'Monsanto Protection Act' slips silently through US Congress

The US House of Representatives quietly passed a last-minute addition to the Agricultural Appropriations Bill for 2013 last week - including a provision protecting genetically modified seeds from litigation in the face of health risks.

The rider, which is officially known as the Farmer Assurance Provision, has been derided by opponents of biotech lobbying as the “Monsanto Protection Act,” as it would strip federal courts of the authority to immediately halt the planting and sale of genetically modified (GMO) seed crop regardless of any consumer health concerns.

The provision, also decried as a “biotech rider,” should have gone through the Agricultural or Judiciary Committees for review. Instead, no hearings were held, and the piece was evidently unknown to most Democrats (who hold the majority in the Senate) prior to its approval as part of HR 993, the short-term funding bill that was approved to avoid a federal government shutdown.

Senator John Tester (D-MT) proved to be the lone dissenter to the so-called Monsanto Protection Act, though his proposed amendment to strip the rider from the bill was never put to a vote.

And from Salon:

The Food Democracy Now and the Center for Food are directing blame at the Senate Appropriations Committee and its chairman, Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md. According to reports, many members of Congress were apparently unaware that the “Monsanto Protection Act” even existed within the spending bill, HR 933; they voted in order to avert a government shutdown.

“It sets a terrible precedent,” noted the International Business Times. “Though it will only remain in effect for six months until the government finds another way to fund its operations, the message it sends is that corporations can get around consumer safety protections if they get Congress on their side. Furthermore, it sets a precedent that suggests that court challenges are a privilege, not a right.”


21 notes | Reblog | 1 year ago

lessonsfromavagabond:

WATCH THIS-OF-THE-DAY: It’s time for change

2012: A Time for Change is a documentary film that takes the whole doom and gloom concept that we have been fed recently of an apocalypse and reminds us that it is indeed an opportunity for a global shift, a heightened awareness, and a more proactive approach to living and respecting our planet.

Because what is life meant for if not living it to its fullest? 

We all have a contribution to make. Think about it: What’s yours?


14 notes | Reblog | 2 years ago

Why Is the U.S. Losing the Green Race?

"Last week’s finger wagging over the Obama administration’s failed clean-energy investment in Solyndra, the solar company that filed for bankruptcy, contrasted with reporting this week on the oil industry’s rush to develop new wells all over the Americas, from Canada to Colombia.

While China’s rising demand for oil is a huge driver in the Latin American boom, the Chinese government is also providing huge subsidies to its green technology industries. In Europe, Germany is the world’s first major renewable energy economy. The United States seems to be lagging in this competition.

Why is that, since the U.S. has often been the global innovator in emerging fields? What should the government be doing differently?”


6 notes | Reblog | 2 years ago
motherjones:

The Way Things Work: The Climate Change Spin Cycle.

motherjones:

The Way Things Work: The Climate Change Spin Cycle.


570 notes | Reblog | 2 years ago

climateadaptation:

Wolf hunting now legal in Montana and Idaho. Not easy to watch for enviros… But, the lawsuit is interesting.

Once again, humans refuse to learn from history— and nature loses out to human interest and profit.
Unbelievable.  


10 notes | Reblog | 2 years ago
sarcasmisdead:


(via Infographic: How many jobs would solar create? | Grist) 

sarcasmisdead:

(via Infographic: How many jobs would solar create? | Grist


28 notes | Reblog | 2 years ago

State Department Backs Canadian Pipeline

The State Department gave a crucial green light on Friday to a proposed 1,711-mile pipeline that would carry heavy oil from oil sands in Canada across the Great Plains to terminals in Oklahoma and the Gulf Coast.

Looks like I’m going to end up writing a long letter to the Obama administration about our energy future. I realize it’s been a rough term for Obama, but new pipelines are not the answer and we cannot afford to ignore the consequences of our energy habits anymore. Climate change is not in our national interest.


8 notes | Reblog | 2 years ago

Find out how much oil money your elected representatives take by visiting the Dirty Energy Money site.


99 notes | Reblog | 2 years ago

Media Matters on Fox’s climate change denial machine.

(Source: sheisfireflying)


41 notes | Reblog | 2 years ago
Theme By: Jahrenesis