USDA seeks method to compensate farmers for GM contamination
I am a long-time reader of Food Chemical News, a weekly newsletter covering a huge range of food issues and invaluable for someone like me who lives outside the Beltway and does not have access to the ins and outs of Washington DC politics.
An item in the August 30 issue caught my attention: USDA secretary Tom Vilsack’s instructions to his department’s new Advisory Committee on Biotechnology and 21st Century Agriculture (AC21).
Get this: Vilsack told AC21 to come up with a plan for compensating organic or conventional farmers whose crops become contaminated by GM genes through pollen drift.
According to Food Chemical News, Vilsack gave a three-part charge to the panel:
1. What types of compensation mechanisms, if any, would be appropriate?
2. What would be necessary to implement such mechanisms?
3. What other actions would be appropriate to bolster or facilitate coexistence among different agricultural production systems in the United States?
Vilsack urged the committee to address the questions in order and not yield to temptation to address the third question first.
“This is a very specific charge,” Vilsack stressed. He also told the AC21 not to worry if their proposed solutions would require an act of Congress or new regulations. “Don’t worry about the mechanism. We’ll figure out how to make it happen.”
Why is Vilsack doing this?
“What motivates me is an opportunity to revitalize the rural economy,” the agriculture secretary declared. “I have no favorite [type of agriculture] here. I don’t have that luxury. I just want to find consensus. I believe that people who are smart and reasonable can find a solution.”
Responding to a question from panel member, Vilsack said the AC21′s failure to come up with solutions would result in “continuation of what we have today…If we want to revitalize rural America, we can’t do it while we’re fighting each other.”
Deputy USDA secretary Kathleen Merrigan cited the recent droughts and flooding as an “overwhelming time for agriculture.”
"I wonder how we are going to prevent the loss of more farmers and encourage young people to take up farming…you have to come up with scenarios where there’s lack of data. You don’t have to figure out the politics. That’s my job and the secretary’s. Just answer the questions [in the charge] and let us carry the water."
Interesting, no?
Could this possibly mean that instead of Monsanto suing organic or conventional farmers whose crops get intermingled with patented GM varieties, Monsanto might now have to pay the farmers for the damage caused by the contamination?
I can’t wait to see what AC21 comes up with.
Related articles of interest:
Want safe meat? Make USDA do its job!
And Now...Genetically Engineered Goats!
Food is cheap at market, but costs a lot elsewhere
Printer-friendly versionAbout the author
Marion Nestle is Paulette Goddard Professor in the Department of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health and Professor of Sociology at New York University. Her degrees include a Ph.D. in molecular biology and an M.P.H. in public health nutrition, both from the University of California, Berkeley.
She is the author of Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health, Safe Food: Bacteria, Biotechnology, and Bioterrorism and What to Eat.
You can read her Food Politics blog here:
Email this Article
Comments
Boomer12k
I certainly hope so!!!! Kudos to this guy!!!
The GM is not natural and is interfering with the natural... so it is AT FAULT...therefore....
But good luck getting it passed all the lawyers and such of Monsanto!!!!
Be well and happy.
Steve
Anonymous
The answer is simple: BAN Genetically Modified crops. Of course Monsanto will take offense. But, because this is the RIGHT thing to do, it won't be done.
alsigirl
We need to encourage the usual petition sites to give the public a voice about this issue. I just shared the article on Facebook. Thanks, Marion, for the heads up.
Robert Ringin
As anonymous said, ban these Frankencrops, even the native fauna walk past them to get to the natural crops.
As for the compensation, 1. Make the seed manuifactuirers pay, or 2. Make the State & Federal equally liable with the seed manufacturers as those instrumentallities allowed the crap to be sold initially.
Anonymous
What this means is that instead of Monsanto suing farmers OR farmers being able to sue Monsanto it will be our taxpayer dollars that get used to repair the damage caused by GMO crops.
Anonymous
Was Vilsack connected to Monsanto in any way in the past?
GM foods may have started out as a way to help people but it is not looking like that at this point in my opinion and Monsanto needs to go back to the drawing board...as in natural solutions.And no one should have a monopoly on seeds or any product...period...end of story.
Jeremy
I wonder if this is not an endrun around possible lawsuits tried by juries friendly to farmers. The object may be to create a governmental regulatory compensation program that will preempt class action lawsuits against gmo makers and farmers.
Google Vilsack and see he is very pro gmo.
This smells.
PJ London
Well recognised "anonymous 8:37 and Jeremy". This sounds like a replay of the "Can't sue the Vaccine maker" solution. The Government will set limits and a mechanism to protect Monsanto from justice. The taxpayer will foot the bill and the small farmer will be squeezed out-of-business. (Payment will never meet the actual damage to his business, of no longer being able to produce "GM Free" crops) I wonder if there will also be a mechanism to compensate Monsanto for the crops which are raised with "GM pollen" pollution, for infractions of their copyrights?
Aidan
@ Jeremy. Agreed, this smells fishy, just like a GMO tomato. It is simply a way for Monsanto to mitigate any kind of compensation awarded to farmers by a sympathetic jury. My money is on some sort of cap being put on the amount that a GMO agri-business can be hit with, which will, in any event, be paid with tax dollars. The corporations are running the game. Drastic times indeed.
Anonymous
It is very simple, anyone can modify something, we do not need brains for that, for in doing bad is simple, the problem with these modifications is that the engineering is never controled and the molecules changes for the worst, what takes brain is to do it naturally, as nature intended that is why people did not suffer the illnesses of today, but again this is a blessing for Big-Pharma to keep us unhealthy. JAM
Post new comment