• 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- M ID is Government by Proxy

Help Support Ranchers.net:

A

Anonymous

Guest
http://www.thestevensonreport.com/

Boss Is this honest or dishonest graft? :wink:
 

ocm

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
779
Reaction score
0
Oldtimer said:
http://www.thestevensonreport.com/

Boss Is this honest or dishonest graft? :wink:

Nobody seems to want to answer the question.

This article is also on the OCM website. http://www.competitivemarkets.com/news_and_events/newsletters/2005/oct3stevenson.htm
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
In the Supreme Court ruling on the Beef Checkoff Justice Scalia provided an invitation for the plaintiffs to return with a claim of unconstitutionality based on the principle of freedom of association. Such a claim would apply more fittingly to a mandatory but privately operated animal identification system. In that situation there would be no “government speech” to hide behind. Cattle producers would have no choice but to associate with the NCBA by using the mandatory identification program. This would be required even though the NCBA does not even represent the majority of cattle producers. The NCBA does not represent all cattle producers any more than the AFL-CIO represents all workers.

If things proceed as they are heading and NCBA/and or its appointed and controlled consortium gets the mandatory ID, we may see lawsuits coming in from all directions-make even the checkoff look virtuous......A mandatory ID system , that could be up and running by next year if left to the individual states, could take years and a dozen lawsuits to implement....But NCBA is here to save us :???: -Yeah right-All they're looking at is the bucks and the political power......Before it was "government speach"- now they want to help big business and big government take away more of our states rights........
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
The NCBA does not even represent the majority of cattle producers. The NCBA does not represent all cattle producers any more,only a smaller %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% anymore.

Has anyone seen the bill from congressman Steven King from Iowa ,it creates a ID livestock board and gets USDA and NCBA out of the Picture.
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
News at the stakeholders meeting last Wed. in Kansas City, some 36 individuals provided comments to USDA and industry participants as to concerns for NAIS, specifically the future of a privately held animal tracking database. Dr. John Clifford, deputy administrator for USDA , Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Services, reiterated some key points for industry to mind as a consortium is developed. These included:Anyone caught removing RFID tags will be Fined to the Full extent of the law.Each State has to do the traceback with their own funds. No Federal help.
USDA has put the private animal tracking database in the hands of the industry, which must collectively decide how to move forward USDA will not provide funding for the establishment or operation of the database Federal and state animal health officials will have 24/7 access to the data, with no user fees USDA is seeking a single interface to access this data, indicating that a single database is not necessarily the only option. Premises registration continues across the country, and the Animal Identification Number system 840 plus 12 digits has been targeted for implementation in the next 90 days by USDA.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
PORKER said:
USDA has put the private animal tracking database in the hands of the industry, which must collectively decide how to move forward USDA will not provide funding for the establishment or operation of the database Federal and state animal health officials will have 24/7 access to the data, with no user fees

So if NCBA ends up being the private database provider, not only will their Big Business buddies ( or any of the good old boys) have access to the info, but also the Feds will still have 24/7 access...... :cry: :mad:
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
Just My reason to have a Company like www.scoringag.com doing the database other than prying EYES tyed to the PACKERS.
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
An Eau Claire-based RFID and data collection company serving the livestock industry. I.D.ology has developed its own circuit boards and tag readers, and is working with both the beef and dairy industries for maintaining databases. The company has an alliance with an offshore firm to produce RFID ear tags.

"Our specialty is the readers, but, we have partnered up so that we have a pretty comprehensive service," says CEO Bob Kleemeier, whose firm has served the livestock industry for the last 10 years. "We are probably one of the first in the state of Wis. to offer this particular technology."

I.D.ology's reader has received technical approval in Quebec, and by the CCIA which spans Canada. It is being put to use in dairies and by cattlemen, as well as by universities, brand inspectors and truckers from California and Montana, through Texas to New York.

After I.D.ology's ISO-Cane Reader was named one of the Top 10 New Products in agriculture for 2005 at California's World Ag Expo in early February, Kleemeier said that numerous organizations started to incorporate it into their operations like ScoringAg. Both the new LightningROD and the ISO-Cane facilitate the rapid collection of tracking and management information on large numbers of animals for the USDA and individual operators. I.D.ology's hand-held readers are complemented by large stationary readers for automatic collection of cow identifications as a herd moves through an alleyway. For the dairy industry, it also makes a small, fixed halo reader for use in milk stalls to read the identity of each cow and correlate the identity with the amount of milk the cow is producing. Those readers can help to rapidly pinpoint the source of any animal disease for national security as well as provide vital management information to save producers time and money.

"We have dairy herds that we have worked with for nine to10 years, and we have calculated a reduction of $10 per year per head of cattle on vet bills," Kleemeier says. "You can save quite a bit of money doing that. So, it all adds up to a more economic way to do business. But, it requires a bit of a shift in people's thinking."

By 2009, it will be mandatory for animals entering commerce to be identified. Government officials will want to know when an animal enters commerce and when it leaves the farm on a truck to go anywhere. It will be necessary to have the ID number of that animal, where it's raised and where it's going. That information will be entered into a number of large databases. The underlying reason is to be able to locate any animal that has been associated with an animal that might have become sick.

"So, if there is any sort of contagious disease, they know which other animals to be looking at to keep them out of the feed chain," Kleemeier says. "They have set up these requirements so that they know not just where the animal was born, and what packing plant it was slaughtered at, but everywhere else in between like in a feed yard. This is supply chain management, but it is really focused on homeland security and food supply security. Everyone will have more detailed information about the individual animals involved.

"The year 2009 may seem a long way off, but, there's a lot of people that need to do a lot of learning of what is involved," Kleemeier says. "You're talking about a whole industry that hasn't done this sort of thing before."

With the advent of RFID technology, brand inspectors will eventually become a thing of the past, Kleemeier adds.

Gee I didn't know that you can read a RFID tag at a hunderd yards like you can a brand!
 

ocm

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
779
Reaction score
0
PORKER said:
Just My reason to have a Company like www.scoringag.com doing the database other than prying EYES tyed to the PACKERS.

Eyes to the packers is only one of the problems. Why should ANY single private entity be granted a monopoly? Choice and competition are a must. OR let the states run their own. Or both.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,609
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
You boys are having waaaay too much fun in Fantasyland!

Time to get back to reality.

Did the Stevensons' bother to ask anyone at NCBA, maybe even the chairman of that committee, Allen Bright, what plans NCBA has? Obviously not! For some of you, it seems to be so much more fun and better suits the "party line" to fantasize about the "evil intent" of NCBA in this matter.

Allen Bright stated on KBHB radio, Sturgis, SD only last Saturday that NCBA does NOT intend to run, manage, own, or receive any money for/from the NAIS program.

Clearly, he indicated that rancher members of NCBA believe that the ID system should be "run" by a CONSORTIUM of people involved in ALL agricultural animals covered by NAIS. It is very likely and even probable that there would not be any member of NCBA on that board, and certainly no one species represented could control it, given the large number of beef cattle and other species organizations across this nation. The goal is a NON-PROFIT consortium in charge. Several purposes could be served: lowest possible cost for the best possible system; fairness and participation for owners of all species covered; privacy more likely outside government; and there are other such systems.

BTW, why is it fine for brand inspection operations to be profitable for some cattle organizations, as they are, but it wouldn't be tolerable IF this system were run by NCBA at a profit? Just curious, since there seem to be some aspects of a double standard here. I reiterate: NCBA does not intend to "run" this system and that is not what they are working toward.

NCBA in no way wants to "take away more of our states rights", OT! Our members simply want all animal owners involved to have a voice in the process, and to get it on track as soon as possible. Maybe you need to shine up that crystal ball a bit, it surely isn't serving you well when you are apparently using it to try to predict the future.....or your mind reading skills are very rusty. Whichever the case you have missed the mark by more than a mile here!

The Stevensons' obviously are quite the conspiracy buffs. How one gets from reviewing Tammany Hall to seeing evil in talented, bright young career people moving from employment at NCBA into USDA (and I know of no more than POSSIBLY four over a period of several years, so wonder how MANY Stevensons' know of) is beyond imagination!

Their premise that "cattle producers would have no choice but to associate with the NCBA by using the mandatory ID program" is ludicrous! It would be equally true to say "cattle producers would have no choice but to associate with horse, pig, bison, and ALL animal organizations included in the NAIS". The proposal is NOT for a system run by NCBA.

Calling the proposed system "incipient fascism" seems about as far out as if they were saying Louis Farakan (sp?) had his space aliens' ship pick them up and take them into space to teach them how the NCBA is planning to take over the total US animal inspection system! And you all seem to be buying right into it. Amazing!

MRJ
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
MRJ said:
You boys are having waaaay too much fun in Fantasyland!

Time to get back to reality.

Did the Stevensons' bother to ask anyone at NCBA, maybe even the chairman of that committee, Allen Bright, what plans NCBA has? Obviously not! For some of you, it seems to be so much more fun and better suits the "party line" to fantasize about the "evil intent" of NCBA in this matter.

Allen Bright stated on KBHB radio, Sturgis, SD only last Saturday that NCBA does NOT intend to run, manage, own, or receive any money for/from the NAIS program.

Clearly, he indicated that rancher members of NCBA believe that the ID system should be "run" by a CONSORTIUM of people involved in ALL agricultural animals covered by NAIS. It is very likely and even probable that there would not be any member of NCBA on that board, and certainly no one species represented could control it, given the large number of beef cattle and other species organizations across this nation. The goal is a NON-PROFIT consortium in charge. Several purposes could be served: lowest possible cost for the best possible system; fairness and participation for owners of all species covered; privacy more likely outside government; and there are other such systems.

BTW, why is it fine for brand inspection operations to be profitable for some cattle organizations, as they are, but it wouldn't be tolerable IF this system were run by NCBA at a profit? Just curious, since there seem to be some aspects of a double standard here. I reiterate: NCBA does not intend to "run" this system and that is not what they are working toward.

NCBA in no way wants to "take away more of our states rights", OT! Our members simply want all animal owners involved to have a voice in the process, and to get it on track as soon as possible. Maybe you need to shine up that crystal ball a bit, it surely isn't serving you well when you are apparently using it to try to predict the future.....or your mind reading skills are very rusty. Whichever the case you have missed the mark by more than a mile here!

The Stevensons' obviously are quite the conspiracy buffs. How one gets from reviewing Tammany Hall to seeing evil in talented, bright young career people moving from employment at NCBA into USDA (and I know of no more than POSSIBLY four over a period of several years, so wonder how MANY Stevensons' know of) is beyond imagination!

Their premise that "cattle producers would have no choice but to associate with the NCBA by using the mandatory ID program" is ludicrous! It would be equally true to say "cattle producers would have no choice but to associate with horse, pig, bison, and ALL animal organizations included in the NAIS". The proposal is NOT for a system run by NCBA.

Calling the proposed system "incipient fascism" seems about as far out as if they were saying Louis Farakan (sp?) had his space aliens' ship pick them up and take them into space to teach them how the NCBA is planning to take over the total US animal inspection system! And you all seem to be buying right into it. Amazing!

MRJ

Great speach MRJ- but we know from past history that NCBA is not credible-- what they say today is not what they say or do tomorrow...We've seen that with their promotion of M-COOL, the 11 border points, their fight against the checkoff revote, etc.....We've seen if their Big Business Buddies tell them to Flip-flop they will in a second........I can no longer trust them....
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,609
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
Oldtimer said:
MRJ said:
You boys are having waaaay too much fun in Fantasyland!

Time to get back to reality.

Did the Stevensons' bother to ask anyone at NCBA, maybe even the chairman of that committee, Allen Bright, what plans NCBA has? Obviously not! For some of you, it seems to be so much more fun and better suits the "party line" to fantasize about the "evil intent" of NCBA in this matter.

Allen Bright stated on KBHB radio, Sturgis, SD only last Saturday that NCBA does NOT intend to run, manage, own, or receive any money for/from the NAIS program.

Clearly, he indicated that rancher members of NCBA believe that the ID system should be "run" by a CONSORTIUM of people involved in ALL agricultural animals covered by NAIS. It is very likely and even probable that there would not be any member of NCBA on that board, and certainly no one species represented could control it, given the large number of beef cattle and other species organizations across this nation. The goal is a NON-PROFIT consortium in charge. Several purposes could be served: lowest possible cost for the best possible system; fairness and participation for owners of all species covered; privacy more likely outside government; and there are other such systems.

BTW, why is it fine for brand inspection operations to be profitable for some cattle organizations, as they are, but it wouldn't be tolerable IF this system were run by NCBA at a profit? Just curious, since there seem to be some aspects of a double standard here. I reiterate: NCBA does not intend to "run" this system and that is not what they are working toward.

NCBA in no way wants to "take away more of our states rights", OT! Our members simply want all animal owners involved to have a voice in the process, and to get it on track as soon as possible. Maybe you need to shine up that crystal ball a bit, it surely isn't serving you well when you are apparently using it to try to predict the future.....or your mind reading skills are very rusty. Whichever the case you have missed the mark by more than a mile here!

The Stevensons' obviously are quite the conspiracy buffs. How one gets from reviewing Tammany Hall to seeing evil in talented, bright young career people moving from employment at NCBA into USDA (and I know of no more than POSSIBLY four over a period of several years, so wonder how MANY Stevensons' know of) is beyond imagination!

Their premise that "cattle producers would have no choice but to associate with the NCBA by using the mandatory ID program" is ludicrous! It would be equally true to say "cattle producers would have no choice but to associate with horse, pig, bison, and ALL animal organizations included in the NAIS". The proposal is NOT for a system run by NCBA.

Calling the proposed system "incipient fascism" seems about as far out as if they were saying Louis Farakan (sp?) had his space aliens' ship pick them up and take them into space to teach them how the NCBA is planning to take over the total US animal inspection system! And you all seem to be buying right into it. Amazing!

MRJ

Great speach MRJ- but we know from past history that NCBA is not credible-- what they say today is not what they say or do tomorrow...We've seen that with their promotion of M-COOL, the 11 border points, their fight against the checkoff revote, etc.....We've seen if their Big Business Buddies tell them to Flip-flop they will in a second........I can no longer trust them....

No, OT, only YOU and your fellow followers who have swallowed the R-CALF Kool-ade "know" that you BELIEVE things about NCBA which simply are not true......others who do a little research know those things are not true, but are your PERCEPTION of events. What exactly can you point to that NCBA did to "fight against the checkoff revote"? Plain and simple, LMA, in spite of their lies, failed to convince enough bona fide cattle producers to sign their petitions calling for that vote. Absolute fact! I know you choose not to believe it........just like some people claim "Al Gore won the 2000 election fair and square"! Maybe it's a good thing you have that rich fantasy life because your reality seems to have slipped a cog.

MRJ
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Plain and simple MRJ- while NCBA was saying they were staying out of it and leaving it to the petition and USDA- they were out fighting against the petition and writing letters lobbying politicians to get USDA to kill the petition- which they did... Speaking out of both sides of their mouth...Which I think was a mistake, because they could have easily won a revote then....
Another petition is coming- and I'm not sure they can win now- many more producers are better informed.....
 

ocm

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
779
Reaction score
0
MRJ said:
Oldtimer said:
MRJ said:
You boys are having waaaay too much fun in Fantasyland!

Time to get back to reality.

Did the Stevensons' bother to ask anyone at NCBA, maybe even the chairman of that committee, Allen Bright, what plans NCBA has? Obviously not! For some of you, it seems to be so much more fun and better suits the "party line" to fantasize about the "evil intent" of NCBA in this matter.

Allen Bright stated on KBHB radio, Sturgis, SD only last Saturday that NCBA does NOT intend to run, manage, own, or receive any money for/from the NAIS program.

Clearly, he indicated that rancher members of NCBA believe that the ID system should be "run" by a CONSORTIUM of people involved in ALL agricultural animals covered by NAIS. It is very likely and even probable that there would not be any member of NCBA on that board, and certainly no one species represented could control it, given the large number of beef cattle and other species organizations across this nation. The goal is a NON-PROFIT consortium in charge. Several purposes could be served: lowest possible cost for the best possible system; fairness and participation for owners of all species covered; privacy more likely outside government; and there are other such systems.

BTW, why is it fine for brand inspection operations to be profitable for some cattle organizations, as they are, but it wouldn't be tolerable IF this system were run by NCBA at a profit? Just curious, since there seem to be some aspects of a double standard here. I reiterate: NCBA does not intend to "run" this system and that is not what they are working toward.

NCBA in no way wants to "take away more of our states rights", OT! Our members simply want all animal owners involved to have a voice in the process, and to get it on track as soon as possible. Maybe you need to shine up that crystal ball a bit, it surely isn't serving you well when you are apparently using it to try to predict the future.....or your mind reading skills are very rusty. Whichever the case you have missed the mark by more than a mile here!

The Stevensons' obviously are quite the conspiracy buffs. How one gets from reviewing Tammany Hall to seeing evil in talented, bright young career people moving from employment at NCBA into USDA (and I know of no more than POSSIBLY four over a period of several years, so wonder how MANY Stevensons' know of) is beyond imagination!

Their premise that "cattle producers would have no choice but to associate with the NCBA by using the mandatory ID program" is ludicrous! It would be equally true to say "cattle producers would have no choice but to associate with horse, pig, bison, and ALL animal organizations included in the NAIS". The proposal is NOT for a system run by NCBA.

Calling the proposed system "incipient fascism" seems about as far out as if they were saying Louis Farakan (sp?) had his space aliens' ship pick them up and take them into space to teach them how the NCBA is planning to take over the total US animal inspection system! And you all seem to be buying right into it. Amazing!

MRJ

Great speach MRJ- but we know from past history that NCBA is not credible-- what they say today is not what they say or do tomorrow...We've seen that with their promotion of M-COOL, the 11 border points, their fight against the checkoff revote, etc.....We've seen if their Big Business Buddies tell them to Flip-flop they will in a second........I can no longer trust them....

No, OT, only YOU and your fellow followers who have swallowed the R-CALF Kool-ade "know" that you BELIEVE things about NCBA which simply are not true......others who do a little research know those things are not true, but are your PERCEPTION of events. What exactly can you point to that NCBA did to "fight against the checkoff revote"? Plain and simple, LMA, in spite of their lies, failed to convince enough bona fide cattle producers to sign their petitions calling for that vote. Absolute fact! I know you choose not to believe it........just like some people claim "Al Gore won the 2000 election fair and square"! Maybe it's a good thing you have that rich fantasy life because your reality seems to have slipped a cog.

MRJ

So do you think it would be ok for the AFL-CIO to run the unemployment insurance program???

FYI Randy Stevenson was at an NAIS seminar well over a year ago. There were clear intentions then to accomplish what this article describes. And note this quote, "Carrying on the operation through a non-profit “consortium” barely changes the fact that the NCBA will gain, if not financially, certainly a great deal of political clout from running the NAIS. And the fact is that the NCBA is a lobbying organization."

And from the fact that the feds will not pay for it the "consortium" will become a proxy tax collector too.

As for somebody (like in South Dakota) making a profit from running the program-- that's not the issue. In South Dakota the SDSGA has a contract. That contract could be given to someone else at any time. Also, it is only statewide, not federal. This federalization sucks.

At its annual meeting in 2004 OCM addressed the issue of "agency capture". They had lists of literally dozens of people from organizations (including NCBA) who play musical offices with the USDA.

Fascism is the merger of government and private enterprise. Don't you see how this could look very much like the beginnings of it to some people. Just for fun look up the word "incipient". That doesn't make it look so far out.
 

ocm

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
779
Reaction score
0
PS

The REAL conservative approach would NOT federalize it. What ever happened to conservatives being the champions of states rights?

The NCBA here is NOT championing the conservative cause as they claim by calling this stuff "privatization." It doesn't even meet the common sense test.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,609
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
ocm said:
MRJ said:
Oldtimer said:
Great speach MRJ- but we know from past history that NCBA is not credible-- what they say today is not what they say or do tomorrow...We've seen that with their promotion of M-COOL, the 11 border points, their fight against the checkoff revote, etc.....We've seen if their Big Business Buddies tell them to Flip-flop they will in a second........I can no longer trust them....

No, OT, only YOU and your fellow followers who have swallowed the R-CALF Kool-ade "know" that you BELIEVE things about NCBA which simply are not true......others who do a little research know those things are not true, but are your PERCEPTION of events. What exactly can you point to that NCBA did to "fight against the checkoff revote"? Plain and simple, LMA, in spite of their lies, failed to convince enough bona fide cattle producers to sign their petitions calling for that vote. Absolute fact! I know you choose not to believe it........just like some people claim "Al Gore won the 2000 election fair and square"! Maybe it's a good thing you have that rich fantasy life because your reality seems to have slipped a cog.

MRJ

So do you think it would be ok for the AFL-CIO to run the unemployment insurance program???

{Personally, I do not think the AFL-CIO should even exist today, given their history! MRJ}

FYI Randy Stevenson was at an NAIS seminar well over a year ago. There were clear intentions then to accomplish what this article describes. And note this quote, "Carrying on the operation through a non-profit “consortium” barely changes the fact that the NCBA will gain, if not financially, certainly a great deal of political clout from running the NAIS. And the fact is that the NCBA is a lobbying organization."

{I submit that it appears Stevenson has his own agenda through which he filters anything re. NCBA. In his mind, there may have been "clear intentions...." That does not make it a fact!

As I stated, it is very possible, even likely, that NCBA will have no representation in that consortium.

I know it just bites you anti-NCBA guys that the organization earned and enjoys an excellent reputation for honesty, accuracy, and success in Washington........but members are sort of proud of that fact. WE worked hard to achieve it MRJ}

And from the fact that the feds will not pay for it the "consortium" will become a proxy tax collector too.

{Yep, sort of like brand inspection. Or you could call it what it is.....a fee paid for a service performed. MRJ}

As for somebody (like in South Dakota) making a profit from running the program-- that's not the issue. In South Dakota the SDSGA has a contract. That contract could be given to someone else at any time. Also, it is only statewide, not federal. This federalization sucks.

{Last time I looked, brand inspection in SD was not statewide, but covered only the West River area. MRJ}

At its annual meeting in 2004 OCM addressed the issue of "agency capture". They had lists of literally dozens of people from organizations (including NCBA) who play musical offices with the USDA.

{So how about sharing that list here? The ones I know are wonderful, intelligent, well educated, and very good at the jobs they had with NCBA. We should be so lucky as for any government agency to have people of such common sense and dedication to private enterprise working for us! Clearly, NCBA's loss was a gain for all people benefiting from the work of those people. MRJ}

Fascism is the merger of government and private enterprise. Don't you see how this could look very much like the beginnings of it to some people. Just for fun look up the word "incipient". That doesn't make it look so far out.

IMO, threats of Fascism, and claims of it, often are thrown about by those who are at the opposite end of the political spectrum.......wanting more government involvement....and fearing private enterprise and competition in business....seeming to prefer Socialism, or at least something very close to it.......MRJ}
 

ocm

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
779
Reaction score
0
MRJ said:
IMO, threats of Fascism, and claims of it, often are thrown about by those who are at the opposite end of the political spectrum.......wanting more government involvement....and fearing private enterprise and competition in business....seeming to prefer Socialism, or at least something very close to it.......MRJ}

Interesting how you are the one wanting to expand the power of government here. Just because somebody decided to call it "privatization" doesn't mean it is. Where is the "free enterprise and competition" in this proposal? That's the point of the article. It is the government granting governing power to a private organization. It would be the same if they did it for R-CALF or for the AFL-CIO. You seem willing to give such authority to "good" organizations but not "bad" ones. NO private entity should have governing power. This is government by proxy.
 

rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,059
Reaction score
0
It is the government granting governing power to a private organization.

Well they did it for the Check-off, won't even let others that have a lower bid get the bid.
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
SSI would have no representation in a database that the ID consortium would use as I see it and they have the system that is built and running here and in other countrys as we speak .That's more than some companys trying to build one in the mean time. SSI also runs in spanish and I suppose that NCBA has people that can program and do that, NOT!!!!! One other thing is the engineers that run the ID database should all be sworn to sercery by the feds and have a FBI clearence and be a disinterested party to any specises group including CATTLE....
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
NIAI survey
In examining respondents that categorize his or her self as a producer or producer/farm/commodity association executive, 62 percent disagree or strongly disagree with the move to propagate a privately managed database.

http://www.cattlenetwork.com/content.asp?contentid=11644
 

Latest posts

Top