HR 875
No, it's not Monsanto's bill
Have you heard about H.R. 875? H.R. 875 was introduced by Representative Rosa DeLauro, a Democrat from Connecticut. It’s commonly called the Monsanto Bill. It is said that passing this bill into law will cause the end of farmers markets, roadside stands, and even organic gardens in general. Amongst people who lead an organic lifestyle, the bill is generally opposed and feared. There are many sites devoted to stopping this bill along with H.R. 759, H.R. 814, and S.R. 425, bills initiated in response to outbreaks of food-borne diseases such as the recent salmonella outbreak linked to peanuts and last year’s salmonella outbreak linked to tomatoes.
Rumors and Half Truths
First, let's clear up a few misconceptions about H.R. 875. Your personal garden is safe. So are farmers markets and roadside stands. This bill was not created to destroy organic farming. The word organic is not even mentioned in this bill.
Was H.R. 875 written either directly or indirectly by Monsanto? No. Not even close. Though some claim Monsanto was the main lobbyist for this bill and others go so far as to state that DeLauro's husband, Stanley Greenberg, works for Monsanto or is “on their payroll,” this is not true.
Stanley Greenberg is the chairman and CEO of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, Inc. This research and polling firm does list Monsanto on their website as one of their corporate clients; however, both Monsanto and Congresswoman DeLauro have stated that there has been no association between Monsanto and Greenburg Quinlan Rosner, Inc. for ten years, a claim confirmed by the company and by Greenburg’s two other companies, Greenberg Research, and Sun Surveys. While we would prefer to see no association between the two, it is important to note a few of the other corporate clients listed on Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research’s website: Dr. Bronner's Magic 
Soaps, the Sierra Club, Oceana, and Comedy Central.
Monsanto not only denies any connection with the bill, on its corporate website the company spokesperson agrees there is reason for concern “…food laws will make it more difficult to sell and process food that is grown locally. That is a legitimate concern—especially for small enterprises that would be hurt disproportionately by the fixed costs of regulation that larger businesses can spread across more revenue.”
Monsanto not only denies any connection with the bill, on its corporate website the company spokesperson agrees there is reason for concern “…food laws will make it more difficult to sell and process food that is grown locally. That is a legitimate concern—especially for small enterprises that would be hurt disproportionately by the fixed costs of regulation that larger businesses can spread across more revenue.”
The Truth about H.R. 875 and Other Related Legislation
Quoted from the actual H.R. 875 proposed legislation:
“To establish the Food Safety Administration within the Department of Health and Human Services to protect the public health by preventing food-borne illness, ensuring the safety of food, improving research on contaminants leading to food-borne illness, and improving security of food from intentional contamination, and for other purposes.”
The idea is that these bills will put safer food handling regulations into place for any “food establishment” including slaughter- houses, factories, and warehouses, that 
HR 875
Issue 9 | October 2009
process, hold, store, and/or transport food and/or food ingredients. This will include significant paperwork, fees, new procedures, and possible inspections of food producers, including small farmers.
H.R. 875 specifically will “…establish an agency within the Department of Health and Human Services to be known as the ‘Food Safety Administration’ to--
H.R. 875 specifically will “…establish an agency within the Department of Health and Human Services to be known as the ‘Food Safety Administration’ to--
(A) regulate food safety and labeling to strengthen the protection of the public health;
(B) ensure that food establishments fulfill their responsibility to process, store, hold, and transport food in a manner that protects the public health of all people in the United States;
(C) lead an integrated, system wide approach to food safety and to make more effective and efficient use of resources to prevent food-borne illness;
(D) provide a single focal point within the Department of Health and Human Services for food safety leadership, both nationally and internationally; and
(E) provide an integrated food safety research capability, including internally generated, scientifically and statistically valid studies, in
Do we support H.R. 875 or the other bills related to it? No!
cooperation with academic institutions and other scientific entities of the Federal and State governments;”
Do we support H.R. 875 or the other bills related to it? No! Not in their current form. While the idea of safer foodis a great idea,
there are several concerns and problems with the bill in its current form including:
- Small farms with their razor thin margins will be unnecessarily burdened by the costs of abiding by new regulations. The bill's regulations could be applied in a one-size-fits-all; manner to all farms including small certified organic farms. This would have a devastating impact on small farmers.
- The legislation is open to too much interpretation, giving the new agency too much power. For example they could have the power to eliminate the already unfairly targeted raw milk producers or to mandate food irradiation.
- None of the legislation does anything at all to deal with the real issue of why our food continues to be contaminated with these bacteria, can make us sick and/or kill us. It does not set new
- policies or specify new guidelines. All of the details are left to interpretation.
Under H.R. 875 the Food Safety Administration has the authority to adopt “preventative process controls to reduce adulteration of food” [Section 203]. Our understanding and fear is that they will issue regulations that limit the presence and growth of bacteria in food through unhealthy means such as requiring that all milk must be pasteurized and all produce must be
HR 875
Issue 9 | October 2009
irradiated. The FDA has long been of the unfortunate belief that the best way to eliminate food borne pathogens in milk is through pasteurization. Even if there is not an outright federal ban on raw milk, it is
reasonable to foresee that raw milk producers could be harassed out of business by the Food Safety Administration since the law designates dairies and farms processing milk as Category 2 Food Establishments, which will receive random inspections on a regular basis.
This bill gives the Food Safety Administration the power to regulate what is "safe" farming. With the purposed legislation’s vague rules and regulations it is not at all unlikely that the Food Safety Administration could impose rules based on what they believe would most likely and easily eliminate food borne pathogens. They could essentially ensure that all fresh food be cooked by pasteurization or irradiation. They could even go so far as to declare genetically modified seeds and pesticides are the safest way to grow food. The more we pass legislation that makes it harder for the small farmer to stay in business, the more we promote big business farming.
When will the FDA address the real problem? Salmonella and E. coli do not naturally occur on produce or nuts. In fact, the E. coli that is harming us does not
When will the FDA address the real problem? Salmonella and E. coli do not naturally occur on produce or nuts. In fact, the E. coli that is harming us does not
naturally occur at all! E. coli naturally occurs within our own intestinal tracks. The problem is, we have forced this naturally harmless bacterium to mutate in order to survive the extremely unnatural acidic conditions of cows fed such an unnatural acidic diet of grains and given so many antibiotics that they have become the breeding ground for the super bug E. coli. Salmonella is a little different. Our inhumane handling of poultry has caused this problem.
Not only do we have cross contamination issues at processing plants and with current shipping and storage facilities that handle meats and nuts and/or produce, we also have animal waste contaminate from one farm to another via ground water runoff and from small wild animals tracking animal feces from industrialized farms into produce fields. If we raised organic grass fed cows and organic range free chickens we would eliminate contamination at the source.
The irony is that while this bill has the power to negatively impact small businesses, it does not guarantee that it will positively impact food safety. Why? Because it is giving arbitrary power to a new regulatory agency with no to a new regulatory agency with no checks and balances in place. Remember that the FDA allowed GMO foods into our food supply without proper testing. They also allow GMO foods and irradiated power foods to be sold without labels. With H.R. 875 we will be creating a new agency and giving it even more authority than the FDA. Why not clean up the FDA and the USDA instead?
The problems with the proposed legislation are many, with unforeseeable, far reaching implications. Knowing the truth about these bills is important. Sensationalism does not help our cause. If people call their representatives to complain about a bill that will make it illegal to grow a garden, they will be dismissed as ill informed. We can’t help but wonder if the abundance of misinformation regarding this bill is purposeful, to derail the
The irony is that while this bill has the power to negatively impact small businesses, it does not guarantee that it will positively impact food safety. Why? Because it is giving arbitrary power to a new regulatory agency with no to a new regulatory agency with no checks and balances in place. Remember that the FDA allowed GMO foods into our food supply without proper testing. They also allow GMO foods and irradiated power foods to be sold without labels. With H.R. 875 we will be creating a new agency and giving it even more authority than the FDA. Why not clean up the FDA and the USDA instead?
The problems with the proposed legislation are many, with unforeseeable, far reaching implications. Knowing the truth about these bills is important. Sensationalism does not help our cause. If people call their representatives to complain about a bill that will make it illegal to grow a garden, they will be dismissed as ill informed. We can’t help but wonder if the abundance of misinformation regarding this bill is purposeful, to derail the
HR 875
Issue 9 | October 2009
public from the true threat.
Call your congressmen and senators. Tell them you don’t want them to vote for this bill because you do not want them to create another government agency with unregulated power. Tell them you want to see an end to the unholy alliance of big business and government, to the revolving door of Monsanto executives running these agencies. The USDA and the FDA are protecting big business, not the American people. If the USDA and the FDA did their jobs, we wouldn’t need another agency.
To read the bill, go to www.govtrack.us. This is a great site for tracking legislation.
Call your congressmen and senators. Tell them you don’t want them to vote for this bill because you do not want them to create another government agency with unregulated power. Tell them you want to see an end to the unholy alliance of big business and government, to the revolving door of Monsanto executives running these agencies. The USDA and the FDA are protecting big business, not the American people. If the USDA and the FDA did their jobs, we wouldn’t need another agency.
To read the bill, go to www.govtrack.us. This is a great site for tracking legislation.
HR 875
| Share | Tweet | Follow Us! |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
