• 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.............

RobertMac

Well-known member
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?

I have no doubt about why the beef industry is in the shape it is in!!!!!
Macon, please give me a "beating head against wall" icon!!!!!
 

Tex

Well-known member
RobertMac said:
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?

I have no doubt about why the beef industry is in the shape it is in!!!!!
Macon, please give me a "beating head against wall" icon!!!!!

RM, there was talk of this happening in the last farm bill. The provision would allow state inspected plants who adhered to fed. regs. could inspect beef for out of state shipment, so Mogal isn't off on that one.

RM, you are totally right about the USDA's help on market protection for the big guys. This has been policy for the USDA for some time and every chair of the House and Senate Agriculture Committees have let it happen. The last Farm Bill had some other provisions.

It is amazing that the USDA would "okay" foreign supplies of beef inspections (like that for Tyson's plant in Canada) and not the state's.

It totally shows how skewed the USDA has been to big Ag and against the little guys. The big guys pay for this protection from the USDA through campaign contributions to corrupt politicians who have allowed it. The last Farm Bill tried to address some of these problems with some provisions listed below.

There are some provisions in the Farm Bill regarding ten state inspection plans:

http://www.ers.usda.gov/FarmBill/2008/Titles/TitleXILivestock.htm#meatpoultry

Look it up under Meat Poultry and Catfish Inspection.
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
Tex said:
RobertMac said:
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?

I have no doubt about why the beef industry is in the shape it is in!!!!!
Macon, please give me a "beating head against wall" icon!!!!!

RM, there was talk of this happening in the last farm bill. The provision would allow state inspected plants who adhered to fed. regs. could inspect beef for out of state shipment, so Mogal isn't off on that one.

RM, you are totally right about the USDA's help on market protection for the big guys. This has been policy for the USDA for some time and every chair of the House and Senate Agriculture Committees have let it happen. The last Farm Bill had some other provisions.

It is amazing that the USDA would "okay" foreign supplies of beef inspections (like that for Tyson's plant in Canada) and not the state's.

It totally shows how skewed the USDA has been to big Ag and against the little guys. The big guys pay for this protection from the USDA through campaign contributions to corrupt politicians who have allowed it. The last Farm Bill tried to address some of these problems with some provisions listed below.

There are some provisions in the Farm Bill regarding ten state inspection plans:

http://www.ers.usda.gov/FarmBill/2008/Titles/TitleXILivestock.htm#meatpoultry

Look it up under Meat Poultry and Catfish Inspection.
If I misinterpreted what Mogal said, I apologize because I normally agree with her...but state inspection has been around for a long time. In the past, most every grocery store was state inspected because they would go to the local processor and buy a beef carcass to be cut up by their butcher.
 

Ben H

Well-known member
I talked to the person in charge of labeling in Maine a few months ago, she said this thing in the Farm Bill about allowing State Inspected meat to cross state lines wasn't as simple as it sounds. There will be another level of regulation beyond state inspection for it to cross state lines.
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Vilsack addresses possible mandatory ID system
By Drovers news staff | Wednesday, April 08, 2009

Speaking with reporters at the International Food Aid Conference this week in Kansas City, Mo., Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said he plans to hold discussions with groups opposed to a mandatory ID system but also said “the bottom line is we have got to have a system that works.”

According to an Associated Press article, Vilsack addressed the conference about the need for international food aid and the agency’s commitment to ship agricultural commodities to needy countries. In an interview with reporters, he touched on the issue of the National Animal Identification System, saying the agency is anxious to listen and learn and will try to be creative in trying to respond. Several members of Congress are pushing for a mandatory ID system. For the full article, click here.

The idea of a mandatory national ID system has met stiff resistance from agricultural groups both large and small. It will be a tough sell in Congress and out in the country. Political pressures are mounting, however, for traceability throughout the food system. Originally conceived as an animal-health program for early intervention in disease outbreaks, politicians increasingly link NAIS with the broader issues of food safety and consumer protection, which the Obama administration repeatedly cites as a high priority. Stay tuned. — John Maday, Drovers managing editor.
 

mrj

Well-known member
RobertMac, I'm so sorry that you apparently have to put down others intellligence or knowledge of the cattle/beef industry to build up your self esteem!

You admit your previous beef processor retired and closed his plant, yet blame that on pressure from those 'evil' big packers????

Why is it that a state with little population and lots of cattle has many small STATE INSPECTED packing plants that process cattle for whomever brings one in (and most seem to have as much business as they can handle) and some other states have virtually no processors for local cattle or by individual owners? Could it be state internal politics and not JUST those 'big outfits' shutting down competition???

I definitely was aware that state inspections must be equivalent to federal inspection. I do not believe, at least in SD, that it is so much onerous regulation and inspection and rules costs that cause the small plants to quit as it is the hard work and difficulty hiring help, at least in western SD that appears to be more the case.

It was also the small FEDERALLY INSPECTED plants, instead of the 'big four or more plants, that fought the interstate sale of state inspected meat in some states.

I believe NCBA was active in PROMOTING interstate sales of state inspected beef.

I KNOW that NCBA is a leader in education programs for member cattle producers in ALL aspects of the cattle/beef industry, contrary to what some here will admit, or can comprehend.

mrj
 

MoGal

Well-known member
RM.... I'm sorry, your post above mine did explain but it wasn't there when I posted (so I looked and they were posted only a few minutes apart).

I thought that was the whole idea put in the farm bill to allow state inspectors so that meat could go intrastate because they said it was easier to ship from another country to the US than it was for stuff to go state to state and this was supposed to correct it. I'm sorry that I didn't explain myself better

There will be another level of regulation beyond state inspection for it to cross state lines.

and that is so ridiculous. We import 63% of our food and 99% of it can't even be inspected once and here you can't even get it from one state to the next.

Well, I keep hoping that this downturn will bring out some moral, common sense people to run for Congress because we definitely need it.
 

Tex

Well-known member
MoGal said:
RM.... I'm sorry, your post above mine did explain but it wasn't there when I posted (so I looked and they were posted only a few minutes apart).

I thought that was the whole idea put in the farm bill to allow state inspectors so that meat could go intrastate because they said it was easier to ship from another country to the US than it was for stuff to go state to state and this was supposed to correct it. I'm sorry that I didn't explain myself better

There will be another level of regulation beyond state inspection for it to cross state lines.

and that is so ridiculous. We import 63% of our food and 99% of it can't even be inspected once and here you can't even get it from one state to the next.

Well, I keep hoping that this downturn will bring out some moral, common sense people to run for Congress because we definitely need it.


Mogal, you have hit the nail on the head here. Why should we trust another country's inspection services over our own state's inspection services?

The reason, of course, is that we have had sold out agriculture committees in the house and senate (with little h and little s) who have allowed this to happen. Ask your own senator if they support other country's inspection systems over their own state inspection systems. They all need to answer to the people in the U.S. over this incompetence and favoritism towards countries and corporations who gain competitive advantage by selling out people in the U.S. with uninspected foreign supplies.

Can you say Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, who represents her real clients. Tyson and Walmart over U.S. interests?

The USDA needs to be cleaned up and some heads need to roll at Homeland Security and USDA who have allowed this to happen. The "corrective" action you mention has not been fully implemented, and even if it has, we need to know why senators and congress in the oversight committees and our regulatory agencies trust foreign governments more than their own state regulators.

We need our government to stop bending over to the globalists and pay a little more attention to their constituents. Money needs to stop buying Washington politicians.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Tex, you, and all of us who do so, give the poliitcians an 'easy out' when we use terms indicating "money needs to stop buying Washington politicians".........no one if forcing those politicians to take that money! It is their fault alone if they play the game.

On the other hand, how does anyone prove that a politician who takes PAC or individual campaign money is, or is not, acting in favor of the entity making the donation......or is acting according to information he/she has that show it the best decision????

Crystal ball gazing works better for some than for others.

mrj
 

Tex

Well-known member
mrj said:
Tex, you, and all of us who do so, give the poliitcians an 'easy out' when we use terms indicating "money needs to stop buying Washington politicians".........no one if forcing those politicians to take that money! It is their fault alone if they play the game.

On the other hand, how does anyone prove that a politician who takes PAC or individual campaign money is, or is not, acting in favor of the entity making the donation......or is acting according to information he/she has that show it the best decision????

Crystal ball gazing works better for some than for others.

mrj

I am not giving them an easy way out, I am saying they are for sale and shouldn't be in government when they are for sale.

The whole pay to play program by the republicans was really "bribe me or else". It shows how low their integrity is and that they are not fit to serve the people in government. D.C has catered to money because it is in their best interest to do so because they get paid off but it led to the whole financial meltdown and our regulatory agencies not being able to regulate and prevent fraud and greed from running rampant.

Wall Street has been the largest contributor to politicians and now they get the biggest bail out by tax payers when they should have lost all their assets for making bad business decisions. We have too many that are too big to fail and that is exactly a result of lax anti competition laws and regulatory agencies. Now the taxpayer has to pay for it. I would say money sure has bought a lot of taxpayer funded bail outs.

We have to change this system.

I don't give them a free ride on this issue, I am holding them accountable.

We get the best government money can buy because we allow money to buy government and nobody gets held accountable for it.
 

Latest posts

Top