Proposed intrution by the Feds on States rights

[OntarioVanMan]

NAIS has been the hot topic of conversation in ranch country this week. There is a move afoot at the federal level to make National Animal Identification mandatory. The House Agriculture Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy and Poultry held a hearing on Wednesday to review animal identification systems. Industry representatives, legislators and administration officials discussed the pros and cons of making the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s currently voluntary National Animal Identification System (NAIS) mandatory. Connecticut Democrat Rosa DeLauro has introduced the "Food Safety and Modernization Act of 2009 (H.R. 875). Her bill will create a new Food Safety Administration and give its administrator the authority to "conduct monitoring and surveillance of animals, plants, products or the environment" on every family farm, ranch, vineyard and fishing hole in the country. Moreover, the administrator can visit and inspect the property and demand that the owner present "papers and effects," and all records relating to food production.

add on.....

H.R. 875 would include the National Animal Identification System, which the USDA has been trying to impose for several years. At a five-hour congressional hearing Wednesday, not one word was said about constitutional authority for the government to mandate the registration of private property and surrender private information to the government. The National Pork Producers are pushing to make NAIS mandatory, which isn’t surprising given the fact that the South Dakota Pork Producers, SD Farm Bureau, and SD Cattlemen lobbied hard against HB1224 to keep animal identification voluntary in South Dakota.

 

[layoutshooter]

Whats new? This administration has NEVER believed in State or individual Rights. They believe in Federal control and rule. Sorry to say, it is just starting. Layoutshooter

 

[pjjjjj]

You know, you guys... this stuff was started long before your new President took office.
These things are not being put in place to hurt people like you. In fact, they're being done to protect the people of your country.
These are no longer the days when just the good guys lived in America, and everyone had the same values and ideals, everyone was on the same side, and you could trust your neighbor for the most part.
Your government has all kinds of intelligence stuff going on, all the time. You aren't privy to that information. They are. If their research tells them the next great threat to your nation and our world will be through your foodchain, wouldn't you prefer they be prepared by putting things in place? Or would you prefer to wonder afterward why the government didn't intervene before it was too late?
Do you ever consider the possibility some of these things aren't being done just to make you all commies? Think there might be a possibility of a bigger picture somewhere?

 

[chefdennis]

This Animal ID thing has been kicked around for a while now and i think it gets voted on this month. But the fed is also looking to go after small farmers, farmers markets and home gardens....think it can't happen, look here:

WILL CONGRESS WIPE OUT HOME GARDENS, GROWERS MARKETS?

By Sarah Foster
Posted 1:00 AM Eastern
March 23, 2009
© NewsWithViews.com

The Internet’s buzzing about a bill in Congress its sponsor and supporters say is vital for protecting consumers from food-borne illnesses, but critics claim would place all U.S. food production “from farm to fork” under control of federal bureaucrats, effectively destroying family farms and farmers markets in the process and hijacking the burgeoning organic food movement.

“This bill will not just sweep up commercial food operations,” warns Tom DeWeese, who heads the American Policy Center in Virginia, in a Sledgehammer Alert, “[It] will subject hobby gardeners, home canners, anyone with a few chickens, or anyone who ‘holds, stores, or transports food’ … to registration, extensive management, and inspection by a huge new bureaucracy, the Food Safety Administration, even if the food items will only be consumed personally.”

“The truly chilling language lays out civil and criminal penalties of up to $1 million per day, per infraction, and imprisonment of five or 10 years, or both, depending how serious the violation(s),” De Weese adds, characterizing the bill as “over-the-top in its overreach.”

Particularly attention grabbing: the bill would bring in the National Animal ID System through the back door, opponents claim.

Introduced Feb. 4 by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), in the middle of the peanut-product recall, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009 (HR 875) was assigned to both the House Committee on Agriculture and the Energy and Commerce Committee. It has 41 co-sponsors. Although not yet scheduled for a hearing, proponents have been forced into damage control mode because of public outrage coming from a politically diverse opposition.

Spokesperson in DeLauro’s office offer assurances: “The bill does not apply to vendors at farmers markets, and therefore will not change the way this business runs. It is meant to address food sold in supermarkets.”

The non-profit Food and Water Watch weighs in: “There is no language in the bill that would result in farmers markets being regulated, penalized by any fines or shut down. Farmers markets would be able to continue to flourish under the bill. In fact, the bill would insist that unsafe imported foods are not competing with locally grown foods.”

A “Major Threat” to Local Food

But in an extensive analysis the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund – a DC-based advocacy group that champions locally grown and organic food production – foresees HR 875 fueling “a tremendous expansion of federal power, particularly the power to regulate intrastate commerce” and warns:

“While the proposed legislation tries to address the many problems of the industrial food system, the impact on small farms if the bill becomes law would be substantial and not for the better HR 875 is a major threat to sustainable farming and the local food movement.” [Emphasis added]


finish the article here:

NWV News -- Will Congress Wipe Out Home Gardens, Growers Markets?

 

[layoutshooter]

You are corrrect, it has been going on for a very long time. The big start of the erosion of States Rights started under Lincoln. As to what intell our government is doing, I think I might just have a bit of an idea of how and what they do since I was an intell agent for 20 years. I doubt that the current resident is really paying attention to what the intell agencies are telling him. I can't as that for sure, BUT, knowing what I know about those agencies, knowing how the press has always played down the threat to the nation and seeing the massive cuts to the defense department I have a pretty darn good idea what is going on. As more comes out as to the programs that are being cut in defense I see more and more stupidity like I saw under Carter and Clinton. Carter's defense policies prolonged what you call the Cold War by 20 years and Clinton's cuts and lack of action led directly to the intell failures and the attacks of 9/11. I can prove that.

As to the food bill. On the surface it might appear that this is a good idea. It might even be that they only intend to do what they say, for now. As with any government, ours and yours included, they will become a tryanny. They all do. The more power you give a central government the faster that will happen. Why is it that normal intelligent people think that once a person is elected to an office that they suddenly know more than they do? Why are we so willing to hand over everything to the government? We can see that they are corrupt. Can you see where a bill like this could be used as a weapon to control? I can. What about a family that wants to only grow it's own food. What gives the government the right to interfere?

Layoutshooter

 

[layoutshooter]

Another thing that must be considered. Will this work? Will National individual animal registration cut down on the risk of contaminated food? I think not. England has had a system like that for years. It started long before I was stationed there between the years of 1976-81. I did not work. How can I say that? Because, I am not longer allowed to give blood in the U.S. Since I lived in Enland for more that 6 months during that time frame, and since there were several wide spread outbreaks of "Mad Cow Diesease" in England during that time frame I can't donate due to possible health effects from my blood. All of the cow ate food there that was contaminated. All of the food was government approved. All of the cow parts that were ground into the cattle food that led to those out breaks were government registered. It does not work. Government is inept at best. By the way, prior to the ban on my blood I had donated 10 gallons. SO, you all lost a valuable donor. Layoutshooter

 

[pjjjjj]

I'm thinkin.. just because a law exists, doesn't mean it's to take away your rights. Maybe it's there to allow them the right to enter, shut down, arrest any bad players they may find along the way.

Think bigger than the trees, and try to see the forest..

Lots of laws don't really affect 'normal' citizens, other than being an inconvenience and perhaps mentally unsettling. You're left alone for the most part, unless you're bad.

People are up in arms about why can't they do this and that to criminals.. why no death penalties any more.. why can't the 17 year old murderer be tried as an adult.. well, because of their 'rights'.. yet when you feel one of your rights is being taken, you're upset about that too. Unfortunately they can't pick and choose who can have rights and who can't, and which rights certain people can have while still giving other people other rights at the same time.

No matter what they do, they can't win.. they're never going to be able to pacify all the people. There are always going to be people on each side.. the smokers who want their right to smoke, and the non-smokers who want their right to clean air. The woman who wants her right to terminate a pregnancy within her own body, and the pro-lifers who want to advocate for the rights of all fetuses to live, the man who wants the right to carry a gun in public, and the woman who wants the right to walk in public amongst unarmed people.

It's scary how much information they have on people nowadays. It can make you want to hide and and go live in the hills to protect your privacy and balk at every attempt to invade it.. but in reality.. all this information is not going to be used against Mr. Normal Joeblow. Afterall, who really gives a rat's behind, and who has time, and for what purpose. But the information is there, in case they need to use it to find Mr. Axemurderer Serialrapist burying 50 women on his property in MN, or Mr. Nationalthreat Arabian growing tainted chicken eggs in KS ready to throw them into the American foodchain.

How do you expect them to get rid of all the illegal aliens if there is nothing in place to know who and where they are? You want them to do something on one hand, but on the other, you don't want your rights infringed upon, which is the only way to allow them to give you what you ultimately want.

 

[chefdennis]

All i want them to do is follow our Constitution, and Bill of Rights...nothing more , nothing less....

 

[letzrockexpress]

OVM said:"we've had a layout and a chef in every generation"

Somehow I think if that alliance actually were to happen, somebody's goose would get cooked...

 

[chefdennis]

I'll let layout shoot the goose from his layout boat, i'll stuff it full if apples and "cook" it!!

 

[greg334]

three important points.

1 - this is not about food safety, if it was then they would not have to go to the extremes as they are doing. This is to make their jobs easier and to allow tighter control on the food supply, meaning regulations. When we had outbreaks of this or that, the FDA and the CDC fell flat on their face and they had problems tracing down the thing that cause the problem. Regulating the food supply goes back to the FDR administration and price controls. Obama has made a point to stop the subsidies to the rich farmers but then allowing other areas to be lax for them to make up their losses.

2 - this is nothing new but it is orwelling in it's nature. The people who are pushing it seem to be the same who are pushing the mexican truck thing..

3 - I read the following

But in an extensive analysis the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund – a DC-based advocacy group that champions locally grown and organic food production – foresees HR 875 fueling “a tremendous expansion of federal power, particularly the power to regulate intrastate commerce” and warns:....

AND need to point out that the feds have the constitutional right to regulate interstate commerce and that there was a court case in 1942 that decided that the fed under interstate commerce has the right to regulate agriculture - Wickard v. Filburn

 

[RLENT]

Why is it that normal intelligent people think that once a person is elected to an office that they suddenly know more than they do? Why are we so willing to hand over everything to the government?

One word: irresponsibility - as in, unwilling to be responsible for (something)

When you think about it, the reason why people "hand everything over to the government" or "want the government to be responsible" for something (anything) is that, to a greater or lesser degree, they are unwilling to be responsible for some portion, or aspect, of their own life or existence, their own condition ..... or are unwilling to be responsible for others ...... or for their country .... or the environment ...... or whatever ....

If one is not responsible for something (by being unwilling to be responsible for it), then it becomes impossible to control it (and do anything about it) - then to absolve oneself of that sin, the inclination is to blame another when the outcome or condition is not what one prefers it to be .....

Blame is merely that condition where one has willingly surrendered control over some aspect of Life (one's own or another's, or a condition) ..... and then, attempting to resolve oneself of any culpability in the matter, points at another, over there, and says "See, I didn't do it - they did, they caused it"

It is possibly one of the most sure-fire ways to reduce one's own personal strength and power ..... because it puts something other than oneself at cause, and generally places one at effect .....

It is, in fact, a fairly cowardly circumstance ......

We can see that they are corrupt. Can you see where a bill like this could be used as a weapon to control?

Therein lies the paradox ......

People should be able to see that - and in fact they can ...... if only for the blink of an eye ..... but to view it for anything other than a moment does require the willingness to look .... the most difficult thing to sit and look at, and see it as it is, is evil itself .....

For some however, it is much easier to not look, to not see things as they are, and to just deny any responsibility ..... and to just slowly go numb, in ever-increasing levels of unawareness ...... ultimately, where that path leads is not a pretty place at all .......

 

[layoutshooter]

If you do notice it, if you don't give up your control and if you do talk about it, rant about it etc, you are then made fun of and ridiculed by all the "sheepeople" that accept it and are more than willing to give control of thier lives to the government. No other man nor govenment is smart enough to live my life for me. No other man nor government will ever take away my self-determination.

Yes, chef, you can "cook my goose" LOL Layoutshooter

 

[chefdennis]

you tied it up pretty well Randy.............

 

[RLENT]

If you do notice it, if you don't give up your control and if you do talk about it, rant about it etc, you are then made fun of and ridiculed by all the "sheepeople" that accept it and are more than willing to give control of thier lives to the government.

Such is the burden of awareness and the willingness to look - while it is a burden, I'd imagine that there are others which are much more of a trial to bear.

I would however suggest that while ranting has it's place (largely in order to blow off steam and frustration), that if one truly wishes to persuade others, particularly those of the "sheepeople" variety, and gently awaken them from their slumber, the best path might be calm, reasoned discourse.

While ranting might well be fun and all, it, in my experience, rarely leads to changing hearts and minds. And in the final analysis, that's really what it's all about isn't it ?

No other man nor govenment is smart enough to live my life for me. No other man nor government will ever take away my self-determination.

That's entirely true - the only way one's self-determination can be "taken away" is if one willingly gives it up - and no one can ever see things exactly as you do, short of being you.

chef: ..... not a very pretty sight is it ?

 

[layoutshooter]

I know ranting seldom works, but, for the most part neither does rational conversation. Too many people today are willing to "bend with the breeze". In other words, follow the crowd. Lots of people like Obama therefor I should too. I don't believe in being a follower. It is just not in my nature. I have a set of core values, I trust in them, they nor I will change. That is not the same a being closed minded. What it used to be called, in the days before men were emasculated, was having the courage of your convictions. You know, being a "stand up guy". I take pride in that. You know what you get when you deal with me. A bit hard-nosed but straight up. No fooling around. I will tell you if I don't like your beliefs. I will tell you if I do. That is just how it is. Layoutshooter

 

[RLENT]

I know ranting seldom works, but, for the most part neither does rational conversation.

It's very much a long-term project

 

[layoutshooter]

Yes, it is. I just don't think we have much time. I will try to be nice. Maybe it will work. Of course, I did ask nice, twice, why letzrocketexpress is scared of me, no answer. The question must have been to scary!! Just kidding on that Rocket!!! layoutshooter

 

[tallcal101]

California voters approved a Medical Marijuana law several years ago.Any card holder that has recieved a Doctors prescription can visit a cannabis club and piuchase medication. It's the state law. It's legal.

Under w's reign of terror,he insisted on having the FED Storm Troopers trash legal farms and clinics under federal laws from 1933. Pot and smack are the same as far as the FEDS under W were concerned.
Bringing assualt weapons,Black Birds,and maked federal agents, Homer and Ms. Homer from Boulder Creek were tending their little victory/medical crop of 200 or so LEGAL plants. when these jack boot creep / cowards dropped in. I know Mr. and Ms. Homer,good folks who keep to themselves and provide the local community with healing herbs.
Their home was trashed,their garden ripped apart and they were hauled off to jail.
All charges were dropped 3 days later.States rights trumped fed.

Our current President (a thinking man) has determined that Federal troops could probaly be put to better use then hassling the Homer's. Do you thinK????

Oue new AG, (another man with compassion and real thoughts) has also made it clear that California has the right to have it's own laws and enforce them on a local level.
That being said,the FEDS hit another clinic (legal ) in San Francisco this morning!!Tore the place apart and arresting innocent clients and employees.
I believe a few left over right leaners from w' watch are testing the waters. I hope they all get canned,I really do.And so do the Homers,up in their little plot of Redwood heaven.
Leave us alone or just stay away.There's a Dizzyland in Florida for the youngins'.

 

[layoutshooter]

Thinking man? Hey, I am sooo glad your back Tallcal, I missed that kind of humor!!! Bush was wrong on med pot but never did the kind of damage to people that Clinton did. He was responsible for un-told numbers of home invasions, without warrents, looking for so-called illegal guns. In case you don't remember, pot is not requlated by the Constitution and the Government has no right to dictate it's use. The RIGHT to Keep and Bear ARMs IS a RIGHT. That RIGHT is part of the Bill of Rights, that set forth the RIghts of the PEOPLE, NOT the government. Barry don't like that none. Layoutshooter