S. 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act

Intense

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
44,909
Reaction score
6,769
Points
48
NOTE

The following summary of S. 510 reflects the manager’s amendment, as released
by the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee on August 12, 2010.







Summary and Background


During the week of November 15th, the Senate may consider S. 510, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act. The Senate’s consideration of this legislation has been preceded by over a year of bipartisan work from, among others, Senators Durbin, Harkin, Dodd, Alexander, Burr, Gregg, and the late Senator Kennedy.



This bipartisan legislation would overhaul our current food safety system, which has failed to protect far too many Americans and will continue to fail them unless Congress improves the nation’s food safety laws. The legislation would address a number of the weaknesses of the current system by, among other provisions:



Giving the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the authority to recall foods when firms fail to voluntarily recall products on their own, when a food is adulterated or contains undeclared allergens and will cause serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or animals;


Requiring the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), within three years of enactment, to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking that would establish a national trace-back system;


Requiring food importers to perform food safety supplier verification activities and prohibit the importation of food by an importer if they do not undertake food safety supplier verification activities;


Expands the nation’s current food facility registration laws requiring all food facilities (excluding farms) to register with the FDA biennially and gives the FDA the authority and the assurance that it will be permitted to inspect registered facilities as permitted; and


Requires all registered domestic facilities (excluding farms) to identify known or reasonably foreseeable hazards and implement preventive controls to significantly minimize or prevent those identified hazards.

http://dpc.senate.gov/dpcdoc.cfm?doc_name=lb-111-2-57


What do you Support? What are your Concerns?
 

The Rabbi

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
67,602
Reaction score
7,863
Points
1,840
Location
Nashville
Note that everything is done in the name of "protecting the consumer."
In fact we have the safest food supply in the world. Why would anyone want to change that?
 

hortysir

In Memorial of 47
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
20,518
Reaction score
4,255
Points
270
Location
Port Charlotte, FL
Congress.org - Legislation:

(1) allocate resources to inspect facilities and articles of food imported into the United States based on their risk profiles; (2) increase the frequency of inspection of all facilities; and (3) report to the appropriate congressional committees annually on food facility and food import inspections. Title III: Improving the Safety of Imported Food - (Sec. 301) Requires U.S. importers to perform risk-based foreign supplier verification activities to verify that imported food is produced in compliance with applicable requirements related to hazard analysis and standards for produce safety and is not adulterated or misbranded.
It takes a more PROACTIVE stance to food inspections rather than just reacting to outbreaks.
 

Revere

Rookie
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
7,427
Reaction score
423
Points
0
Location
Watching you in my profile page
Congress.org - Legislation:

(1) allocate resources to inspect facilities and articles of food imported into the United States based on their risk profiles; (2) increase the frequency of inspection of all facilities; and (3) report to the appropriate congressional committees annually on food facility and food import inspections. Title III: Improving the Safety of Imported Food - (Sec. 301) Requires U.S. importers to perform risk-based foreign supplier verification activities to verify that imported food is produced in compliance with applicable requirements related to hazard analysis and standards for produce safety and is not adulterated or misbranded.
It takes a more PROACTIVE stance to food inspections rather than just reacting to outbreaks.
You mean shrinking the food supply so the limited competence of the US government can promise it can deal with it better than it dealt with it before?
 
OP
I

Intense

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
44,909
Reaction score
6,769
Points
48
I find it really interesting that this is so low profile and so unopposed. It's like the Hydra is unleashed.


Nov. 30, 2010 UPDATE: US Senate passes the Patriot Act for Food, S510, by a vote of 73 to 25.
By Steve Green

S 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act*, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the US. It is to our food what the bailout was to our economy, only we can live without money.

“If accepted [S 510] would preclude the public’s right to grow, own, trade, transport, share, feed and eat each and every food that nature makes. It will become the most offensive authority against the cultivation, trade and consumption of food and agricultural products of one’s choice. It will be unconstitutional and contrary to natural law or, if you like, the will of God.” ~Dr. Shiv Chopra, Canada Health whistleblower

It is similar to what India faced with imposition of the salt tax during British rule, only S 510 extends control over all food in the US, violating the fundamental human right to food.

Monsanto says it has no interest in the bill and would not benefit from it, but Monsanto’s Michael Taylor who gave us rBGH and unregulated genetically modified (GM) organisms, appears to have designed it and is waiting as an appointed Food Czar to the FDA (a position unapproved by Congress) to administer the agency it would create — without judicial review — if it passes. S 510 would give Monsanto unlimited power over all US seed, food supplements, food and farming.

History

In the 1990s, Bill Clinton introduced HACCP (Hazardous Analysis Critical Control Points) purportedly to deal with contamination in the meat industry. Clinton’s HACCP delighted the offending corporate (World Trade Organization “WTO”) meat packers since it allowed them to inspect themselves, eliminated thousands of local food processors (with no history of contamination), and centralized meat into their control. Monsanto promoted HACCP.

In 2008, Hillary Clinton urged a powerful centralized food safety agency as part of her campaign for president. Her advisor was Mark Penn, CEO of Burson Marsteller, a giant PR firm representing Monsanto. Clinton lost, but Clinton friends such as Rosa DeLauro, whose husband’s firm lists Monsanto as a progressive client and globalization as an area of expertise, introduced early versions of S 510.

S 510 is hissing in the grass | Food Freedom
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: Vel

hortysir

In Memorial of 47
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
20,518
Reaction score
4,255
Points
270
Location
Port Charlotte, FL
Congress.org - Legislation:

(1) allocate resources to inspect facilities and articles of food imported into the United States based on their risk profiles; (2) increase the frequency of inspection of all facilities; and (3) report to the appropriate congressional committees annually on food facility and food import inspections. Title III: Improving the Safety of Imported Food - (Sec. 301) Requires U.S. importers to perform risk-based foreign supplier verification activities to verify that imported food is produced in compliance with applicable requirements related to hazard analysis and standards for produce safety and is not adulterated or misbranded.
It takes a more PROACTIVE stance to food inspections rather than just reacting to outbreaks.
You mean shrinking the food supply so the limited competence of the US government can promise it can deal with it better than it dealt with it before?
Where does it mention shrinking the food supply?
 

Revere

Rookie
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
7,427
Reaction score
423
Points
0
Location
Watching you in my profile page
Congress.org - Legislation:

It takes a more PROACTIVE stance to food inspections rather than just reacting to outbreaks.
You mean shrinking the food supply so the limited competence of the US government can promise it can deal with it better than it dealt with it before?
Where does it mention shrinking the food supply?
It will close small producers who can't afford attorneys to tell them if they are in compliance.

Moron.
 

random3434

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
25,899
Reaction score
7,781
Points
48
Wait, do we or don't we want our food supply to be safe and regulated, or just risk the chance of Botulism and food poisoning with rancid meats, tainted cheeses, leaded water, et al...for us.


:confused:

Help me out here.
 

Revere

Rookie
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
7,427
Reaction score
423
Points
0
Location
Watching you in my profile page
I thought we already had that.

If the government puts small producers out of business, can it promise your food will be safe?

How big was the operation that sickened people with eggs, and what regulations did it not comply with?
 

Two Thumbs

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
38,215
Reaction score
6,495
Points
1,140
Location
Where ever I go, there I am.
It takes away imported foods from countries that can't comply.

This will crush many small countries that rely on exports, b/c not every place on the planet has access to computers.

Seems cruel, but what else would you expect from something backed by Soros.

We have the best and safest food on the planet, it's getting expensive, more expensive, and this will put many foods out of the working poor reach.

But it's good to see we are getting double penetrated by the R's and D's.
 

JBeukema

Rookie
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
25,613
Reaction score
1,745
Points
0
Location
everywhere and nowhere
Requires all registered domestic facilities (excluding farms) to identify known or reasonably foreseeable hazards and implement preventive controls to significantly minimize or prevent those identified hazards.
sounds like 'self-regulation'

does it give the FDA the authority to shut down factories with repeated outbreaks?


sounds like hollow legislation
 

hortysir

In Memorial of 47
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
20,518
Reaction score
4,255
Points
270
Location
Port Charlotte, FL
You mean shrinking the food supply so the limited competence of the US government can promise it can deal with it better than it dealt with it before?
Where does it mention shrinking the food supply?
It will close small producers who can't afford attorneys to tell them if they are in compliance.

Moron.
So medium sized groves that are harvested by illegals and irrigated with their sewer water shouldn't be inspected for safety in the same manner as larger growers?
Anyone selling produce for public consumption should be subjected to stricy inspection standards.
Being in the restaurant industry for almost 30 years it would be really nice if, when I ran out of lettuce, I could run across the street to a produce stand and buy some from them rather than having to order from "an approved food source" at a much higher price.
How comfortable are you going to a restaurant and not being sure of the quality of produce they're using??
How can you be sure that proper temperatures are kept or proper rotation. What chemicals are on it? etc....
 

Two Thumbs

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
38,215
Reaction score
6,495
Points
1,140
Location
Where ever I go, there I am.
Wait, do we or don't we want our food supply to be safe and regulated, or just risk the chance of Botulism and food poisoning with rancid meats, tainted cheeses, leaded water, et al...for us.


:confused:

Help me out here.
We already have the best system in the world.

How many cases of what you mentioned happened in the last year that the FDA could have stopped?
 

Revere

Rookie
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
7,427
Reaction score
423
Points
0
Location
Watching you in my profile page
Where does it mention shrinking the food supply?
It will close small producers who can't afford attorneys to tell them if they are in compliance.

Moron.
So medium sized groves that are harvested by illegals and irrigated with their sewer water shouldn't be inspected for safety in the same manner as larger growers?
Anyone selling produce for public consumption should be subjected to stricy inspection standards.
Being in the restaurant industry for almost 30 years it would be really nice if, when I ran out of lettuce, I could run across the street to a produce stand and buy some from them rather than having to order from "an approved food source" at a much higher price.
How comfortable are you going to a restaurant and not being sure of the quality of produce they're using??
How can you be sure that proper temperatures are kept or proper rotation. What chemicals are on it? etc....
Where are those groves right now, doofus?

You could turn one in right now if you knew about it.

You would not need this law.

Go find someone else to justify you raising the prices of your already over priced food, ass hole.
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
59,337
Reaction score
7,230
Points
1,840
Location
Portland, Ore.
Golly gee whiz, you are stuck on stupid in every category, Revere.

The legislation passes with strong bi-partisan support. Government worked as it should.
 
OP
I

Intense

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
44,909
Reaction score
6,769
Points
48
Golly gee whiz, you are stuck on stupid in every category, Revere.

The legislation passes with strong bi-partisan support. Government worked as it should.
Government or Corporate Investment?
 

hortysir

In Memorial of 47
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
20,518
Reaction score
4,255
Points
270
Location
Port Charlotte, FL
It will close small producers who can't afford attorneys to tell them if they are in compliance.

Moron.
So medium sized groves that are harvested by illegals and irrigated with their sewer water shouldn't be inspected for safety in the same manner as larger growers?
Anyone selling produce for public consumption should be subjected to stricy inspection standards.
Being in the restaurant industry for almost 30 years it would be really nice if, when I ran out of lettuce, I could run across the street to a produce stand and buy some from them rather than having to order from "an approved food source" at a much higher price.
How comfortable are you going to a restaurant and not being sure of the quality of produce they're using??
How can you be sure that proper temperatures are kept or proper rotation. What chemicals are on it? etc....
Where are those groves right now, doofus?

You could turn one in right now if you knew about it.

You would not need this law.

Go find someone else to justify you raising the prices of your already over priced food, ass hole.
No way of knowing until there is actually an outbreak.
That's the point, dumbass.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top