maybe 6 head per week. There is an inspectors office in the plant provided by the plant owner and they pay for the inspector(how much I'm not sure of). The plant also has to pay someone to write a HACCP plan and pay employees to document the plan with the inspector there looking over their shoulder every day. Why does this small plant have to be held to the same regulations when there is an inspector there overseeing every aspect of plant operations? The financial problem is that a plant killing several thousand head per week is able to spread their inspection cost over many more head. The other part is that meat in a large plant is not nearly as well inspected as meat that is doubly inspected in a small plant. These regulatory disadvantages are putting small plants out of business!!!

With all the recent recalls, more regulations are coming that will farther limit producers marketing options. Producers will be limited to exactly what AMI wants them to do...produce a weaned calf and nothing more!!!!!
 

MoGal

Well-known member
Unfortunately Ben once you sign up for NAIS, it will always be signed up........... just as you found out it can only be made "inactive". Its in the fine print. I don't know what happens if, for example, a 200 acre tract is signed up and then get splits off into smaller tracts where the NAIS # goes or if the number stays with each tract of land. I'm hoping that the individual states will have their own form of NAIS and take out "premise" so that owners have property rights under the constitution.

I thought it was in the farm bill to allow states to inspect (just like USDA)........ has that not taken effect or did they scratch that out of the bill? Wouldn't state inspections suffice in that regard so that you could sell beef?

There's a good 2 hour show on Link TV (DirectTV ch 375) that has been showing, "The Future of Food". It is very informative talking about GM grains and that there will be 6 corporations in control of the food supply and 4 retail businesses (1 of which is Walmart). If you have a chance to watch it do so.
 
Top