should stop – look – listen –

… Whenever any health issue gets place before America’s   U S  Supreme Court … now corporate owned … Americans of all color, creed, sex should stop – look – listen – as this court is focused on one thing only … providing profit$ to those manipulating their puppet strings…

 

A Viper In the Grass: Could the Supreme Court Find Medicaid, And Programs Like It, Unconstitutional?

 

Posted: 03/21/2012 8:28 am… http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doug-kendall/a-viper-in-the-grass-coul_b_1369333.html?ref=daily-brief?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=032112&utm_medium=email&utm_content=BlogEntry&utm_term=Daily%20Brief

 

In the lead-up to next week’s historic, six-hour Supreme Court argument on the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), the press and commentariat remain focused almost exclusively on the challenge to the ACA’s minimum coverage provision (which requires many Americans to obtain health care insurance or pay a tax penalty) and the argument that this provision exceeds Congress’ power under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause. Lost in the avalanche of coverage of that aspect of the case is the fact that the Court will also be hearing a sweeping attack on the Act’s expansion of the Medicaid program to provide health care for 16 million more low-income Americans. The challengers claim that the Medicaid expansion is "coercive" to the states and thus an unconstitutional exercise of Congress’s Spending Clause authority. This claim is wrong, but if it were to succeed, it would be a constitutional earthquake that would throw into question Medicaid and other federal statutes that create federal/state partnerships to solve nationwide problems such as health care, child welfare and discrimination.

Progressives should be particularly attuned to the attacks on Medicaid and Congress’ Spending Clause power. Unlike the minimum coverage provision — a concept designed by the conservative Heritage Foundation that has generated considerable unease among some progressives — Medicaid is a quintessential social safety net program. Its expansion is perhaps the single most significant progressive victory in the ACA. Thus, for progressives — including more than 500 state legislators from all 50 states who are defending the Medicaid expansion — the Supreme Court’s decision to review the claim by 26 states that the ACA unconstitutionally coerced states by conditioning Medicaid funds on the states’ agreement to expand coverage to more of their residents was a particularly unsettling surprise. In contrast to the claims against the ACA’s minimum coverage provision, there was no split in lower court rulings on the constitutionality of the Medicaid expansion: not a single lower court judge ruled for the states on this claim. Indeed, no court hasever ruled that any Spending Clause statute is unduly coercive, a recognition that it is difficult, if not impossible, to differentiate between an appropriate financial inducement and unconstitutional coercion.

 

So why did the Court decide to review this claim? Could this particular claim of coercion succeed where all others have failed? The text and history of the Constitution and the Court’s precedents say otherwise. The Spending Clause in Article I, Section 8 grants Congress the power "to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States." In the Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton described this broad grant of authority to tax and spend as "an indispensible ingredient in every Constitution." The Supreme Court, too, has generally interpreted the Spending Clause according to its broad terms, ruling in the leading case in this area, South Dakota v. Dole (1987), that "Congress may attach conditions on the receipt of federal funds, and has repeatedly employed the power ‘to further broad policy objectives by conditioning the receipt of federal moneys upon compliance with federal statutory and administrative directives.’"

 

Paul Clement, the high-profile conservative lawyer representing the Medicaid challengers, argues that the ACA’s expansion of Medicaid is a bridge too far. Because the federal government could withhold all Medicaid payments to states that fail to comply with the Act’s expanded coverage and other requirements — which is no small thing, given that the federal government will fund 100% of the Medicaid expansion initially, eventually tapering down to 90% — Clement argues "[t]here is no plausible argument that a State could afford to turn down such a massive federal inducement." Essentially, the argument is that the federal government’s Medicaid spending is too generous, that the states and their residents have become too dependent on this valuable program, and that it is therefore an offer the states cannot afford to refuse. This argument should be a loser. While the Supreme Court has suggested that there might be a "point at which pressure turns into compulsion," it has never found any conditioned spending to be inappropriate coercion or compulsion. In addition, the Court has recognized that "every rebate from a tax when conditioned upon conduct is in some measure a temptation" and "to hold that motive or temptation is equivalent to coercion is to plunge the law in endless difficulties."

Clement is asking the Court to take the plunge, which is what makes this aspect of the ACA case so scary. Clement argues that a ruling for the challenger states on this point would invalidate "the entire Affordable Care Act," an enormously significant outcome, even if this were the only fallout. But that limited result seems unlikely. To some degree or another, the objective of Congress in employing the Spending Clause is always to make an offer to states that is so generous — or politically popular — that they cannot afford to turn it down: the federal government always wants to convince states to participate. As a result, a ruling for Clement and his clients would throw into doubt prior expansions of Medicaid and federal/state partnerships across a wide range of areas including education (No Child Left Behind), child welfare (Adoption and Safe Families Act), disabilities (Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act), and civil rights (Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1965 and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972), a prospect that has some conservatives cheering.

 

Even if the Supreme Court ultimately rejects the states’ coercion argument in this case, as it should, its ruling could make important new law on the ability of the federal government to use the Spending Clause to enlist states in federal-led efforts. As the Court turns to the ACA next week, most eyes will focus on Tuesday’s oral argument on the minimum coverage provision, but we should all be watching just as closely during Wednesday’s argument on Medicaid. While this aspect of the case could easily fizzle out, it could also end up being the part of the challenge to health care reform that matters most.

 

They are all part of the same “cabal”

… What does the World Water Forum … Bechtel … World Bank … IMF … World Health Organization … Water Privatization … SUEZ… Veolia all have in common … They are all part of the same “cabal” …

 

World Water Forum- Marseille

 

 

 

Thursday, March 15, 2012… http://www.waterefficiency.net/WE/Articles/16488.aspx

MARSEILLE – 15 March 2012: UNDP has led a group of 25 institutions including local, regional and national authorities, international and multilateral organizations, water operators, NGOs, private organizations and prominent public figures in the assessment, design and constitution of a new international tool to promote decentralized cooperation in the water and sanitation field. 

The new instrument, called the Global Water Solidarity Platform, was launched yesterday at the World Water Forum in Marseille, France, where 20,000 participants from the private, public and non-profit sectors have gathered this week to address the water crisis. At the UNDP event, numerous organizations joined local authorities from across Africa and Europe at a special ceremony to sign the Decentralized Solidarity Mechanisms International Charter.

“This UNDP initiative is important because 11 percent of the planet’s population still lacks access to potable water, and 2.5 billion people do not have adequate sanitation services, said UNDP Deputy Director for External Relations and Advocacy, Romesh Muttukumaru, at the launch event in Marseille. “We believe this platform, and the International Charter, are important because local actors acting in solidarity can be a very effective tool to reducing the conditions that create poverty.”

The Global Water Solidarity Platform, which is supported by the governments of France and Switzerland, connects local authorities and organizations to take action to solve water and sanitation challenges, through which, for example, municipal water authorities in more developed countries can take direct action to support the improvement of water and sanitation services in developing contexts by contributing 1% of their revenue or budgets.

Muttukumaru said local authorities and water utility companies play a key role in responding to the challenges. “Together with an active coalition of stakeholders and concrete cooperation mechanisms, local leaders from across the globe are working in solidarity so everyone can access safe water and sanitation services,” he said.

Sub-national institutions hold an essential position in the provision of water and sanitation services, said Jean-Philippe Bayon, senior water expert at UNDP. “These institutions have found efficient solutions and accumulated best practices to overcome technical, political or financial obstacles to ensure availability, quality, acceptability, accessibility, affordability, inclusiveness and sustainability of their water and sanitation services,” he said, adding that the nature of these obstacles is generally shared by many sub-national institutions in many countries and regions in both the north and the south and “the successful experiences developed by one of them can serve to inspire others in their path to universal access.”

Idrissa Doucoure, Secretary General of EAA, said the linkages between developed and developing cities has a multiplier effect that reaches far beyond the immediate impact. “Through South-South cooperation further catalyzed by access to financing mechanisms and capacity,” he said, “helps ensure that the benefits are replicated again and again as the knowledge and technology migrates from community to community.”

Manfred Kauffman, chairman of solidarit’eau Suisse, a founding member of the Global Water Solidarity, said his organization has raised more than 2 million euro thus far by connecting communities in Switzerland with communities in the developing world to improve their water and sanitation. Through this network, for example, the City of Lausanne is helping to ensure clean water to the people of Nouakchott, Mauritania.

Issoufou Issaka, Minister of Hydraulics and Environment in Niger said the new platform gives him hope that new partnerships can be established to support his ministry to overcome the challenges of ensuring widespread access to clean water. “The difficulties may seem insurmountable,” he said. “But through the types of decentralized partnerships promoted by the Global Water Solidarity Platform we will be able to confront them together, in Niger, across Africa and around the world.”

More information at www.undp.org/geneva/watersolidarity or (in Marseille): Adam Rogers, UNDP – mobile +41 79 849 0679 or adam.rogers@undp.org To view a video of the signing ceremony, please visithttp://youtu.be/gE_IBdl0KOY

 

No surprise here to learn the military industrial complex employs most of the world’s population … We love War ..

clip_image002

 

 

 

No surprise here to learn the military industrial complex employs most of the world’s population … We love War ..

 
 

Amazing Chart: World’s Largest Employers

I don’t know what’s more amazing:  that the US Dept of Defense is first with 3.2 million employees (but, according to Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and most other Republicans other than Ron Paul, can’t be cut a measly 10% to 2.88 million in order for the military-industrial complex to do its share in saving the country from an excrutiating suicide by debt and monetary folly); or that Walmart ranks third; or that the UK National Health Service ranks fifth with 1.7 million employees out of a small population of 60 million.  

Note:  The Dept of Defense is one percent of the U.S. population, while the People’s Liberation Army of China, with 2.3 million employees, is one-tenth of one percent of China’s population, although China sits in between some well-armed neighbors, with India having 1.3 million in its armed forces and Russia having 1.0 million.

 clip_image004

 

///

Demolishing Due Process

…Due Process like so much of the “rights” we took for granted have been under attack by Republicans and Democrats for decades … what we are witnessing today are the falling of the final dominos …

Demolishing Due Process


03-21-2012   http://lewrockwell.com, by Ron Paul 

 It is ironic but perhaps sadly appropriate that Attorney General Eric Holder would choose a law school, Northwestern University, to deliver a speech earlier this month in which he demolished what was left of the rule of law in America.

In what history likely will record as a turning point, Attorney General Holder bluntly explained that this administration believes it has the authority to use lethal force against Americans if the President determines them to be a threat to the nation. He tells us that this is not a violation of the due process requirements of our Constitution because the President himself embodies "due process" as he unilaterally determines who is to be targeted. As Holder said, "a careful and thorough executive branch review of the facts in a case amounts to ‘due process.’" That means that the administration believes it is the President himself who is to be the judge, jury, and executioner.

 
Read Full Story

One snip here, one there, and there goes the Constitution

What a profound analogy and “we” have sat and watched and did nothing to prevent it … no shots need be fired to take control of the United States of America as “we” will gladly and willingly participate in its demise …

 

One snip here, one there, and there goes the Constitution

03/17/2012  •  The Examiner

Major challenges to the Constitution are pretty easy to spot. It’s the small snips here and here that present the greatest danger, in this case a free speech, right to assembly and redress of grievances got a hair cut. .

Until then we will allow Arizona’s CHILDREN to continue to be ABUSED …

///

clip_image002… For anyone living in Arizona the headline below should not come as any surprise …

Report shows child protection agency struggling

 

clip_image003Associated Press

PHOENIX (AP) — A new report shows Arizona’s Child Protective Services is struggling to keep up with a number of cases involving a dramatic rise in abuse and neglect along with an unprecedented number of children in foster care.


The report covering a six-month period ending Sept, 30 also shows the agency has been unable to respond to investigations within the time frames required by state policy.

The Arizona Republic (http://bit.ly/GDrm8H ) reports CPS workers told investigators that some cases dating back to last summer still haven’t been investigated

By our choices of those ‘we’ elect ‘to serve & to protect’ us a very clear message is sent.   And that message is Arizona citizens have little or no tolerance for those of “color” – – the future of our economy is to be one where employment is one of our Governor’s friend’$ private prisons at minimum pay with few if any benefits and limited health care ranks as a good job.

 

“We” choose to allow our elected officials to engage in whatever behavior they choose making you and me the butt of their daily jokes at the State Legislature is SOP.   Where ‘we’ allow them to hold themselves above the rule and the intent of any law – – – Where being a shill for corporate interests is rewarded with re-election – – – where the rights of women, in particular is under daily attack, by female members of the our state legislature – – -  where education of our children is pitiful allowing us to rank near the bottom of the barrel – – – where “rage in the cage” is entertainment – – – where the antics of law enforcement is a daily TV side show – – – where students protesting the antics of America’s toughest sheriff is to be trotted off to his “tent city” – – – wear his pink underwear – – and eat his bologna sandwiches – – and ‘we’ find this funny and acceptable …

 

With this as ‘leadership’ can anyone wonder why CHILD ABUSE is rampant in Arizona … monkey see, monkey do … we do not hold our leaders to any rational standard so why would we believe that abusing a child is not acceptable after all we all turn our heads when reports surface of the more than 1,000 years of pedophilia tolerated and sanctioned in the Catholic Church..?  We remain deaf, dumb, silent as our Governor appoints her private “kitchen cabinet” Commerce Authority granting them carte-blanche and NO oversight by us. 

 

Since we refuse to honestly educate our citizens we lack the “tools” necessary to ask cogent questions, to know and to understand it is our right to challenge and demand answers from all those we elect.

 

When “we” choose to hold ourselves accountable and responsible “we” will automatically demand and hold all those serving in any elected office accountable and responsible to us.

 

Until then we will allow Arizona’s CHILDREN to continue to be ABUSED   

…Did you really anticipate that corporate health insurance companies were going to cover

…Did you really anticipate that corporate health insurance companies were going to cover us and not enjoy their traditional “perks” … and besides they own Congre$$ and the $upreme Court …

 

Health Insurers: We’ll Deny Coverage for Pre-Existing Conditions if Health Mandate Is Repealed

by: Fatima Najiy, ThinkProgress | Report…http://www.truth-out.org/health-insurers-well-deny-coverage-pre-existing-conditions-if-health-mandate-repealed/1332259202

Health insurers and supporters of the Obama administration’s health-care reform law are currently in the midst of drawing up possible contingency plans in case the Supreme Court overturns the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate.

 

The insurance industry argues that premiums are likely to skyrocket without the individual mandate in place to aid in pushing millions of new enrollees into the marketplace, as healthy people will be less likely to buy insurance, while insurers will still be required to sell policies to all applicants. In fact, a repeal of the individual mandate would increase insurance premiums by 25 percent, according to a study released by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

“The insurance reforms would have to change if the mandate were struck,” said Justine Handelman, vice president of legislative and regulatory policy for the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association trade group.

Health-insurance officials say that if the mandate is repealed, “their first priority would be persuading members of Congress to repeal two of the law’s major insurance changes: a requirement to cover everyone regardless of his or her medical history, and limits on how much insurers can vary premiums based on age.” Their next step would be to “set rewards for people who purchase insurance voluntarily and sanction those who don’t.”

Other possible alternatives to the individual mandate that insurers are weighing:

- Penalize those who enroll outside of short annual windows; deny treatment for specific conditions, especially right after a policy is purchased

- Reward certain insurance buyers, such as offering much lower premiums for younger and healthier people

- Expand employers’ role in automatically enrolling employees for health insurance

- Urge credit-rating firms to use health-insurance status as a factor in determining individuals’ ratings

Although the mandate has been upheld in two appeals courts, it was struck down in a third. The Supreme Court hearings are scheduled to begin March 26, and an official ruling is expected to be delivered in June.

 

…WOW… there is hope

WOW… there is hope and light is being directed providing disclosure on the perverse nature in which corporate owned … USDA … FDA … CDC… serves the American public

 

Agencies Ailing America

03-21-2012  •  http://www.strike-the-root.com, by Brian Anderson

The history of the Food and Drug Administration is one of the many corporatist climaxes in US history. 

… GMO and our US Congre$$ joined at the hip thanks to Mon$anto/Xe and our US Supreme Court …

… GMO and our US Congre$$ joined at the hip thanks to Mon$anto/Xe and our US Supreme Court …

 

Booted Out of Germany – the Ignorance that Could Destroy Your Health

 
Posted By Dr. Mercola | March 20 2012….http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/03/20/germany-rejects-gmo-food.aspx?e_cid=20120320_DNL_art_1

 

In Germany, massive resistance to genetically engineered (GE) foods, both among politicians and the general public, has caused chemical giant BASF to close its German biotech division.

European opponents of GE foods are jubilant.

A reported 75 percent of Germans oppose genetically engineered foods, and few politicians are in favor of genetic technology.

Over there, opposed to the US, it’s actually politically risky to support it!

This explains why BASF is moving its genetically modified (GM) plant science headquarters from Germany to Raleigh, North Carolina…

According to Farmers Weeklyi:

"BASF will transfer some GM crop development to the US but stop work on crops targeted at the European market—four varieties of potato and one of wheat.

The decision, which involves a net loss of 140 highly skilled jobs in Europe, also signals the end of GM crop development for European farmers.

Bayer CropScience, BASF’s German competitor, is working on GM cotton and rice in Ghent, Belgium—but not for European markets.

"There is still a lack of acceptance for this technology in many parts of Europe—[by] the majority of consumers, farmers and politicians," said Stefan Marcinowski, a member of BASF’s board of directors.

"Therefore, it does not make business sense to continue investing in products exclusively for cultivation in this market." The company instead plans to focus on plant biotechnology markets in the Americas and Asia."

Majority of Common Crops Grown in United States are Genetically Engineered!

Folks, this is exactly why we must demand labeling for genetically engineered foods in the US! The general lack of awareness about genetically engineered foods has allowed biotech giants like Monsanto to dominate large portions of the market in the U.S., and the lack of labeling has greatly helped keep people in the dark about what’s really in their food.

"Acceptance" of genetically engineered foods is actually NOT high in the US. It only appears that way because Monsanto has managed to infiltrate the very agencies tasked with regulating them, and are doing everything in their power to prevent any action that might impede their market growth. As a matter of fact, the vast majority of Americans polled say they would avoid buying foods with genetically engineered ingredients, if they knew which foods contained them—which of course is KEY to getting rid of them. It’s important to realize that at this point, the vast majority of common food crops grown in the US are already genetically engineeredii, including:

·         94 percent of all soybeans

·         93 percent of canolaiii

·         93 percent of cottonseed oiliv

·         72 percent of all corn

·         Approximately 25 percent of all milk and yoghurt contain genetically engineered recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH)v

 

(Between 2008 and 2009, 95 percent of all sugarbeet acres were also planted with Roundup Ready technology. However, in early 2010, a court ruled to prohibit further planting, cultivation, processing, or other use of Genuity® Roundup Ready® sugarbeets until an environmental impact statement has been completed. The EIS is not anticipated to be completed until 2013, so the future of GE sugarbeets still remains to be seen.)

What all of this means is that virtually every processed food you encounter at your local supermarket that does not bear the "100% USDA Organic" label is likely to contain at least one GE component—corn (most commonly in the form of corn syrup), canola or cottonseed oil, and any kind of soy or soy derivative, and potentially anything containing sugar from sugarbeet too…

Germany Still Worries about Contamination from Genetically Engineered Imports

Last year, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) also deregulated genetically engineered alfalfa in the U.S., which is a perennial crop commonly used in cattle feed. This will undoubtedly end up contaminating even organic animal products as alfalfa is a perennial crop that can easily spread and end up in organic alfalfa fields…

In the video above, Germany expresses similar concerns, stating there’s already a huge problem with contaminated animal products. Milk, meat, and eggs get contaminated by imported feed containing genetically engineered components. While GE feed is not allowed, the GE content is oftentimes not reported on the label, and therefore ends up being used unwittingly. There, they have realized that coexistence does not work. It cannot work, because gene technology completely takes over. This then makes it impossible to grow organics… a fact that American regulators have still refused to acknowledge or accept.

Most of Europe Breaking Free of Biotech ThreatLast year, Mexico denied Monsanto’s request to expand a pilot planting project in the northern part of the country for fear that the genetically modified variety might cross-contaminate with other native species, which are crucial to Mexico. As explained by GMwatch.orgvi:

"Diversity is important because each strain has not only a distinct look and flavor, but also certain characteristics that make it more likely to survive in given conditions. If only one type of corn existed, it would not be able to be grown in all parts of Mexico, as each part has differing temperature and rainfall."

A couple of months later, in March of last year, Hungary introduced a new regulation stating all seeds must be tested for genetically modified organisms (GMOs) before being accepted into the Hungarian market. When GE seeds were found to have been inadvertently planted, it led to the destruction of nearly 1,000 acres of maize, to prevent cross-contamination to other fields.

But cross-contamination and destruction of biodiversity is not the only threat posed by genetically engineered crops. Both the altered plant itself and the herbicides used on them have been shown to pose profound risks to environmental, animal, and human health.

GE-Triggered Superweeds and Superpests

When the land is doused with a single herbicide for years on end, the ecosystem adapts. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup, and has been used in massive quantities on all Roundup-ready crops since their inception. As a result, glyphosate-resistant "superweeds" are getting out of control, driving out their non-resistant counterparts.

An estimated 130 different types of weeds spanning 40 U.S. states and 15 million acres are now resistant to the herbicide, and thesesuperweeds are spreading at a rapid pace. Extremely hardy Roundup-resistant weeds are now boosting costs and cutting crop yields for farmers across the United States. Compounding the problem is that farmers are resorting to ever higher amounts of herbicides and more toxic varieties in an effort to keep these superweeds in check, but all that does is create ever increasing resistance.

The same goes for crops genetically engineered to control certain pests, such as the Bt cotton sold under the trade name "Bollgard" in India. It was designed to control the Bollworm, but today, the insect has become resistant to the Bt cotton. 

Bt crops appear particularly prone to create "super pests" as they contain added genes for Bt toxins that allow the plants to produce their own insecticides. (This Bt toxin, by the way, has now been found circulating in the blood of pregnant women and fetuses.) Because the plants release the toxin continuously, pests can evolve resistance to it. Making matters worse, other beneficial insects like bees and Monarch butterflies may be negatively impacted by the massive use of toxic chemicals.

Potential Health Hazards of Genetically Engineered Foods

Last but certainly not least are the many potential hazards to animal and human health. Although Monsanto, the world leader in GE seeds, insists that genetically engineered foods are no different from conventional varieties, the research tells of a different reality. Here is just a sampling of the unsavory findings associated with GM foods:

GM peas caused lung damage in mice

Offspring of rats fed GM soy showed a five-fold increase in mortality, lower birth weights, and the inability to reproduce

GM potatoes may cause cancer in rats

Male mice fed GM soy had damaged young sperm cells

Bacteria in your gut can take up DNA from GM food

The embryo offspring of GM soy-fed mice had altered DNA functioning

GM foods lead to significant organ disruptions in rats and mice, specifically the kidney, liver, heart and spleen

Several U.S. farmers reported sterility or fertility problems among pigs and cows fed on GM corn varieties

Bt corn caused a wide variety of immune responses in mice, commonly associated with diseases such as arthritis, Lou Gehrig’s disease, osteoporosis, and inflammatory bowel disease

Investigators in India have documented fertility problems, abortions, premature births, and other serious health issues, including deaths, among buffaloes fed GM cottonseed products

Why We MUST Insist on Mandatory Labeling of GM Foods

Mandatory labeling may be the only way to stop the proliferation of genetically engineered foods in the U.S. because while biotech giants like BASF and Monsanto are being driven out of most parts of Europe, many U.S. states are actually passing legislation thatprotects the use of genetically engineered seeds and allows for unabated expansion! At present, no less than 14 states have passed such legislation. Michigan’s Senate Bill 777vii, if passed, would make that 15. The Michigan bill would prevent anti-GMO laws, and would remove "any authority local governments may have to adopt and enforce ordinances that prohibit or regulate the labeling, sale, storage, transportation, distribution, use, or planting of agricultural, vegetable, flower or forest tree seeds."

While legislation like this sounds like crazy nonsense to most people, such bills are essentially bought and paid for through the millions of dollars Monsanto and other biotech companies spend lobbying the U.S. government each year. In the first quarter of 2011 alone, Monsanto spent $1.4 million on lobbying the federal government — a drop from a year earlier, when they spent $2.5 million during the same quarter.

As mentioned earlier, their efforts of persuasion are clearly made infinitely easier by the fact that an ever growing list of former Monsanto employees are now in positions of power within the federal government.

clip_image001

Proof Positive that GMO Labeling WILL Change the Food Industry

Many don’t fully appreciate the strategy of seeking to have genetically engineered foods labeled in California. The belief is that large companies would refuse to have dual labeling; one for California and another for the rest of the country. It would be very expensive and a logistical nightmare. So rather than have two labels, they would simply not carry the product, especially if the new label would be the equivalent of a skull and crossbones. This is why we are so committed to this initiative as victory here will likely eliminate genetically engineered foods from the US.

Powerful confirmation of this belief occurred in early 2012 when both Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo Inc. chose to alter one of their soda ingredients as a result of California’s labeling requirements for carcinogensviii:

"Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo Inc. are changing the way they make the caramel coloring used in their sodas as a result of a California law that mandates drinks containing a certain level of carcinogens bear a cancer warning label. The companies said the changes will be expanded nationally to streamline their manufacturing processes. They’ve already been made for drinks sold in California."

This is a PERFECT example of the national impact a California GMO labeling mandate can, and no doubt WILL, have. While California is the only state requiring the label to state that the product contains the offending ingredient, these companies are switching their formula for the entire U.S. market, rather than have two different labels. According to USA Today:

"A representative for Coca-Cola, Diana Garza Ciarlante, said the company directed its caramel suppliers to modify their manufacturing processes to reduce the levels of the chemical 4-methylimidazole, which can be formed during the cooking process and as a result may be found in trace amounts in many foods. "While we believe that there is no public health risk that justifies any such change, we did ask our caramel suppliers to take this step so that our products would not be subject to the requirement of a scientifically unfounded warning," Garza-Giarlante said in an email."

Learn More about Genetically Modified (GM) Foods

Due to lack of labeling, many Americans are still unfamiliar with what genetically engineered foods are. We have a plan to change that, and I urge you to participate and to continue learning more about GM foods and helping your friends and family do the same.

Please, print out and use the Non-GMO Shopping Guide created by the Institute for Responsible Technology. Share it with your friends and family, and post it to your social networks. You can also download a free iPhone application, available in the iTunes store. You can find it by searching for ShopNoGMO in the applications.

Your BEST strategy, however, is to simply buy USDA 100% Organic products whenever possible, (as these do not permit GM ingredients) or buy whole fresh produce and meat from local farmers. The majority of the GMO’s you’re exposed to are via processed foods, so by cooking from scratch with whole foods, you can be sure you’re not inadvertently consuming something laced with GM ingredients. When you do purchase processed food, avoid products containing anything related to corn or soy that are not 100 percent organic, as any foods containing these two non-organic ingredients are virtually guaranteed to contain genetically engineered ingredients, as well as toxic herbicide residues.

And what exactly do we see as the future of America we leave to our children and grandchildren …

And what exactly do we see as the future of America we leave to our children and grandchildren …

With the stroke of a pen, President Obama issued an executive order a few days ago that seizes control over all food and food production resources in the nation: Farms, seeds, tractors, livestock, stored food, food processing centers and even the food in your pantry!

It was officially announced by the President, and you can read it yourself at Whitehouse.gov. It’s not just food, either — Obama has seized all water, labor, metals and other resources that he says will be used to "stockpile" supplies for the military and the government.

Here’s my full report on America’s descent into total tyranny. (This is not a drill… it’s really happening.)
http://www.naturalnews.com/035301_Obama_executive_orders_food_supply.html

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.