Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
He also got a wavier so he could keep on collecting CRP payments and not pay back the $60,000 plus he as already collected. :roll:
PORKER said:Johnson and Enzi have been long-time advocates of COOL and have been vocal about changes needed in the rule to reflect the intent of Congress.
"I am hopeful that this new Administration will work with Congress to ensure U.S.A.-exclusive product is labeled as such. I introduced my first meat labeling bill sixteen years ago, and I will continue to fight until this program is implemented properly," Johnson said.
"Congress wants a labeling program that will provide consumers with accurate information about the source of meat products they eat. There have been significant developments in labeling, but we need this Administration to finish as soon as possible what we started so long ago," said Enzi. "I am looking forward to working with the new Administration in implementing the labeling law that supports our farmers, ranchers and consumers."
Also at the news conference, Vilsack said USDA's decision to use $3.2 million, originally set aside for the specialty crop block-grant program, to enforce mandatory country-of-origin labeling would be reversed and the block-grant program would receive the funds as Congress intended. There was no further indication what is next for the COOL program. The Obama administration has taken the position to halt and review many of the final rules for programs published in the Federal Register during the last month or so of the Bush presidency.
Tex said:Also at the news conference, Vilsack said USDA's decision to use $3.2 million, originally set aside for the specialty crop block-grant program, to enforce mandatory country-of-origin labeling would be reversed and the block-grant program would receive the funds as Congress intended. There was no further indication what is next for the COOL program. The Obama administration has taken the position to halt and review many of the final rules for programs published in the Federal Register during the last month or so of the Bush presidency.
They need to take money out of NAIS to fund COOL. Whoever is responsible for pushing NAIS over COOL needs to be branded and fired. The brand is necessary to not allow them into government service again where they can abuse government power for their packers policies.
We need to identify these people and follow them to not ever allow them back in any government authority position and to track who is supporting them in government. If we do not do this, we may have to go through this all over again.
What a headache!!!
Big Muddy rancher said:Tex said:Also at the news conference, Vilsack said USDA's decision to use $3.2 million, originally set aside for the specialty crop block-grant program, to enforce mandatory country-of-origin labeling would be reversed and the block-grant program would receive the funds as Congress intended. There was no further indication what is next for the COOL program. The Obama administration has taken the position to halt and review many of the final rules for programs published in the Federal Register during the last month or so of the Bush presidency.
They need to take money out of NAIS to fund COOL. Whoever is responsible for pushing NAIS over COOL needs to be branded and fired. The brand is necessary to not allow them into government service again where they can abuse government power for their packers policies.
We need to identify these people and follow them to not ever allow them back in any government authority position and to track who is supporting them in government. If we do not do this, we may have to go through this all over again.
What a headache!!!
Tex be careful. Branding people could be deemed racist. As liberal as you are I guess your friends would excuse it. :roll:
Tex said:Big Muddy rancher said:Tex said:They need to take money out of NAIS to fund COOL. Whoever is responsible for pushing NAIS over COOL needs to be branded and fired. The brand is necessary to not allow them into government service again where they can abuse government power for their packers policies.
We need to identify these people and follow them to not ever allow them back in any government authority position and to track who is supporting them in government. If we do not do this, we may have to go through this all over again.
What a headache!!!
Tex be careful. Branding people could be deemed racist. As liberal as you are I guess your friends would excuse it. :roll:
BMR I don't believe when you substitute protecting the rights of a group of rich people over everyone else that it is "liberal" unless you believe the word "conservative" strictly means you believe in a system where this has come to pass and you don't want it to change.
When the meaning of the term conservative turns into liberal and liberal into conservative, it isn't me who has changed, it is the meaning of the words.
As far as "free trade" is concerned, one requirement I would have is that the people my country is trading with have people that are free.
I believe we need to hold those in government accountable for their actions and we need to identify them to do it. "Branding" with perception is what I meant. We don't need corporate representatives running our country. We need people who believe real democracy (not as in party) and the rule of law, not the rule of money.
Thanks for the warning, BMR but racism is where you discriminate in thinking against someone based on race, not politics. I guess you are one of those who wish to change the meaning of words without letting anyone know it.
Have you thought about running for office in Canada?
Big Muddy rancher said:Tex said:Big Muddy rancher said:Tex be careful. Branding people could be deemed racist. As liberal as you are I guess your friends would excuse it. :roll:
BMR I don't believe when you substitute protecting the rights of a group of rich people over everyone else that it is "liberal" unless you believe the word "conservative" strictly means you believe in a system where this has come to pass and you don't want it to change.
When the meaning of the term conservative turns into liberal and liberal into conservative, it isn't me who has changed, it is the meaning of the words.
As far as "free trade" is concerned, one requirement I would have is that the people my country is trading with have people that are free.
I believe we need to hold those in government accountable for their actions and we need to identify them to do it. "Branding" with perception is what I meant. We don't need corporate representatives running our country. We need people who believe real democracy (not as in party) and the rule of law, not the rule of money.
Thanks for the warning, BMR but racism is where you discriminate in thinking against someone based on race, not politics. I guess you are one of those who wish to change the meaning of words without letting anyone know it.
Have you thought about running for office in Canada?
Just thought i had better warn you as Soapweed got chastised for calling his Angus cows" black".
PORKER said:Obama pledges ‘complete review’ of FDA
By Caroline Scott-Thomas, 03-Feb-2009
Related topics: Legislation
President Obama has said in a televised interview that his administration will conduct a complete review of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to prevent future lapses in food safety.
The pledge comes in the midst of a salmonella outbreak linked to peanut products from a processing plant in Georgia that has sickened more than 500 people, and may have caused eight deaths.
“The FDA has not been able to catch some of these things as quickly as I would have expected them to catch them, so we’re going to be doing a complete review of its operations,” Obama told the Today Show on Sunday. “At a bare minimum, we should be able to count on our government keeping our kids safe when they eat peanut butter.”
The FDA is currently being run by an acting commissioner, but a White House spokesperson told reporters at a press briefing on Friday that Obama was expected to announce a new agency chief “in the next few days.”
Industry calls for reform
Obama’s assurance that the FDA will be put under the microscope will be seen as a positive step by many organizations representing food manufacturers, as well as consumer groups and the Government Accountability Office, which have all been calling for an overhaul of the FDA. A group of ten major food industry organizations, including the Grocery Manufacturers Association among others, recently wrote letters to Congress which said: “We urge Congress to quickly enact food safety reforms that will give FDA new powers to reduce the risk of food-borne illness.”
FDA Globalization Act
Then last week, a bill was introduced in the House of Representatives to tackle food safety reform, which includes proposals to give additional powers to the FDA to issue mandatory recalls and carry out more frequent inspections of food and drug manufacturing facilities. Under the proposed legislation, manufacturers would pay fees to fund the additional inspections, to take place once every four years for food manufacturers, and every two for drug manufacturers.
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Rep. Bart Stupak, said: “Since January 2007, my Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee has held 16 hearings on the FDA’s failure to protect Americans from unsafe food and drugs. The Food and Drug Administration Globalization Act addresses many of the problems we have identified through our hearings, providing the regulatory tools and financial resources for the FDA to protect American families from unsafe food and drugs.”
Although a spokesperson for the Grocery Manufacturers Association broadly welcomed the news that the legislation had been put forward, he criticized the proposal that industry should pay for plant inspections. He told FoodNavigator-USA.com: “We believe that food safety is a right that all Americans have…and that it should be paid for by Congress appropriating general funds.”
PORKER said:The Food Mafia doesn't want to pay for their mistakes. Go BART Stupak !
reader (the Second) said:I cannot believe this. Of course the food industry should pay for inspections.
hypocritexposer said:In a free market society, if you do not feel that the company is watching food safety, you would not buy from them.
Reader thinks that it should be taken off the producer's pay!
hypocritexposer said:So, this stuff is in the stimulus package, right? Offering more inspection jobs, while allowing for increased food safety?