Monsanto, “Villain of Agriculture”? Preppers Grab Your Seed Bags

Heritage or GMO?  Only Monsanto knows for sure.The food supply for  United States citizens, and the global export market, are protected in three ways by the federal government.  First is the Food and Drug Administration.    The FDA requires proper product labeling,  that food sources meet certain health standards and that they are safe for human consumption.  Second is the United States Department of Agriculture.  The USDA inspects meat producers as well as regulates crops.  It is their job to ensure meat and crops are safe before they enter the food supply chain.  In the event that something managed to get past one of these two agencies, both the government and the public had legal recourse options which included criminal as well as civil court options.  That is until last week.

President Obama signed into law a bill that specifically protects Monsanto, a bio-tech company, from court cases.  That means if we get injured in any way by a Monsanto product neither the government nor citizens can take legal action against Monsanto.  Indeed, the bill was drafted with direct input from Monsanto to a former employee, Senator Roy Blunt.  Mr. Blunt (R – Missouri) received more than $64K from Monsanto in the form of campaign contributions.  So, let’s see,  Blunt works for Monsanto as an attorney, he runs for political office with the full support of Monsanto, and in return Blunt sponsors a bill that runs through congress and Obama signed.

Where should one begin when analyzing this event?  Precedent? First amendment rights?  Danger to the public?  Big business in bed with government against little guys?  Government approval of big business bullying little guys to force them out of business? Food safety?  Loss of plant variety?

Considering all these issues, it is certainly important that all preppers gather their heritage seeds now.  Since Monsanto and friends have been given a free pass for eternity, agriculture will become more and more difficult.

Tune in for more on this issue.

States Show Concern about Automatic Budget Cuts Effects

Every where you look, the politicians and economists are talking about how their own state and/or city will be affected by the automatic budget cuts set to begin in March, 2013.  Indeed, every state and territory has some to reason worry.  The purse strings may not be totally cut, but they will be shortened.

This isn’t the first time sequestering happened.

In 2003 the military came to a complete stop unless a particular unit was deployed to action.  Training exercises ceased.  Funding for repairs stopped.  Indeed, this process was first described and put into effect in 1985 as a means to enforce budget constraints when congress failed to do its job.  Consider this from the CRS Report for Congress, March 8, 2004:

“During the period encompassing FY1986-2002, the budgetary decisions of
Congress and the President were guided in part by specific goals in statute enforced by
a process known as sequestration. The statutory goals initially took the form of deficit
targets, but later were changed to limits on discretionary spending (first effective for
FY1991) and a “pay-as-you-go” requirement for direct spending and revenue legislation
(first effective for FY1992). Five sequesters were triggered during years in which
Congress and the President did not adhere to these statutory goals, three under the deficit
targets and two under the discretionary spending limits. No sequester occurred,
however, after FY1991.

In many of the years since FY1991, Congress and the President were able to avoid
a sequester by ensuring that it did not enact spending or revenue legislation in violation
of the statutory goals. At times, Congress and the President had to take advantage of
flexibility in the procedures, such as the ability to designate certain spending as
“emergency requirements,” in order to achieve this outcome. In other instances,
however, Congress and the President prevented a sequester that otherwise would have
occurred by enacting into law provisions that intervened in the normal operation of the
process.”

The point is that Congress anticipated not doing its job in 1985 for which they created a plan by which they could forever blame for the resulting sequestering.

Now, the budget cuts won’t be the “fault” of congress.  Instead, they will say they can’t help it when laws take effect.  Members of congress can still sit in their offices with a smug little smile and blame the members of the other parties for not agreeing with them.  Neither party wants to budget.  Both parties are willing to let the sequester happen.  They did it before and will do it again.  After all, it isn’t their fault, is it?

Blame?  The Democratic party, starting with President Obama, flat out blames everything on the Republican party.  The “list” posted on the White House website consists of 52 documents, one for each state or territory.  Paragraph three of each and every document says:

“Unfortunately, many Republicans in Congress refuse to ask the wealthy to pay a little more by closing tax loopholes so that we can protect investments that are helping grow our economy and keep our country safe. By not asking the wealthy to pay a little more, Republicans are forcing our children, seniors, troops, military families and the entire middle class to bear the burden of deficit reduction. The President is determined to cut spending and reduce the deficit in a balanced way, but he won’t stick the middle class with the bill. The President is willing to compromise, but on behalf the middle class he cannot accept a deal that undercuts their economic security.”

Seriously?  Does President Obama expect us to believe 100% of the fault lies with one party?  The stark reality is that Republicans, Democrats and President Obama are all to blame.  They have created amongst themselves an environment that in any other work place could be called unfriendly at best and hostile at worst.  It didn’t just happen during this presidency.  It has happened more than once.  It seems when people get elected to the highest offices in the land, they become difficult personalities.  Working with them has to be a nightmare.

How does all this affect Preppers?  Tune in tomorrow for a run down of how fully prepared Preppers will be affected.

 

References:

The White House List

CRS Report for Congress

“How Automatic Budget Cuts Could Affect Minnesota.” The Journal. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Feb. 2013.

“Automatic Budget Cuts Find Few Fans.” Casper Star-Tribune Online. N.p., 24 Feb. 2013. Web. 25 Feb. 2013.

“A Look at Automatic Budget Cuts in Florida.” Atlanta News, Sports, Atlanta Weather, Business News. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Feb. 2013.

[subscribe2]