Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Posted: 05/23/2013 4:38 pm
In March, when I first
wrote about
how the biotech rider -- called the Monsanto Protection Act by its
vocal opponents -- undercut the constitutional concept of separation of
powers, it seemed hardly anyone (other than the usual advocacy groups)
was paying attention. But then a lot of people got mad, really mad.
Within a few short weeks the issue exploded in the mainstream media,
with the surest sign the issue had hit the big time being (what else?)
coverage by
The Daily Show (hilariously titled, "You Stuck What Where?"). Another indication was outrage even from a
Tea Party blogger.
Quick refresher: Biotech companies have to get permission from the
U.S. Department of Agriculture to plant new genetically-engineered
crops. In recent years, groups such as the Center for Food Safety have
been gaining traction by
filing lawsuits
challenging federal approval, thereby stopping some novel crops from
being planted when courts agreed that USDA failed to conduct proper
environmental oversight.
Enter the biotech rider, an unprecedented end-run around such court
decisions. The law -- conveniently snuck into the must-pass budget bill
-- requires USDA to ignore a court order and allow the planting of new
genetically engineered crops while the agency conducts further review,
after which time it's likely too late to undo any harm. It would be like
the Food and Drug Administration saying to food makers: go ahead and
put those potentially dangerous food additives on the market while we
keep studying them to see if they make people sick. (Okay, we do that
too but only because we don't have laws against it.)
Despite political cynicism running at sky-high levels, this corporate
power grab sent many people over the edge, like a collective yell of,
"I am mad as hell and am not going to take it anymore." But it didn't
happen by accident. It took hard grassroots efforts of groups like
Food Democracy Now!
to take this issue to its constituents, raise bloody hell over it, and
demand accountability from our elected representatives, that got this
story to break through.
The Iowa-based group (comprised of two staff) delivered more than
300,000 petitions
of outrage to Washington, D.C. They also started calling the measure
the "Monsanto Protection Act" -- a smart use of framing to get
attention, as "biotech rider" wasn't cutting it. Dave Murphy, executive
director of Food Democracy Now! explains:
Republicans understand the importance of language -- that's
why they say Obamacare and Clear Skies Initiative -- but Democrats, not
so much. I nicknamed the rider The Monsanto Protection Act as soon as I
saw Congress calling it the Farmer Assurance Provision. As a former
conservative, I know it's important to tell the truth about what you're
really fighting.
In the noisy aftermath, even Monsanto's hometown newspaper, the
St. Louis Post-Dispatch,
published a scathing editorial blaming Missouri Republican Senator Roy Blount for "a sleazy bit of business" that "undermines the legislative process."
That's the good news: that when food industry lobbyists do something
so over the top, we can marshal our resources to respond effectively.
Even though we didn't win that particular battle, the outrage over
Monsanto's colossal overreach did bring massive attention to the issue.
And that message came through loud and clear both in the media and at
least to some members of Congress.
Senator Barbara Mikulski, the Democrat chair of the Senate appropriations committee, (where the rider was slipped in) put out a
defensive apology
in the wake of the uproar, a move unheard of by politicians. Her
spokesperson tried to explain: "Senator Mikulski understands the anger
over this provision. She didn't put the language in the bill and doesn't
support it either." What classic politician-speak: defending her vote
by saying she doesn't support what she voted for. No matter, the
statement alone points to the success of the backlash.
We've been hearing for some time now that the food movement needs to
demonstrate some chops to gain more credibility, and I agree. We can't
just be a small collection of writers and polite foodies talking to each
other. The only way to beat back a powerful industry is to prove we
have enough people outraged over our broken food system to hold our
politicians accountable. During his 2008 campaign, President Obama
promised to fight for labeling of genetically-modified foods. But now (
according to close sources) his attitude is: "show me the movement."
With more than 6 million votes to label GE food in California for Prop 37, the ballot initiative that
lost narrowly (48.6 to 51.4 percent) leading to the rise of
at least 20 states
considering labeling bills, combined with the recent outrage over the
Monsanto Protection Act, it appears that movement has arrived.
Now it's time for next steps, and we have a critical opportunity with
the farm bill (once again) making its way through Congress. Senator
Jeff Merkley (D-OR) has introduced (along with several co-sponsors) an
amendment (number 978) to the farm bill that would completely repeal the biotech rider. From Senator Merkley's
statement
on his proposal: "The Monsanto Protection Act is an outrageous example
of a special interest loophole. This provision nullifies the actions of a
court that is enforcing the law to protect farmers, the environment and
public health. That is unacceptable."
Unacceptable is right, to an outraged senator and hopefully millions
of other Americans. Now is the time to demonstrate our strength. Enough
is enough. You can take action at Food Democracy Now!'s website
here.
No comments:
Post a Comment