HB1267: Big Ag Strikes Back in Indiana

[Fargo]

In a word- yes. If not directly, through surrogates of all kinds. Who was behind the regulations in the first place?

In the end, it does not matter though, what they got was less regulation while their competition was more heavily regulated with the attendant costs.

Maybe this was a "good" thing- whatever that means, but to act like applying the same standards is somehow immoral in some way....

You really think that small farmers are responsible for the enactment of USDA inspection requirements? Historically, they fought them tooth and nail which is how they got some exemptions. Big Ag caved since it didn't affect their viability and their liability was much greater.

The economic manipulation in the name of "safety" here is pretty much a one way street which is what many find offensive.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

This. I'm sure as hell not eating that garbage. I'd rather lick a public toilet seat at the Indy500.

Pushing legislation by lobbying and paying off politicians so that they don't have to tell me what's in/on the food I'm buying.....No thanks. I'll stick to food that's not doused in chemicals.

Well, the way I look at it, the only food that I eat that I'm sure isn't doused in chemicals is the food that I grow and prepare myself. At a farmer's market I was at, I saw bins of beautiful pristine asparagus at one booth. When I asked the guy how he kept the beetles off his asparagus, he just looked at the ground and didn't say anything, then said something like "Well, you just learn to live with them". As we walked away, my daughter said "Well he's a better farmer than he is a liar".

 

[JettaKnight]

Well, the way I look at it, the only food that I eat that I'm sure isn't doused in chemicals is the food that I grow and prepare myself. At a farmer's market I was at, I saw bins of beautiful pristine asparagus at one booth. When I asked the guy how he kept the beetles off his asparagus, he just looked at the ground and didn't say anything, then said something like "Well, you just learn to live with them". As we walked away, my daughter said "Well he's a better farmer than he is a liar".

You get beetles on your asparagus?

 

[IndyDave1776]

Agreed. Isn't having laws in place that put regulatory restraints on large producers, but not on small essentially the same thing?

It seems to me that by not applying the regulations to larger producers, the law was trying to make up the difference advantage in operating costs that the larger producers had....trying to use the law to make smaller producers more competitive.

Whether this is good policy or not, it may be, let's not pretend that one side tries to use regulation to its advantage while the other is pure and clean as the wind-driven snow as to that issue.



What free-market reason is there for a differentiation at all?

Typically what you will find is that government at whatever level may be relevant will pass regulations 'with the approval of industry' (whatever that industry may be) which translates into the largest and richest wanting a bunch of asinine regulations since they can afford an in-house compliance department and don't have to deal with the BS personally as hired staff are the ones who actually have to do the work. Even with the smallest of participants exempted outright, this will put the mid-sized producers at a significant disadvantage, and after that bears fruit, they you get what you have now with the attack expanded to smaller and smaller producers until it reaches the point that your backyard chicken house with fewer birds than your family has fingers will be regulated.

Your argument is not correct. There is no prohibition on labeling food GMO-free. Take a trip to your local hippie-mart and see.



My concern is the powerful and vocal anti-GMO special interest groups are spreading their hate-filled, uninformed and irrational message and silencing any dialog. Any question of their tactics, big money or dubious science is not allowed.

I want my politicians to be in my side and concerned about my health and not for Big Organics and the anit-GMO lobby.

Follow the money - who has the most to gain from a generic, "contains GMO food" label?

Yup, Big Organics. They're the same ones that try to silence any scientific study that points out all the flaws in their anti-GMO campaign. These liberals are completely built an spreading irrational fear - just like hoplophobes. Plus, their anti-GMO "studies" are all funded by Big Organics.

These liberal do-gooders ignore all the positive benefits, all the lives saved and all the children fed because they obviously hate the freedom we have in America to innovate and create a better life for ourselves using the brains God gave us for scientific development.

I, for one, do not want to live in that form of oppressive society ruled by Big Organics and liberal anti-GMO special interests.

Wait a minute. I said I oppose the EFFORT to prohibit labeling non-GMO which is a weed which needs cut down often. Just because they haven't got the job done doesn't mean they haven't been trying.

How does it become a matter of being ruled by special interests to assert the right to know what I am eating and make up my own mind? So far as I am concerned, the money, politics, and validity of the studies is absolutely irrelevant as a policy issue. It is NOT their prerogative to secretly introduce something to my dinner plate that I do not wish to consume.

Oh, and by the way, I also have an issue with wayward GMO pollen interfering with the crops grown by people who make a deliberate effort to be non-GMO. Get back with me in 50 years or so, and then we can compare notes regarding GMO. Those who value the virtues they find in GMO crops are more than welcome to consume all they like so far as I am concerned, but not to impose them on others, especially doing so secretly.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

You get beetles on your asparagus?

 

[CampingJosh]

Yup, Big Organics. They're the same ones that try to silence any scientific study that points out all the flaws in their anti-GMO campaign. These liberals are completely built an spreading irrational fear - just like hoplophobes. Plus, their anti-GMO "studies" are all funded by Big Organics.

Organic is something special. Does everyone here know why farms have to be certified organic? It's because there is no reliable method of examining a piece of produce after the fact and determining the difference. It's usually impossible to tell except on the price tag.

And anyone who thinks that their organic food hasn't been doused in chemicals doesn't understand the word organic.

Get back with me in 50 years or so, and then we can compare notes regarding GMO. Those who value the virtues they find in GMO crops are more than welcome to consume all they like so far as I am concerned, but not to impose them on others, especially doing so secretly.

What is this non-GMO food you claim to be eating? Selective breeding, intentionally cross pollinating, and even grafting branches are all processes of humans controlling changes to an organism's genetics.

At best the non-GMO label is arbitrary. We haven't been eating "natural" produce or meat for thousands of years.

 

[wagyu52]

Organic is something special. Does everyone here know why farms have to be certified organic? It's because there is no reliable method of examining a piece of produce after the fact and determining the difference. It's usually impossible to tell except on the price tag.

And anyone who thinks that their organic food hasn't been doused in chemicals doesn't understand the word organic.



What is this non-GMO food you claim to be eating? Selective breeding, intentionally cross pollinating, and even grafting branches are all processes of humans controlling changes to an organism's genetics.

At best the non-GMO label is arbitrary. We haven't been eating "natural" produce or meat for thousands of years.

And X1000

"Organic" and "NonGMO" are the 2 greatest marketing ploys ever created, and that's exactly what they are. People think Monsanto invented GMO but have no idea man has been manipulating genes in living organisms for 1000's of years. Or that GMO medicine like Insulin has actually saved millions of people's lives. It's almost sick.

 

[JettaKnight]

Ironically, it's the GMO potatoes that cause less cancer.

GMO Potatoes Have Arrived. But Will Anyone Buy Them? : The Salt : NPR

 

[Aggar]

This topic gives me a headache. There is so much misinformation out there about both sides. I'll just farm how I farm and you buy your food where you buy it. Don't push your anti-Gmo agenda on me and I won't spray round up in your yard.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Organic is something special. Does everyone here know why farms have to be certified organic? It's because there is no reliable method of examining a piece of produce after the fact and determining the difference. It's usually impossible to tell except on the price tag.

And anyone who thinks that their organic food hasn't been doused in chemicals doesn't understand the word organic.



What is this non-GMO food you claim to be eating? Selective breeding, intentionally cross pollinating, and even grafting branches are all processes of humans controlling changes to an organism's genetics.

At best the non-GMO label is arbitrary. We haven't been eating "natural" produce or meat for thousands of years.

And X1000

"Organic" and "NonGMO" are the 2 greatest marketing ploys ever created, and that's exactly what they are. People think Monsanto invented GMO but have no idea man has been manipulating genes in living organisms for 1000's of years. Or that GMO medicine like Insulin has actually saved millions of people's lives. It's almost sick.

There is a difference between selective breeding and splicing and dicing on genes so far as I am concerned. Anyway, this really diverts from what I consider the real issue at hand, which is that regardless of your opinion on the merits of the issue, making up other people's minds for them through enforcing ignorance by one means or other is NOT acceptable. If I prefer to buy product A rather than competitor B because the CEO at company A wears a beard, arguing with me about the relative quality of the products is irrelevant, and it is my prerogative to make my decisions based on even the most absurd of criteria.

 

[BluePig]

And X1000

"Organic" and "NonGMO" are the 2 greatest marketing ploys ever created, and that's exactly what they are. People think Monsanto invented GMO but have no idea man has been manipulating genes in living organisms for 1000's of years. Or that GMO medicine like Insulin has actually saved millions of people's lives. It's almost sick.

Please tell your sister-in-law about this so she will get off this organic/non-gmo kick...
She drank the kool-aid from a friend who pumped her with all these videos and hype and now is totally on it.
Your brother would appreciate it.

 

[JettaKnight]

So, IndyDave, you want "GMO free" labels.

Well who determines if a product can or should be labeled as such? For 'organic' there's a lot of paperwork involved to get certified. What sort of arbitrary rules are you going to set up to determine where that threshold is?



Food labeling is such a complex mess of laws and rules and you want to add another layer of bureaucracy?

Case in point: ever get a craving for vanilla ice cream? Now a vanilla connoisseur like Foszoe probably knows this, but not all are alike. You can call about anything vanilla ice cream - doesn't even require adding vanilla flavorings. And "vanilla flavor" as an ingredient is not vanilla. Nope, could be vanillin, could be a wood pulp byproduct or even excretions from beavers. "Vanilla" listed as an ingredient means there's actual vanilla from vallina beans added.

I spent twenty minutes an Meijer looking for ice cream and couldn't find one with vanilla.


What's my point...oh yeah...Taxes. Yup, someone has to pay for this level of oversight and bureaucracy and ends up being the little guy.


And honestly, I put the ice cream on apple crisp - I couldn't even taste the difference between vanilla and vanillin. So all that cost, all that time lost due to decision paralysis - a complete waste.

 

[CampingJosh]

Anyway, this really diverts from what I consider the real issue at hand, which is that regardless of your opinion on the merits of the issue, making up other people's minds for them through enforcing ignorance by one means or other is NOT acceptable.

Enforcing ignorance is certainly unacceptable. So is forcing stigmatizing language onto a competitive product, as the anti (some certain types of) GMO lobby advocates.

 

[IndyDave1776]

So, IndyDave, you want "GMO free" labels.

Well who determines if a product can or should be labeled as such? For 'organic' there's a lot of paperwork involved to get certified. What sort of arbitrary rules are you going to set up to determine where that threshold is?



Food labeling is such a complex mess of laws and rules and you want to add another layer of bureaucracy?

Case in point: ever get a craving for vanilla ice cream? Now a vanilla connoisseur like Foszoe probably knows this, but not all are alike. You can call about anything vanilla ice cream - doesn't even require adding vanilla flavorings. And "vanilla flavor" as an ingredient is not vanilla. Nope, could be vanillin, could be a wood pulp byproduct or even excretions from beavers. "Vanilla" listed as an ingredient means there's actual vanilla from vallina beans added.

I spent twenty minutes an Meijer looking for ice cream and couldn't find one with vanilla.


What's my point...oh yeah...Taxes. Yup, someone has to pay for this level of oversight and bureaucracy and ends up being the little guy.


And honestly, I put the ice cream on apple crisp - I couldn't even taste the difference between vanilla and vanillin. So all that cost, all that time lost due to decision paralysis - a complete waste.

I am aware of the problems with organic certification including that the majority of the requirements have absolutely nothing to do with actually growing the plants or handing the produce thereof.

If we go your way, I expect a removal of the barriers to entry put up by various agencies of government for the benefit of 'farmers' named 'Corporation'. I want to be able to buy milk as milked from the cow. I don't care that it isn't graded or pasteurized so long as I am truthfully informed. I want to be able to buy meat from people I trust without it being illegal without jumping through hoops, again, so long as I am truthfully informed of what I receive. I see no reason why I should not be truthfully informed about GMO products. Why do we need bureaucrats? Why not treat it like any other form of fraud?

The follow the money argument has been applied in one and only one direction for the most part in this thread. Why the big fight it if doesn't matter? What is wrong with the truth unless there is something inherently wrong with the substance which the truth describes? Who stands to gain from keeping buyers in the dark?

 

[JettaKnight]

Dave,
The question goes back to what's light and what's dark? Waygu and CampingJosh nailed it. Big Organics wants to vilify all of their competitors based on some arbitrary factor. They'll call their product "GMO Free" based on some arbitrary threshold they create then have congress, who's in their pockets, make more laws.



I don't want another layer of government bureaucracy in my food.

I don't want Big Organics trying to push food that safer, healthier and less expensive off my table only to be replaced with bruised, carcinogen laden potatoes that they fertilized with their own poo.

It starts with, "GMO Free" labels, then moves to "Contains GMO" labels, then comes the bans. It's the same way with guns. This liberal government power grab will happen here as it does everywhere else. Don't believe me? Go try and buy some metal tipped lawn Jarts at Walmart.

Dave, I suggest you go direct to a farmer you trust and get your food that way. I'm all for "farm to table", no labels needed there. Because, If you think you can trust the labels at hippie-mart to tell you "what's in your food"... You "just want to be informed", so, who decides what can be labeled "GMO Free"? So far you danced around that question.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Dave,
The question goes back to what's light and what's dark? Waygu and CampingJosh nailed it. Big Organics wants to vilify all of their competitors based on some arbitrary factor. They'll call their product "GMO Free" based on some arbitrary threshold they create then have congress, who's in their pockets, make more laws.



I don't want another layer of government bureaucracy in my food.

I don't want Big Organics trying to push food that safer, healthier and less expensive off my table only to be replaced with bruised, carcinogen laden potatoes that they fertilized with their own poo.

It starts with, "GMO Free" labels, then moves to "Contains GMO" labels, then comes the bans. It's the same way with guns. This liberal government power grab will happen here as it does everywhere else. Don't believe me? Go try and buy some metal tipped lawn Jarts at Walmart.

Dave, I suggest you go direct to a farmer you trust and get your food that way. I'm all for "farm to table", no labels needed there. Because, If you think you can trust the labels at hippie-mart to tell you "what's in your food"... You "just want to be informed", so, who decides what can be labeled "GMO Free"? So far you danced around that question.

Actually, I am getting ready to go one better, and be my own farmer that I trust. I have had enough chaos that I am running a couple of years behind right now, but I am getting close to the jumping off point. About all the farming I did last year was putting up hay for my alpacas. This year, I intend to add chickens, a cow, and a lot of garden produce. Planting fruit and nut trees and constructing a greenhouse sufficient to house my fish and hydroponic growing are also on the short list. I am not finished accumulating supplies for that particular project, but then again, I have an impending move, a lot of fence to build, a barn to build, equipment needing repair, and I am just getting to the point of being able to see the light at the end of the tunnel regarding being well enough to do these things.

That doesn't change the fact that I have a major problem with people's decisions being made for them through enforced ignorance. If the truth is 'too dangerous' that generally stands in evidence that some house cleaning needs done really bad. I certainly don't support putting a gag on GMO producers either. Let them sell to people who believe that they offer a good and more economical product. Conversely, let those who don't not buy from them. Sneaking a product in on the unwary is not an acceptable third option, and enforcing that ignorance is absolutely not acceptable. I will add a concern that no one else seems to have considered: I am not oblivious to the fact that mass marketers of certified organic are likely to be just as unfriendly to folks selling produce out of a wheelbarrow in the front yard as are the traditional suppliers. The only solution I see is in the free market, but the free market is neither free nor workable when the truth is not available regarding what you are actually buying.

 

[wagyu52]

I'll just leave this here, well worth the 20 min if you think GMO's are bad.


[video=youtube_share;xvFD6DRn0Cg]http://youtu.be/xvFD6DRn0Cg[/video]

 

[JettaKnight]

You not going to answer my question, are you Dave?

Who decides what can be labeled "GMO Free"?

Right now it's Big Organics that's trying to keep consumers ignorant.

 

[wagyu52]

This topic gives me a headache. There is so much misinformation out there about both sides. I'll just farm how I farm and you buy your food where you buy it. Don't push your anti-Gmo agenda on me and I won't spray round up in your yard.

The problem is they are not fine with just letting you farm the way you want. These organized anti GMO groups are just like the anti gun groups, they are not satisfied with baning high cap mags and "assault rifles" they want all guns ban.
The anti GMO groups don't want GMOs ban they want Monsanto, BASF, DuPont, ECT...ban. Their goal is not to just eliminate GMO but all herbicides, pesticides and comercial fertilizer. Anti CAFO groups are no different.

 

[IndyDave1776]

You not going to answer my question, are you Dave?

Who decides what can be labeled "GMO Free"?

Right now it's Big Organics that's trying to keep consumers ignorant.

I can't say that this is something I spend hours on end thinking about. I am still at the point of realizing that Monsanto, et alia, have made the effort to lobby for putting a gag on any information regarding the presence or absence of GMO content. I am also aware that many on the other side would gleefully return us to the stone age. I don't feel that knowing the damned truth about what is being fed to me is asking a whole lot. It seems to me that organisms which are not and/or cannot be produced through natural means of reproduction (i.e., selective breeding) are pretty easy to distinguish at a level of definition from those which have been bred up through natural processes. We are rapidly approaching a 'definition of is' argument with this discussion.