The Daily Caller.com

12:01 AM  06/17/2013

This week the US House of Representatives considers the 2013 Farm Bill — the agriculture policy tool for the federal government. Of all of the amendments that will be debated, there is one in particular that has conservatives fuming. If passed, the “Egg Bill” amendment will result in an unfunded government mandate on thousands of American family farmers. The amendment calls for federal requirements on the size and structure of egg producing facilities. This mandate could have significant consequences for farmers — especially the smaller, familyrun businesses. It would likely force farmers to shut down their operations or significantly increase their production costs, which will inevitably be passed on to consumers at the grocery stores and at restaurants. This complete overhaul of our nation’s egg producing facilities is expected to increase the price of eggs and any food containing eggs, such as baked goods.

The Egg Bill amendment is being pushed on Capitol Hill by liberal animal activist organizations, such as the Humane Society of the United States, who have made it their mission to end animal agriculture as we know it.

The Egg Bill amendment is opposed by conservative groups, such as Americans for Prosperity, and a majority of the US agriculture industry. Opponents say that similar mandates in Europehave cut food supplies and driven up costs, without

any evidence of improved food safety, animal welfare or other social benefits.

It is also widely believed that the Egg Bill amendment sets a dangerous precedent for government control of all family farms – including those that produce meat, poultry and dairy products. Furthermore, it needlessly replaces the family farmer’s traditional values and good judgment with a bureaucratic mandate from Washington, DC.

This looming move by Congress comes on the heels of scandals at the Internal Revenue Service and the Justice Department, and would continue the precarious trend of the federal government overreaching and compromising Americans’ freedoms.

One organization is standing up to big government and working to keep the Egg Bill off the Farm Bill. Keep Food Affordable (KFA) is a coalition that brings together consumers, farmers and food security organizations to support policies and practices that will allow America’s farmers to produce food safely, efficiently and without any unnecessary financial burdens so that all Americans can have access to safe and affordable food. KFA is helping Americans voice their opposition to the Egg Bill and communicate their desire to keep DC bureaucrats off family farms directly to their members of Congress through an online advocacy tool. The coalition hopes that with enough input from constituents, the House will act in the best interest of those most at risk of being hurt by the Egg Bill.

If the Farm Bill passes with the Egg Bill attached as an amendment, farmers will lose income, American families will be forced to spend even more money on food and Congress will emerge with egg on its face.

Read more:  http://dailycaller.com/2013/06/17/federal-government-has-new-group-in-its-sights/#ixzz2Wciao0FF

http://www.thenation.com/blog/174753/sword-drops-food-stamps#axzz2WNrmeZ4R

The Sword Drops on Food Stamps

George Zornick on June 11, 2013

It’s official: Congress will slash food stamp funding in the midst of a deep economic recession, when more people rely on food stamps than ever before.

Monday night, the Senate passed a five-year farm bill that contained $4.1 billion in cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) over ten years. This ensures that the only debate now will be about how much to cut—and it’s likely to result in cuts much deeper than $4.1 billion.

The House Agriculture Committee passed a farm bill last month that cut $20.5 billion from SNAP by removing “categorical eligibility” (more on that here), which would take food stamps away from 2 million Americans and hundreds of thousands of children.

That bill has yet to be fully debated and passed on the House floor, and the push to make the cuts even deeper will be strong—conservatives have insisted on even deeper cuts. Representative Paul Ryan’s 2013 budget, for example, called for $135 billion in food stamp cuts, and on Tuesday, twenty-five House Republicans wrote to House Speaker John Boehner to remove food stamp funding from the bill altogether. (They just want the program debated on a separate track, but the barely implicit message in the letter is that they don’t want to be forced to agree to “only” $20.5 billion in food stamp cuts at the risk of killing the farm bill.)

The House bill, once passed, will head to conference committee, and the negotiators will have to reach a consensus number. Without question, it won’t be lower than $4.1 billion.

Why did Democrats in the Senate head down this road? Some attempted not to—Senator Kirsten Gillibrand introduced a bill last month that blocked any food stamp cuts, but only twenty-five of her colleagues, and zero Republicans, voted for it. It failed 70-26.

Senator Debbie Stabenow, chair of the Senate Agriculture committee, has defended the cuts as designed only to stop “waste, fraud and abuse” in the SNAP program, and urged Democrats to vote against Gillibrand’s bill. “Every family that currently qualifies for nutrition assistance in this country continues to get that assistance,” she said. “We do make sure there is integrity in the programs.”

Please support our journalism. Get a digital subscription for just $9.50!

That’s not really what the bill does, however. It cuts $4.1 billion by eliminating the “Heat and Eat” programs adopted by several states that coordinate low-income heating assistance with SNAP benefits, thus allowing a slightly larger benefit. The Coalition on Human Needs explains:

Fifteen states and the District of Columbia have opted to provide SNAP households with a nominal [Low Income Heating Assistance Program] payment, so that instead of having to provide burdensome monthly documentation of their shelter and heating/utility bills, they can deduct a standard allowance from their income, thereby increasing the amount of SNAP benefits they qualify for. This “Heat and Eat” approach disproportionately helps seniors and those with disabilities, who pay a high proportion of their income on shelter costs. Without this coordinated approach, such households may lose $50—$75 a month in SNAP benefits.

Aside from being, well, cruel, the food stamp cuts in the Senate bill are also damaging to the economy. The Center for American Progress, in a study released in March, found that for every $1 billion cut from SNAP, 13,718 jobs are lost:

So the Senate bill, by that calculation, will cost 56,243 jobs. CAP noted the losses “will likely have the greatest impact on younger workers, since they account for a disproportionate share of workers in food-related industries.”

The only hope now to at least moderate the cuts is a band of House Democrats who have pledged to fight the food stamp cuts ferociously, as we reported last month.

AT&T’s deregulation campaign will hurt low-income Americans, people of color and rural communities. Read Leticia Miranda’s report here.

PNP comment: More than 70,000 head of cattle need feed from Tribal-made drought. — Editor Liz Bowen

JEFF BARNARD, Associated Press

Posted June 12, 2013 at 4 a.m., updated June 12, 2013 at 7:50 p.m.

GRANTS PASS, Ore. (AP) — With rivers in Oregon’s drought-stricken upper Klamath Basin flowing far below normal levels, state water officials started telling ranchers Wednesday they must shut off irrigation to leave water for native fish held sacred by the Klamath Tribes, a federal irrigation project and wildlife refuges downstream.

The shutoffs are the first for the upper Klamath Basin, where 38 years of litigation ended in March with recognition by the state Water Resources Department that the tribes have the oldest water rights on rivers flowing through lands that were once their reservation.

The tribes issued their call in concert with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which needs water to supply the Klamath Project, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which has wildlife refuges that draw water from the irrigation project.

Douglas Woodcock of the Oregon Water Resources Department said watermasters had completed measuring streamflows to verify the need to start shutting off some irrigators, and were beginning to notify ranchers along the Sprague River and its tributaries.

“It’s painful,” said Don Gentry, chairman of the Klamath Tribes. “But we have to protect our resources and really make sure our water rights are enforced.”

Until now, ranchers have been able to irrigate freely, no matter how much water is in the river.

The rivers flow into Upper Klamath Lake, the primary reservoir for the Klamath Project and the Klamath River.

Woodcock said it was not yet clear whether all the irrigators drawing from the Sprague have to be shut off. It will take the next week and a half to make all the notifications. Shutoffs on the Wood and Williams rivers are to follow.

Ranchers have said the shutoffs will be devastating, forcing them to find feed for more than 70,000 cattle grazed on irrigated pasture. Feed is already in short supply across the drought-stricken West.

The Klamath Basin has been the sight of some of the most bitter water battles in the nation as scarce water is shared between protected fish and farms.

MORE at:

http://www.redding.com/news/2013/jun/12/klamath-basin-irrigation-shutoffs-coming-week/?partner=newsletter_headlines

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

By DEREK MOORE &     GUY KOVNER
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Published: Tuesday, June 4, 2013 at 3:00 a.m.

Last Modified: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 7:24 a.m.

Situated about 50 miles from Drakes Estero in Marin County, the landlocked city of Sonoma would seem an unlikely place to take a stand in an oyster company’s fight for survival.

Photo Galleries

•     Murphy’s Irish Pub Oyster Night  

By GUY KOVNER
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Published: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 6:17 p.m.

Last Modified: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 6:17 p.m.

Rep. Jared Huffman said Wednesday he is rejecting the city of Sonoma’s request that he support a congressional investigation into the federal government’s decision to close an oyster farm in the Point Reyes National Seashore.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/protests-grow-amid-discovery-genetically-modified-us-wheat

PNP comment: In an article in the Capital Press news, the property owner said he have never had GMO wheat before during the past 9 years. This was the first year. Hum, wonder how it got there? — Editor Liz Bowen

May 31, 2013 – 10:26 AM

By Susan Jones and Taylor Knopf
Subscribe to Susan Jones and Taylor Knopf RSS
13 11

People chant and carry signs during one of many worldwide protests against Monsanto in Montpelier, Vt. on Saturday, May 25, 2013. (AP Photo/Mark Collier)
(CNSNews.com) – The discovery of genetically engineered wheat on an Oregon farm is having economic repercussions for the United States, at a time when protests against this type of food are growing.

Japan, one of the largest export markets for U.S. wheat growers, has suspended some imports of U.S. wheat, the Associated Press reported. Katsuhiro Saka, a counselor at the Japanese Embassy in Washington, told the AP that his country is waiting for more information from the Agriculture Department as it investigates the discovery.

The USDA announced the discovery of the unapproved, genetically altered, herbicide-resistant wheat in Oregon on Wednesday, reigniting protests from the liberal advocacy group MoveOn.org, which accuses the “evil” Monsanto of making a secret deal with the USDA to keep selling genetically engineered seeds that are not labeled as such.

The USDA said on Wednesday that plant samples from an Oregon farm showed the presence of  genetically engineered (GE) wheat.

“Further testing by USDA laboratories indicates the presence of the same GE glyphosate-resistant wheat variety that Monsanto was authorized to field test in 16 states from 1998 to 2005,” the news release said. “There are no GE wheat varieties approved for sale or in commercial production in the United States or elsewhere at this time.”

But USDA also said the detection of this particular wheat variety “does not pose a food safety concern.” In fact, it added, based on Food and Drug Administration findings, “this variety is as safe as non-GE wheat currently on the market.”

Nevertheless, USDA said it is “taking this situation very seriously” and it has launched a formal investigation to find out “how it happened.”

Asked about the discovery of the Oregon GE wheat on Thursday, a White House spokesman said he didn’t want to “get ahead” of the USDA investigation.

“We certainly have been in touch with our trading partners on this issue, but there’s no indication at all at this point, based on the FDA’s review, that there’s any threat to food safety,” spokesman Josh Earnest said.

‘No GMO’

Even before this week’s confirmation of GE wheat in Oregon, protests have been building against “genetically modified organisms,” or GMOs for short.

Protesters chanted “Heck no GMO” in front of the White House last Saturday during one of the largest of many demonstrations worldwide against GMOs.

Organizers said their “March against Monsanto” protests took place in more than 420 cities across the globe on Saturday, following Senate rejection of an amendment to the farm bill requiring GMOs to be labeled as such.

The amendment would have allowed the states to require that “any food, beverage, or other edible product offered for sale have a label on indicating that the food, beverage, or other edible product contains a genetically engineered ingredient.”

Critics of Monsanto, one the largest seed distributors in the world, claim that the genetically modified seeds could have harmful, long-term effects on people’s health and the environment. Some of the signs held up outside the White House read: “Seeds of Destruction”; “Just say no to Monsanto”; “Seeds belong to nature”; and “Hell no GMO.”

“The way you want to avoid GMOs is buying organic food,” said one protest leader nicknamed “Gene-etic.”  “The USDA seal — the little green seal on the front or the back of your food — is the only way that you can buy processed food in America that doesn’t have a generically engineered ingredient. The status quo is, you’re either organic or everything else.”

Monsanto addresses the push for labeling GMO foods on its website: “We oppose current initiatives to mandate labeling of ingredients developed from GM seeds in the absence of any demonstrated risks. Such mandatory labeling could imply that food products containing these ingredients are somehow inferior to their conventional or organic counterparts.”

Monsanto noted that the Food and Drug Administration does require labeling of GMO food products if there is a “meaningful difference between that food and its conventional counterpart.” It also says the American Medical Association supports the FDA’s food labeling approach.

But the protests are not over. According to MoveOn.org, “A massive backlash is growing” against Monsanto and against those in Congress who rejected the labeling of genetically modified foods.

In a message to supporters on Thursday, MoveOn.org requested donations to help “fight back against Monsanto” with protests and lobbying campaigns.

Among other things, MoveOn.org said it plans to call out “key members of Congress who are supporting Monsanto over the public interest.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. GRG [Ref.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml]
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.