I just want to remind everyone that when we talk about legislation, there are many ways to interpret a bill, sometimes it takes the Supreme Court to do that.  Often bills will make references to other laws contained in the United States Code.  When a bill refers to the USC, it is important to look-up the reference to see what is being incorporated into the bill by the reference.

It is also important to do your own homework.  Neither I, nor special interest groups, the press, or anyone else can do that for you.  Read the bills for yourself.  Then make your own decision about which bills you want to support.  They all have drawbacks, they all have good points.  None of them are perfect.  Don't let anyone else, me included, do your thinking for you.

OK I found the article from the last post, done by consumer reports. It lists at which price particular groups will "cut back" driving, whatever that means.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/news/2007/05/gas-price-survey-5-07/overview/0507_gas_price_survey_ov.htm

The article also concedes that the amount that we drive is "inelastic" and cutbacks in other areas would most probably make up for the cost of fuel.

So we can't stop driving, we can't stop eating, so what do we give up?

If we stop buying we lose jobs, if we lose jobs we aren't going to work, if we don't go to work then we don't buy gas.

Doesn't that mean the economy would take a dive?

How does that benefit anyone, including the oil companies?

This is not logical.

db

One of the biggest problems.

Yes, I'm back.  I'm "your worst nightmare" reporting, once again, on the Durbin and DeLauro bills.

Here is a very reputable site for anyone concerned about these issues listed below..

NHF
http://www.thenhf.com
About the National Health Federation
Established in 1955, the National Health Federation is a consumer-education, health-freedom organization working to protect individuals' rights to choose to consume healthy food, take supplements and use alternative therapies without government restrictions. With consumer members all over the world, and a Board of Governors and Advisory Board containing representatives from 6 different countries, the Federation is unique is being the only consumer health freedom organization in the world to enjoy official observer status with the Codex Alimentarius Commission.

THE NATIONAL HEALTH FEDERATION
DECLARATION OF HEALTH-FREEDOM RIGHTS
The following rights and freedoms are basic to all individuals:
 
1. The right to control our own bodies - to decide what food, drink, and medicines to take and use, and what food, drink, and medicines not to take.

2. The right to supplement our diets with vitamins, minerals, herbs, amino acids, and enzymes without government restrictions.

3. The right to receive alternative medicine and treatments (such as those provided by chiropractors, acupuncturists, naturopathic doctors, massage therapists, and clinical nutritionists) without government restrictions.

4. The right of alternative medical practitioners to determine and use those treatments best suited for their patients without government restrictions.

5. The right of manufacturers and distributors of dietary supplements to provide truthful research and label information about the benefits of supplements and other health aids.

6. The right to discuss and disseminate truthful natural-health information. The FDA, the FTC, and other government agencies should not be allowed to prevent health organizations such as the National Health Federation from disseminating this vital information.

7. Freedom from international Codex Alimentarius Commission standards that would greatly restrict all of the above rights on behalf of a small elite that has gained control of governmental health agencies. We view this and other governmental actions as the greatest threats to our health freedom today.

8. The freedom to eat clean, fresh food without pesticides, hormones, antibiotics, poisons, or irradiation.

9. The right to breathe clean air and to drink water free of harmful chemicals such as fluoride.

10. The right to protect ourselves and our children from unnecessary and often dangerous, childhood vaccines.

11. The right of our military men and women to refuse to submit to mandatory vaccines such as anthrax.

12. The right to keep our medical records private and confidential.

THE NATIONAL HEALTH FEDERATION
http://www.thenhf.com/government_affairs_federal.html

This is what the NHF is saying about S.654 and H.R.1148

S.654  H.R.1148
 Both are identical to last session's Food Safety Admin bills, sponsored by Durbin and Rep. DeLauro.

 Sen. Richard Durbin (Asst. Minority Leader for the Democrats) has reintroduced S.654 under the pretext of the need for food safety protection, thereby creating a new federal food safety agency. This is very dangerous legislation for consumers of dietary supplements as it would repeal the DSHEA Act of 1994, and if signed into law, as currently proposed, dietary supplements would be reclassified and regulated like drugs. The companion bill, H.R. 1148, was introduced by Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro. Both introduced similar legislation at the end of the last Congress.

Dietary supplements are now regulated as foods under the Food, Drug, & Cosmetic Act (FD&CA). This bill contains exemption language applying to dietary supplements so that the regulation of dietary supplements would not be reassigned to the new federal food safety agency. Instead, supplements would remain under the jurisdiction of the FDA, which would not have the authority to regulate foods. Dietary supplements would have to be reclassified and regulated as drugs by the FDA.
 
Under the pretext of needing improved food safety protection, this bill would repeal the Dietary Supplement Act (DSHEA) of 1994. Supporters of the bill argue that the current regulatory structure for protecting consumers from food safety problems has not worked, and that a new federal bureaucracy is needed. The real issue is holding government bureaucrats at the FDA and USDA accountable for the performance of their existing food safety responsibilities. Creating another federal bureaucracy is not the solution to our food safety protection needs.

I read both bills,researched it myself, and support what the NHF is saying.

Press Release
SENATE HAS PASSED S.  1082
Durbin Food Agency Idea Dropped and Meaningless Reimportation Added
http://www.thenhf.com/press_releases/pr_10_may_2007.html

When the Senate started its consideration of  S.1082, Senator Dick Durbin wanted to amend this bill and add his Food Safety Bill, S.645, to this bill.  Acting on Durbin's intentions, the NHF's lobbyist contacted Senators and their staff members on the Senate HELP committee to register our objections to allowing this to occur. Subsequent pressure on Durbin by Democratic and Republican members led to Durbin having to withdraw this attempt.  In its place, Durbin had to settle for a substantially reduced scope of change.  This prevented yet another attempt by Durbin to have the FDA regulate supplements more like it regulates over-the-counter and prescription drugs.  This victory, by the way, had absolutely nothing to do with comments sent in to the FDA over its CAM Guidance document – a separate issue.  Some organizations have falsely claimed that these comments were the swaying factor - they were not.

Under S.645, all of the FDA food-regulatory functions would be transferred to a new separate federal bureaucracy, the Food Safety Administration, except that dietary supplements would remain at the FDA.  The underlying food relationship with supplements would be eliminated from the jurisdiction of the FDA.  Under this scenario, without statutory authority to regulate supplements under the separate but related DSHEA provisions of the FD & C law, Congress would have no choice but to change the law and include supplements under a drug-like regulatory structure under the auspicious of a recreated FDA.  Instead, the Durbin amendment, which passed the Senate by a vote of 94 for and 0 against, only makes changes to the non-dietary-supplement provisions related to foods.  The Durbin amendment establishes an early warning and notification system for human food, as well as pet food, establishes fines for companies that do not promptly report contaminated products, seeks to improve inspections and monitoring of imports, and provides more uniform pet-food safety standards.

visit site to read more
http://www.thenhf.com/press_releases/pr_10_may_2007.html

amen to that.

db

From above: "Sen. Richard Durbin (Asst. Minority Leader for the Democrats) has reintroduced S.654 under the pretext of the need for food safety protection, thereby creating a new federal food safety agency. This is very dangerous legislation for consumers of dietary supplements as it would repeal the DSHEA Act of 1994, and if signed into law, as currently proposed, dietary supplements would be reclassified and regulated like drugs. The companion bill, H.R. 1148, was introduced by Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro. Both introduced similar legislation at the end of the last Congress."


THANK YOU, THANK  YOU, THANK YOU!  I've had one individual email  me repeatedly, obnoxiously, because he insisted that 654 did not affect food supplements.  It's nice to know that someone else actually did their homework and read the bill, and followed-up on the different language in this bill. I deleted all my posts on 654 just to shut the guy up. (So, take THAT Mike Bruin --protect pets dot org...and if you want to take this to THE RING, I'm ready for ya!  Call me "uninformed" and "inaccurate" all you want, but YOU are the one who's --bleeping -- wrong!  We all have the same goals; we are all doing our best -- to help our pets and animals, so don't attack me until you can get YOUR facts straight!)

(sorry, just had to get that out of my system.  Start a thread in THE RING, Bruin, and I'll be there!).


 

"This is very dangerous legislation for consumers of dietary supplements as it would repeal the DSHEA Act of 1994, and if signed into law, as currently proposed, dietary supplements would be reclassified and regulated like drugs."

How do we know that will happen?  I haven't been on here much & not up-to-date with that discovery.

Thanks
Kat

Here's Title 21 SEC. 201. [21 U.S.C. 321][/b]  See (ff)

So, you are saying that by removing "food" from the FDA that leaves the vitamins being controlled by the FDA?  They have already been relatively controlled for years  as to what you can state they do.  I'll have to find & read what you are talking about.