Monday, July 6, 2009

HR 2749 - (sic) "Food Safety" Bill

July 7, 2009 Emergency Health Freedom eBlast
from Natural Solutions Foundation:

Blog Entry:

While Self-Shielding in the face of manufactured pandemics and weaponized vaccines got our attention; while Codex further degraded the food supply... Congress was planning its own surprise: the forced-industrialization-of-farming bills, such as HR 875 & 759, have been replaced by a new "fast-tracked" (sic) "Food Safety" bill - HR 2749 - that threatens food, health and freedom. It is in reality, a "martial law food control bill" -- see:

I just checked with Dr. Ron Paul's office and am told that the bill is not likely to be voted on today, so there is still time to push-back. The good doctor's legislative aide told me that Congress is so focused on the bill to take-over health care costs that it is not likely that the "food safety" issue will come to the floor soon.

And, as you know, push-back works.

For example, we've been urging Congress to defeat all (sic) "Food Safety" bills, but also we set up an Action Item so about a hundred thousand people could tell them to protect family farms, home food production, food co-ops, etc.

See: No HARMonization White Paper:

Our original proposed amendment: *

And, apparently, they heard at least part of the message. Those who support HR 2749 are touting the (slight) "farmer protection" added to the bill to get it out of committee:

"Are Small Farms Protected?

"The legislation is doing a bunch of things for food safety, most notably
giving the FDA mandatory recall authority. This has been a major sticking
point for previous iterations of this legislation in the House, because House
reps more than senators represent small fiefdoms inside large rural states.
These districts worry recalls will disproportionately harm smaller businesses
and processors versus their larger partners. In a sense, FDA recalls and fees
would represent a regressive tax.

"This is an extremely valid concern given the FDA’s proclivity for influence
from industry. However, this bill was able to climb out of committee in the
House because it properly addressed small growers and farmers markets.
Specifically, Section 107 of the bill which stipulates ‘Traceability
Requirements’ on most farms makes an exemption for farmer’s markets (more
or less):


‘(A) DIRECT SALES BY FARMS- Food is exempt from the requirements of this
subsection if such food is–

‘(i) produced on a farm; and

‘(ii) sold by the owner, operator, or agent in charge of such farm
directly to a consumer or restaurant.

"Traceability is a huge issue and this bill seeks to establish a new electronic
system for tracking that will be vetted over the course of a couple years.
The exemption for small farmers is good but poorly defined. We hope this
vague language about exemptions gets tightened up as the bill moves forward.
It would be a pity to see this single exemption allow major agribusiness
farmers off the hook."

This is not the protection we want. But it is a start. We are concerned that the word "farm" could be construed too narrowly. What about religious communities, nonprofits, co-ops, community and family gardens that produce surpluses... Real protection is needed for local, natural production.

We need to redouble our efforts to get Congress to listen!

Here is the action item -

Remember to follow us on twitter: and - whenever we post a new blog, the link
appears on twitter!


* The language was modified later, and this later language was sent to
Congress many thousands of times:

"The citizens ascribing to this Petition therefore hereby request that the
Food Safety Modernization Act be defeated, or that it, or any substitute for
it, such as H.R. 759, be amended to exclude organic and natural agriculture,
family farms and ranches, and natural or organic food products, including
dietary supplements, through a rule of interpretation, as follows:

“Rule of Interpretation

“No provision of this act shall be deemed to apply (a) to any home,
home-business, homestead, small farm organic or natural agricultural activity,
(b) to any family farm or ranch, or (c) to any natural or organic food
product, including dietary supplements regulated under the Dietary Supplement
Health and Education Act of 1994.”

We also note the language of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 USC sec 203 (s)
(2) which provides, "(2) Any establishment that has as its only regular
employees the owner thereof or the parent, spouse, child, or other member of
the immediate family of such owner shall not be considered to be an enterprise
engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce or a part of
such an enterprise..." Language such as this would be helpful to allay our


Versions of this blog also published at:

Campaign for Liberty blog blog

No comments: