Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Director of Online Strategies, Progressive Strategies
Posted: 03/28/2013 4:12 pm
Elizabeth Warren
,
Protection Of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act
,
Cfpb
,
Consumer Protection
,
Dupont
,
Monsanto
,
Monsanto Protection Act
,
Politics News
With every bill passed in Congress, there is good news and bad news.
The good news of HR 933 passing the House: we avoided a government
shutdown (for now). The bad news: Congress authorized a provision known
as the "Monsanto Protection Act," protecting the agricultural giant from
litigation.
From
The Russian Times:
"The US House of Representatives quietly passed a
last-minute addition to the Agricultural Appropriations Bill for 2013
last week -- including a provision protecting genetically modified seeds
from litigation in the face of health risks.
The rider, which is officially known as the Farmer Assurance Provision,
has been derided by opponents of biotech lobbying as the "Monsanto
Protection Act," as it would strip federal courts of the authority to
immediately halt the planting and sale of genetically modified (GMO)
seed crop regardless of any consumer health concerns."
Senator Jon Tester from Montana was the only opponent (which surely
will come back to bite him in the ass in his next election cycle, when
his opponent will say he "opposed preventing a government shutdown" and
"wants us to fall into an economic rut" or something stupid).
The protection bill is dangerous for a few reasons. First, a lot of
the people who voted for this
didn't know they were voting on this particular addition, because they
didn't read the whole bill. The protection provision was included
anonymously, pointing to back room wheeling and dealing, and it was
packed into a bill trying to keep the government from shutting down.
Second, Monsanto has a history of litigation with their genetically engineered crops -- they
fought with DuPont over rights to genetically altered crops, they were
found liable
for a farmer's memory loss and physical problems from inhaling their
weedkiller, and recent studies have shown that the company's engineered
crops are leading to
infertility in cattle
and declining plant health. If they are protected from litigation, the
company can continue to make dangerous products with no legal
ramifications - allowing them to turn a profit while people, animals,
and the environment suffer, not entirely unlike 2005's Protection of
Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and its protection of the gun industry.
And third, the Monsanto Protection Act is also dangerous because it
sets a nasty precedent for future consumer protection cases. From the
International Business Times:
"Though it will only remain in effect for six months until
the government finds another way to fund its operations, the message it
sends is that corporations can get around consumer safety protections if
they get Congress on their side. Furthermore, it sets a precedent that
suggests that court challenges are a privilege, not a right."
It's a continuation on the trend of corporations getting away with
shafting their customers out of millions, leaving consumers worse for
the wear and letting corporations off scot-free. Big Banks, the ones Too
Big to Fail, cost customers billions of dollars only to be bailed out
and refuse to pay back the taxpayers after making record profits. They
take up a huge chunk of our economy and can
make higher profits
risking working families' money than conducting ethical banking
business, and they're not being held accountable for that. Even
champions like Elizabeth Warren and the Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau fighting for consumers and hard-working Americans who got hosed,
it's still not enough. Big Pharma has gotten away with murder for years
- right now, they're fighting pressure from the Obama administration to
stop the "
pay to delay"
practice of keeping generics off the pharmaceutical market for years --
keeping millions of Americans from being able to afford the drugs they
need, and allowing Big Pharma to make millions off of their exclusive
drugs.
With this deal, Big Agriculture is stepping up its game in consumer
abuses and stopping consumers from holding them accountable for their
actions. And that is wrong. The government should be protecting
consumers, not big companies. If the products or services that a company
provides to its customers are faulty, risky, or dangerous, they should
be willing to either take them off the market or be held legally
responsible for them.
This deal is nothing new -- but it's a disturbing pattern of "more of
the same," and further proof that our government isn't doing enough to
protect us from Big Business and special interests.
No comments:
Post a Comment