Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (132007)	11/5/2012 10:51:57 AM
From: TimF	Respond to of 132070

Croplife was only one of the links. And a lot of the sources on the other side are also biased, organizations campaigning against GMOs or just GM crops and such. In any case the fact that pesticide resistant GM crops result in more pesticide use (but fewer pesticide types, and often less toxic pesticides), doesn't change the fact that other crops, that are modified to be pest resistant result in less pesticide use, but your always campaigning against GM crops, not some specific pesticide resistance modification. Also pesticide use is only one issue, and not a particularly key one. Higher yields from GM crops are extremely important.

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (132007)	3/30/2013 2:52:22 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 132070

Obama signed a bill that effectively bars federal courts from being able to halt the sale or planting of GMO or GE crops and seeds, no matter what health consequences from the consumption of these products may come to light in the future. "This provision is simply an industry ploy to continue to sell genetically engineered seeds even when a court of law has found they were approved by USDA illegally," the petition stated. "It is unnecessary and an unprecedented attack on U.S. judicial review. Congress should not be meddling with the judicial review process based solely on the special interest of a handful of companies." Many food safety advocates maintain that there have not been enough studies into the potential health risks of GMO and GE seeds and crops, and the judicial power to stop companies from selling or planting them was one key recourse they were relying on to stop them from being sold if health risks come to light. But the "Monsanto Protection Act" -- referred to as the "Farmer Assurance Provision" by its supporters -- removes that course of action, and those who are angry at Obama for signing the bill are also incensed with Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D- Md., who is accused of failing to give the amendment that inserted the language a proper hearing. “In this hidden backroom deal, Sen. Mikulski turned her back on consumer, environmental and farmer protection in favor of corporate welfare for biotech companies such as Monsanto,” Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety, said in a statement. “This abuse of power is not the kind of leadership the public has come to expect from Sen. Mikulski or the Democrat Majority in the Senate." A number of the provision's vocal opponents allege that it was quietly inserted while the bill was still in the Senate Appropriations Committee, which Mikulski chairs, and that her committee did not hold any hearings on its language. They say many Democratic members who voted for the bill were unaware.