The Congress critters say nobody’s calling them to oppose the USDA’s proposed National Animal Identification System (NAIS). Time to correct that. Contact you’re federal representatives and the people on the agriculture committees. Here’s a release from the folks at Liberty Ark:
LIBERTY ARK ACTION ALERT: FARM BILL TO IMPLEMENT NAIS:
Contact Congress. Ask the House and Senate Agriculture Committees to keep NAIS out of the Farm Bill.
FARM BILL PROVISION ON NAIS: The House Committee on Agriculture is continuing to work on the Farm Bill throughout the month of June. Section 121 of the current draft would allow the USDA to use a mandatory animal identification system in order to implement Country of Origin Labeling (“COOL”). Current law prohibits mandatory NAIS for COOL, and this is a move in the WRONG direction! Read Randy Givens’ article about the dangers of linking COOL with NAIS.
In the last action alert, we urged everyone to contact the chair and ranking minority member of the subcommittee on livestock. If you haven’t done so already, you can find the earlier alert with their contact information. These Congressmen have significant input into what happens with Section 121, even though it has gone to the full Committee.
Now, we’re asking people to broaden their efforts. The first two targets are the Chair and Ranking Minority Member of the full House Committee on Agriculture. We also need to educate the Chair and Ranking Minority Member of the Senate Committee, to provide protection against whatever the House may pass.
Last, we need everyone to contact any member of the Committee who is from their state. There is no point in contacting all 46 members of the Committee – but those members who are from your state should hear what you think about NAIS. They also need to hear from all your friends and neighbors! Numbers count!!
The fight in Congress is going to be a long and difficult one. Please continue educating your friends and neighbors, and encourage them to sign up as Liberty Ark supporters. Stand ready to write and call at important moments. This first stage of educating the legislators before the actual votes on bills is critical, and we need everyone’s help.
A call takes less than a minute. Please call or write whenever a new vote is to be taken, and regularly until NAIS is out of the Farm Bill! We’ll keep you updated when important events are happening. And don’t forget to educate your Representative and Senators!
TAKE ACTION: Please write, email, fax, or call following members:
1) The Honorable Collin C. Peterson
Chairman, House Committee on Agriculture
1305 Longworth House Office Building
Washington D.C. 20515
Phone: 202-225-2171
Fax: 202-225-8510
Email: link
2) The Honorable Bob Goodlatte
Ranking Minority Member, House Committee on Agriculture
1305 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-0029
Fax: 202-225-0917
Email: link
3) Any member of the Committee who comes from your state. All of the members are listed below, and it’s very important that the members hear from the people within their state. The members are listed in order of their states (starting with Alabama and ending with Wisconsin).
4) Senator Harkin
Chairman, Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition & Forestry
Room SR-328A Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC. 20510-6000
Phone: 202-224-2035
5) Senator Saxby Chambliss
Ranking Minority Member, Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition & Forestry
Room SR-328A Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC. 20510-6000
Phone: 202-224-2035
6) Your Congressman and Senator: link
Message: Please strip Section 121 from the draft Farm Bill. The law barring the USDA from using mandatory animal identification to implement COOL should not be changed, and NAIS should not be put into the Farm Bill.
A sample letter and talking points are at the end of this alert. As always, if you have any questions, you can contact us at link.
MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
Name (State), Phone number, Fax number
Members are listed in order of their states (alphabetically). Please contact any members who come from your state. If you want to use e-mail, then go to the Congressperson’s website, which you can find at link
Terry Everett (AL), (p) 202-225-2901, (f) 202-225-8913
Michael Rogers (AL), (p) 202-225-3261, (f) 202-226-8485
Jo Bonner (AL), (p) 202-225-4931, (f) 202-225-0562
Joe Baca (CA), (p) 202-225-6161, (f) 202-225-8671
Dennis Cardoza (CA), (p) 202-225-6131, (f) 202-225-0819
Jim Costa (CA), (p) 202-225-3341, (f) 202-225-9308
Kevin McCarthy (CA), (202) 225-2915, (f) 202-225-2908
John T. Salazar (CO), (p) 202-225-4761, (f) 202-226-9669
Marilyn Musgrove (CO), (p) 202-225-4676, (f) 202-225-5870
Timothy Mahoney (FL), (p) 202-225-5792, (f) 202-225-3132
David Scott (GA), (p) 202-225-2939, (f) 202-225-4628
Jim Marshall (GA), (p) 202-225-6531, (f) 202-225-3013
John Barrow (GA), (p) 866-890-6236, (f) 202-225-3377
Leonard L. Boswell, (IA), (p) 202-225-3806, (f) 202-225-5608
Steve King (IA), (p) 202-225-4426, (f) 202-225-3193
Timothy Johnson (IL), 202-225-2371, (f) 202-226-0791
Brad Ellsworth (IN), (p) 866-567-0227, (f) 202-225-3284
Joe Donnelly (IN), (p) 202-225-3915, (f) 202-225-6798
Nancy Boyda (KS), (p) 202-225-6601, (f) 202-225-7986
Jerry Moran (KS), (p) 202-225-2715, (f) 202-225-5124
Charles W. Boustany, Hr. (LA), (p) 202-225-2031, (f) 202-225-5724
Tim Walberg (MI), (p) 202-225-6276, (f) 202-225-6281
Collin Peterson (MN), (p) 202-225-2165, (f) 202-225-1593
Timothy J. Walz (MN), (p) 202-225-2472, (f) 202-225-3433
Sam Graves (MO), (p) 202-225-7041, (f) 202-225-8221
Earl Pomeroy, (ND), (p) 202-225-2611, (f) 202-226-0893
Mike McIntyre (NC), (p) 202-225-2731, (f) 202-225-5773
Bob Etheridge (NC), (p) 202-225-4531, (f) 202-225-5662
Robin Hayes, (NC), (p) 202-225-3715, (f)202-225-4036
Virginia Foxx (NC), (p) 202-225-2071, (f) 202-225-2995
Jeff Fortnberry (NE), (p) 202-225-4806, (f) 202-225-5686
Adrian Smith (NE), (p) 202-225-6435, (f) 202-225-0207
Kirsten Gillibrand, (NY), (p) 202-225-5614, (f)202-225-1168
John R. “Randy” Kuhl, Jr. (NY), 202-225-3161, (f) 202-226-6599
Zachary T. Space (OH), (p) 202-225-6265, (f) 330-364-4330
Jean Schmidt (OH), (p) 202-225-3164, (f) 202-225-1992
Frank D. Lucas (OK), (p) 202-225-5565, (f) 202-225-8698
Tim Holden (PA), (p) 202-225-5546, (f) 202-226-0996
Stephanie Herseth Sandline, (SD), (p) 202-225-2801, (f) 202-225-5823
Lincoln Davis, (TN), (p) 202-225-6831, 9f) 202-226-5172
Henry Cuellar (TX), (p) 202-225-1640, (f) 202-225-1641
Mike Conaway (TX), (p) 202-225-3605, (f) 202-225-1783
Randy Neugebauer (TX), (p) 202-225-4005, (f) 202-225-9615
Nicholas Lampson (TX), (p) 202-225-5951, (f) 202-225-5241
Bob Goodlatte (VA), (p) 202-225-5431, (f) 202-225-9681
Steve Kagen (WI), (p) 202-225-5665, (f) 202-225-5729
TALKING POINTS – To STOP NAIS
* Please strip Section 121 from the draft Farm Bill. The law barring the USDA from using mandatory animal identification to implement COOL should not be changed, and NAIS should not be added to the Farm Bill.
* Country of Origin Labeling can and should be implemented without mandatory animal identification
* Requiring all imported livestock to be identified with a country of origin marking is enough to implement COOL
* Requiring U.S. cattle producers to individually identify all domestic cattle to prove their eligibility for a USA label is not necessary for COOL.
* Using mandatory animal identification to implement COOL would impose heavy burdens on American farmers and ranchers, in both time and money. NAIS will drive independent ranches and farms in America out of business.
* The purpose of COOL is to provide information so that consumers can choose whether to buy domestic or foreign products and, as a hoped-for result, providing American farmers and ranchers with economic rewards for raising food in this country.
* Mandatory animal identification would harm American farmers and ranchers, contrary to the goal of COOL.
* The right to know where our food comes from will be an empty right if it is purchased at the price of a mandatory animal identification system, such as the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). If mandatory animal ID is implemented, consumers would be fooled into believing that they were supporting American farmers and ranchers through the “Made in the USA” label. Yet more and more of the food labeled that way would be raised by international corporations that are willing and able to comply with NAIS.
SAMPLE LETTER OR EMAIL – Personalize for the greatest impact
If you use email, be sure to put a clear subject line, such as “Strip Section 121 from the Draft Farm Bill”
Dear Chairman Peterson and Members of the Committee:
I ask that you strip Section 121 from the draft Farm Bill. The law barring the USDA from using mandatory animal identification to implement Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) should not be changed, and the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) should not be added to the Farm Bill.
I am a _______ (farmer, consumer,
. Tell them a few sentences about yourself and why you care about this issue)
COOL can be implemented simply by requiring all imported livestock to be identified with a country of origin marking, which is already a requirement for cattle imported from Mexico or Canada. Requiring U.S. cattle producers to individually identify all domestic cattle to prove their eligibility for a USA label is simply not necessary. Using mandatory animal identification to implement COOL will impose heavy burdens on American farmers and ranchers, in both time and money. NAIS will drive independent ranches and farms in America out of business.
The purpose of COOL is to provide information so that consumers can choose whether to buy domestic or foreign products and, as a hoped-for result, providing American farmers and ranchers with economic rewards for raising food in this country. Mandatory animal identification will harm all Americans’ rights and our economy. Mandatory animal identification will cancel out the goals of COOL.
The right to know where our food comes from will be an empty right if it is purchased at the price of a mandatory animal identification program such as the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). If NAIS is implemented, consumers will be fooled into believing that they were supporting American farmers and ranchers through the “Made in the USA” label. Yet more and more of the food labeled that way would be raised by international corporations that are willing and able to comply with NAIS.
Please strip Section 121 from the draft Farm Bill, and keep NAIS out of the Farm Bill.
Sincerely,
Name
Address
City, State Zip
Email ( if you have it)
Everyone must be busy faxing because the lines seem to be very busy!
None of my Congressmen or Reps are on the committee, but I decided to canvas everyone in every district of the state just to be sure they knew that this would effect their constituents.
BTW–faxing from your computer allows you to set up blocks of addresses and automates the whole process. Why didn’t I think of this sooner. . . .
Comment Podchef — June 12, 2007 @ 11:41 am
I faxed my objections to Provisions 121 & 123 in the draft of the House Committee on Agriculture to several of those on that committee as well as to my senators last week.
I guess numbers are whatever they want to make them.
Comment donna — June 12, 2007 @ 5:36 pm
Well the spam anwser was wrong, i just got done faxing everyone but 4 of them. Done and they all got a personlized letter, Whats Next on the list?
Comment Gisela — June 13, 2007 @ 12:37 pm
Follow up with phone calls. :-)
Atta girl! Thanks for your work.
Comment Henwhisperer — June 13, 2007 @ 6:48 pm
Made a flood of faxes yesterday. Funny how Boswell and Goodlatte’s faxes didn’t seem to work. . . .
When I called their offices I didn’t make very much headway, either. That is until I played the R-Calf card. Then I at least got to leave them a message. Don’t expect any call backs though.
Comment Podchef — June 13, 2007 @ 9:56 pm
C-SPAN has a very easy way to find contact info for your reps - follow this link
http://www3.capwiz.com/c-span/dbq/officials/
Comment sloov — June 14, 2007 @ 8:36 am
Thanks Sloov! That was slick and I was able to find contact info for a couple I hadn’t been able to contact before.
Comment Mary Beth Westcott — June 14, 2007 @ 10:40 am
Thank you to all who take the time to contact Ag. Committee.
I’m a little pessimistic so pardon me for thinking Pitch forks and pine tar might not be a bad idea…
…damn shame we’ve got to beg one more time to keep rights that are ours to begin with.
…speaking of rights by the powers vested in me by myself I hereby proclaim my Chickens as free and independent. I recognize their status by releasing all mineral and manure rights around their Coop, I further enter into a
Non nuclear proliferation agreement with them and agree to the boundaries heretofor established marking their Sovereign Nation. I also agree to a mutual military assistance pact with them in the event roving Skunks, Fox or Weasels (2 legged or 4 legged) come to force them to wear ear tags. I retain a 99 year lease on the production of their eggs and agree to reparations of daily rations of table scraps for any chicken or ancestor of chickens I illegally held in bondage. It is my hope that with this proclamation man and chicken can live in harmony :)
…So Colin Peterson, USDA, Weimars et al talk to the Rooster he’s in charge now!
Comment Bob Constantine — June 14, 2007 @ 10:08 pm
Well, fellas, I did my part in doing some faxing and calling. Will follow up on some more calls and faxes. (And emails) One of the faxes did not go through… Maybe Lincoln Davis’ (TN) fax blew up from all the faxes coming in, opposing Section 121 snuck in the Farm Bill?
Here’s hoping that Congresscritters will take heed of us “small guppies” (as Walmart once described those of us “little people”) who managed to prevent yet another Walmart from building where it isn’t wanted.
One day at a time…
Comment John Sherrer — June 15, 2007 @ 2:47 pm
If, and I mean, IF NAIS becomes the law of the land, here is something that should offer us hope. This is part of an article, copied and pasted here, written by Douglas Herman on the Strike the Root website.
Here it is:
“Walden inspired the environmental movement more than a century after it was written, the essay, On the Duty of Civil Disobedience effected a worldwide range of rights movements over the past 150 years–too many to count–spanning abolition and civil rights to include the antiwar, draft and tax resistance movements today. This single essay, Civil Disobedience, inspired such diverse thinkers as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Tolstoy, Gandhi, and most recently, Martin Luther King, Jr. Not surprisingly, it is not required reading in high school.
This grass-roots idea of organized, passive resistance would later influence another formidable religious leader a quarter century later and halfway around the world.
Martin Luther King, a Southern Baptist minister, took Thoreau at his word, that each human had a right and duty to disobey unjust policies, and invigorated the moribund civil rights movement almost a hundred years after the author’s death. This basic premise, of passive resistance to an overwhelming force, continued through the tumultuous Sixties while the Vietnam War raged.
[Please leave links as citations to the original when quoting material. Here is the link for the above quote. In searching for that link I also found this interesting essay about breaking the law.-WJ]
Comment John Sherrer — June 16, 2007 @ 10:14 am
John #10, sound logic and a nice link from Walter to Thoreau etc….I’ll go a little further and say that any “law” , “regulation” or “interim rule”
that runs contrary to the Constitution and Bill of Rights as well as conflicts with my State Constitution is no law at all. In fact it is my
Patriotic DUTY to not only ignore but to defeat such “laws”. I’ll go further still and accuse those traitors who insist on applying or enforcing such false “laws” as criminals.
Obviously our founding fathers never intended for us to get this far down the path to being ruled… and they warned us that it could happen.
All it takes is for the people to sit by and do nothing.
Comment Bob Constantine — June 17, 2007 @ 3:55 am
To Mr. Constantine (#11)
I agree with you 100%! Thomas Paine said, “It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from his government.”
I (and most of us small farmers and freedom lovers) join you in your dismay (and resentment) that we are having to beg for our rights that were ours to start with.
Here is a great website that helps us stay right on top of congress — it is called Downsizer DC. I imagine that you are already aware of it. The link:
http://www.downsizedc.org/index.shtml
Truth is on our side. Let us continue to hold our heads high and show the ilk in office that we will NOT be intimidated, and that we are not going away. Again, I believe that our resolve to hold fast to what is dear to our hearts and the Internet will see us through. Never, never lose hope.
Comment John Sherrer — June 17, 2007 @ 9:02 am
Congress says nobody is calling them and that is nothing but a lie. I know I have called everybody on that committee, and talked only to assistants, but at least gave them my 2 cents to pass on to the committee memebers. As we noticed here in WA state, our own Legislators keep parroting the same thing- “oh- we don’t get any calls, emails, or testimonies sent in to us about this NAIS stuff.” We had to threaten the state Leg with a lawsuit when the testimonies we all submitted never made it into their files, which they are supposed to keep by law. So when they were asked for a full file of copies of all the testimonies and most of them came up missing, they were forced to re-open the testimony submission so people had to re-send their testimonies. That happened on our No NAIS legislation just this year that was not passed in the end.
So they pretty much say whatever they want, and don’t believe them for a second! We know first hand how their black politics work. I find it disturbing that all they have to do to pass something awful is say nobody contacted them, when, in fact, many people have contacted and are contacting them.
Comment Sabrina — June 19, 2007 @ 1:26 am
Farm Bill may ease modified crop ban
By Hank Shaw
Capitol Bureau Chief
June 18, 2007 6:00 AM
SACRAMENTO - Buried within the gigantic federal Farm Bill now under debate in Congress lies a seed of discord over the use of genetically modified crops, known by critics as “Frankenfoods.”
Section 123 of the federal bill bars state or local governments from banning anything the U.S. Department of Agriculture has already approved. It sounds benign, but the proposal would sweep away existing bans on genetically modified crops in four California counties and block bans proposed in at least 16 other states.
The proposed measure has sparked uproar among the sustainable agriculture community, especially among organic farmers, and the office of House Agriculture Committee member Dennis Cardoza, D-Merced, has received more than 3,000 e-mails protesting the provision.[my emphasis - Sharon]
Cardoza leads the committee’s panel on organic agriculture and says he, too, has concerns about Section 123.
“I am slightly troubled by this language, with respect to the fact that it was put in, … towards the end of the legislative process, without proper debate and consideration,” Cardoza said. “I will be monitoring this section closely as the Farm Bill process continues to determine how it might affect laws already on the books in California.”
At its core, the conflict is between those who believe it is OK to alter plants and animals by any means necessary to achieve a desired result - making corn more resistant to pests, for example - and those farmers and scientists who find the idea of inserting genes from bacteria or animals into plants abhorrent.
Traditional animal and plant husbandry relies on a slow, progressive progress of selection among similar plants. Genetic engineering can serve as a shortcut that not only can bypass intermediary steps necessary in traditional farming, but can also introduce elements wholly alien to a plant, such as implanting pesticides into corn.
Special effects like this have proved to be genetically unstable; cross-breeding between genetically modified grasses and natural grasses is threatening Oregon’s seed industry. Worries over genetically modified rice have caused the California Rice Commission to ban it, largely because export markets in Asia refuse to buy it.
Proponents of the measure argue that modified crops require fewer pesticides and note that a crazy quilt of county and state regulations, especially regarding sale of genetically modified foods, would cripple interstate commerce.
County growers already are raising genetically modified crops such as alfalfa and field corn, both primarily used to feed dairy catt;e.
This sort of “pre-emption” legislation stripping local control has popped up all over the country.
Last year at the Legislature in Sacramento, state Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, sponsored a bill - universally supported by San Joaquin Valley lawmakers - that was effectively a state version of Section 123.
San Joaquin County Supervisor Jack Sieglock was an active supporter of that bill, as were nine agricultural counties as well as nearly every farm group in the state. Nevertheless, the bill died in the waning days of the session.
This year, a state bill allowing farmers to sue if their fields are contaminated by nearby genetically modified crops ran aground in the Assembly Agriculture Committee.
It is unclear who inserted Section 123 into the federal legislation, but staffers working on the bill say they do not expect it to survive intact.
A revised version of the section is expected to be released next week as the Agriculture Committee continues debate on the overall bill.
Comment Henwhisperer — June 20, 2007 @ 6:28 am
i honestly don’t think that sending them letters or calling them will make a difference. They are not working by the laws of the constitution. If each and every american disagreed they will still try and probably suceed implimenting this. The are chipping people in hospitals, and nursing homes.
I am overwhelmed and terrified.
I write my letters anyway and will make a few phone calls when i can.
It is TERRIFYING …the reality of all this…UTTERLY TERRIFYING.
I am quite sure that sometime in the near future they will pass a law overnight, without proper legislative process and no public comment period or announcement that we will have to report to the nearest health facility or concentration camp for an RFID chip. I will leave this disgustingly corrupt and insane country so fast…
How did such devastation occur? This is crazy…
Comment irene — June 24, 2007 @ 2:19 pm
Irene #14…don’t leave the country, defend it. WE are the
Patriots, THEY are ones that should leave us alone or leave OUR country.
It is our country and if we don’t want to submit to theft of our rights we need to say no, sometimes loud enough to be heard. Sometimes with a cow pie :) Nothing quite says “no thanks” like a cow pie!
Speaking of saying NO… I spent a little time at Porc Fest yesterday…met some interesting people, some might consider a few of them on the fringe but most subscribe to the less Government the better point of view.
Nais is but one talon digging into our freedoms. I did put in a few plugs for our cause and handed out some Nonais flyers and learned about a few other Government power grabs. I got a chance to chat with Russell Kanning…interesting guy (he’s a well known activist) he mentioned he’d publish NoNais items in his newspaper The Keene (NH) Free Press. We just need to send him the info. I think if you google Keene Free press it will give you contact info etc. It may take a while for a response since I’ll assume he’s busy with the Free State Project this week…
Comment Bob Constantine — June 24, 2007 @ 7:46 pm
Irene, if I may say so,
Bobs right,this is our country, our home ,lets not let them scare us out of it, I know it can all be a bit overwhelming but you can do it,
you have it in you,we just have to dig down deep sometimes to find the courage and the resolve to look the devil in the eye and spit in his face,we all have had reservations and fears about what is going on all over the place,
but then thats the point it is “all over the place”,we will find tyrants wherever we go on this planet,no sense trading their tyrrants for ours,besides they won’t let you leave anyway if it really hits the fan.
we have had a good thing here in America,we still do/ will,if we stick together and adopt a “not in my backyard” attitude toward govt stupidity in general.
Govt wants us to believe they hold all the cards and that they are too powerful and all encompasing to be challenged or defied,I’m here to tell you it ain’t so, they know it too,
but they will keep at it as long as we the people let them,like most bullys they have no real backbone or authority,but they have a lot of bluster and intimidating ways,
if we refuse to comply in mass they will soon back down, but if we let them they will run us off the farm ,so to speak.
We are up against a ruthless bunch of tyrant wannabees (govt and corporate) who believe they are destined to rule us,it ain’t gonna happen,we are going to win this fight,one way or another,failure is not an option,so never give up and never say die.
We have gained some ground since we first started this journey,we have a ways to go, but lets hang in there and we will finish this thing for good.thanks.
“Live free or die tryin”
Comment LEE — June 24, 2007 @ 8:50 pm
I just read this morning in Meatingplace that the USDA’s Agriculture Marketing Service has reopened the comment period for 60 days for the “proposed” rule for mandatory COOL for beef, lamb and pork.
I am hopping mad. My understanding is that COOL was in the farm bill in 2002 and hasn’t been implemented because of lack of funds and pressure from the big ag associations and packers. NOTHING has happened on this.
On the other hand, the USDA has been extremely creative in shoving NAIS down our throats (due to pressure from the same people who don’t want COOL) and millions of dollars made available for something that is not law. And now the 2007 Farm Bill links COOL with NAIS.
I think we all need to leave our comments on COOL. The recent publication on COOL in the Federal Register can be found here:
link
(Sorry Walter but I don’t understand how to use the html below to add a link)
COOL YES, NAIS NO
[COOL good. NAIS bad. Link fixed. -WJ]
Comment Mary Beth Westcott — June 25, 2007 @ 7:15 am
I am deeply concerned with proposals that tie NAIS to COOL.
In mid-july, you will be considering approving Section 121 of the 2007 Farm Bill. This proposal ties the implentation of COOL with NAIS. These should be considered as SEPERATE items, because that is exactly what they are. NAIS should be stricken from the Farm Bill.
I am seriously opposed to NAIS. It is not a system people will support and furthermore it will never work. Do your research from many angles. NAIS is seriously flawed and is unrealistic, to say the least. There are too many variables such as a houase cat eating a dead bird and then kissing its owner. THen what - the entire farm is “depopulated” because the owner gets sick? NAIS will harm everyone, all of us, society, in the long run by eventually downgrading the needed the biodiversity as small family farmers, who can’t afford the time or money, will get put out of business, while the huge conglomerates will benefit and grow larger while we all loose more gene pools and strains of animals as people stop keeping animals. And if disease ever did come to these large factory farms, how smart is it that we concentrate all this food source in single spots? We’ll need the biodiversity of many small famers so we can recover. More problems that can’t even be thought of with NAIS/USDA such as inspectors dragging disease from farm to farm with their dirty tires; 4-H destroyed, etc. There is a myriad of serious problems with NAIS. It is not a realistic program. It does nothing to stop disease - it can only “track back.” Since most contamination and bacteria comes from the slaughterhouse after the fact, NAIS is not useful for stopping disease. NAIS is only money making for the huge conglomerates. We will all mourn the day NAIS ever went through, so do not let it.
Seperately, Consumers need to be able to differetiate foreign grown products from local with COOL (malamine problem from China for example!)
The Farm Bill process was originally created to benefit family farmers. Do your part in passing a bill that is good for the very occupation this nation was built on.
Thanks for your consideration,
Comment Concerned Consumer — June 27, 2007 @ 11:35 am
Meatingplace is taking comments on the following article which reports that 92% of the people surveyed wanted COOL. There is a place to comment after the article.
It is a great opportunity to voice our belief that NAIS should not be used to implement COOL. The subject of increased costs is brought up and we all know the costs would be astonomical if NAIS is implemented. COOL can be accomplished much simpler and without the burden of NAIS to USA producers.
I also thought the comment by the AMI was interesting. Sounds like we already have a system in place??
General News
Americans are COOL with labels for imported meat and poultry: report
By Tom Johnston on 7/12/2007 for Meatingplace.com
A Consumer Reports poll indicates that 92 percent of Americans want to know where their meat originates in light of recent domestic food scares involving peanut butter and lettuce.
“I was definitely shocked at how high these numbers were,” the study’s co-author, Dr. Urvashi Rangan, a senior scientist and policy analyst at Consumers Union, publisher of CR, told Reuters.
“It’s much like a nutrition label or an ingredient label in that it needs to be part of the general information coming in about imported foods,” she added.
CR polled more than 1,000 consumers between June 7 and June 10. The results come as USDA continues accepting public comment on its country-of-origin labeling measure, and as consumer and producer groups express concern over recent food-safety snafus involving pet food and other products from China.
American Meat Institute President J. Patrick Boyle said the survey results “underscore the value of the existing mandatory country-of-origin labeling rules for imported meat and poultry enforced by USDA.”
Comment Mary Beth Westcott — July 12, 2007 @ 10:29 am
OOps, I forgot to add the link for the article:
link
This is what I wrote in my comments. There is so much more that can be said so please add to this!!!
“High costs will result if NAIS is used to implement COOL(Mary Beth Westcott)
Although the 2002 Farm Bill forbade the use of an animal identification system like NAIS (National Animal Identification System) to implement COOL, the 2007 Farm bill has an amendment that marries the two together. Costs will be major if this happens. The NAIS would be costly and burdensome for livestock producers and require much more information collection than is needed to implement COOL. COOL can be implemented simply by requiring that all imports of live animals or food be identified with a country of origin marking. Requiring U.S. livestock owners to individually identify and track all domestic livestock is not necessary. The USDA is just using COOL now as latest excuse to sell NAIS. Cool will add substantial increases at the meat counter if the costs of NAIS is thrown into the program.”
Comment Mary Beth Westcott — July 12, 2007 @ 11:34 am
We’ve all speculated that even if we succeed in stopping NAIS, it can come in the back door through the North American Union.
I was out of town one week in May, so someone may have posted info on this. If so, I am sorry to duplicate what has been done.
I ran across a one-paragraph article on Brownfield titled, “Andy Miller in Mexico for Tri-National Accord”. I searched “tri-national agricultural accord”, the phrase mentioned in the text of the article, and discovered the following:
Tri-National Agricultural Accord XV, April 16, 2005, NASDA (National Association of State Departments of Agriculture):
US/Canada: “Delegates agreed to continue working toward harmonization of animal health standards, livestock feed regulations and risk mitigation measures in relation to BSE.” AND
US/Mexico: “Delegates reviewed the 2004-2005 work plan, and agreed to continue work on harmonization in animal health policies, including animal identification, and plant health policies.”
link
Mexico/US Accord Working Group, 2007-2008 Work Plan, April 9, 2007
Issue: Animal Identification
Action: Monitor progress of animal identification plans in each country and ensure animal identification is compatible in the three countries.”
link
More is available on the NASDA home page (click on “Tri-National Accord at the top). More meetings are scheduled for this year. I have not found a list of the U.S. delegation. And there are tons of items if you Google “Tri-National Accord”.
No matter how the pro-NAIS traitors push this, out front or behind the scenes, I feel that they know they cannot legally shove this down our throats - otherwise, there would have been a short and sweet piece of legislation to pass Congress.
Regarding the article, “Australian Farmers Urged to Raise Kangaroos, Not Sheep”, how long before the word urged is replaced with “required”.
link
I believe talks are ongoing to enter into a trade deal with Australia.
Comment Texas Goat Gal — July 15, 2007 @ 10:11 am
Two out of three ain’t bad for me. This is a Document file, so I may have done the link wrong. Google:
“mexico/u.s. accord working group” “april 9″
It should be the only hit. I tested it and it worked.
Comment Texas Goat Gal — July 15, 2007 @ 11:41 am
Texas Goat Gal has a point. That word ‘harmonization’ keeps popping up in regard to trade agreements being pushed by the globalists.
Now the Chinese are accusing the foreign media for the ‘food scare’. I’m not sure it was a food scare. As I understand it, people have died from contaminated products. Who knows how extensive the food & supplement contamination is. It seems a ready pretext for ‘tracking’ and control.
chineseaccuse
I had two pets die and one still struggling from having eaten top-of-the-line pet food. A friend in Seattle took her sheltie to the vet for a routine visit a few weeks ago; 5 pets with renal failure were ahead of her at that one vet.
We make our own pet food exclusively now but I did notice on the FDA site awhile ago that a goat & sheep feed producer in Iowa had been using melamine in their products, as well.
Why can’t we be left alone to develop our local food sources without federal oversight? They certainly do not have our health & safety at issue. It’s simply a matter of absolute control.
Comment donna — July 16, 2007 @ 10:47 am
What ever you do don’t please don’t give up. That is what the powers that bee want. They want to wear us down so we give up and stop fighting back. They have a long range plan. Keep your eye on the ball and keep fighting back.
Comment Jed — February 26, 2009 @ 8:04 pm
I am a city dweller and even I am sacared of this. It is like the real id for people. We need less government not more. They will destroy america. My grandchildren will only now plastic and desert at this rate.
Comment Beth — February 28, 2009 @ 10:40 pm