FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
read more of todays top articles

Excerpt: "But now we come to one of the most contentious questions surrounding the bill: At what cost? Meaning, are S. 510's measures so onerous to small farmers and producers as to put them out of business ... and thus limit the choices available to us eaters?"

File photo, pigs on a small farm New York State, 06/15/09. (photo: Farm Camp)
File photo, pigs on a small farm New York State, 06/15/09. (photo: Farm Camp)

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
0 # MyKisa 2010-11-21 10:32
growing control, growing problems and a growing government that is successful at doing only one thing....growin g
 
 
0 # kamala 2010-11-21 11:17
I read this useful discussion and wrote a comment that addressed the complexity of issues and introduced enviro concerns, staying w/i the symbol counter's limit, however, when sending I was told my comment was too long. How do the progressive forces expect to make any headway if we can't communicate in any depth?
 
 
+2 # csanders 2010-11-21 12:45
Although I am a proponent of effective and strong regulation there remains one essential reason to suppport the Tester Amendment. That is, without the amendment, large scale business will exert lobbying influence in the FDA rulemaking process and thereby impede or eliminate competetion from small scale agriculture.
 
 
0 # GeraldT 2010-11-21 15:15
See? Here's exactly why the Republicans took back power. Progressives are fighting over scale and the Republicans are simply saying: dump the entire FDA, forget this one bill! So much easier for the clueless hordes to remember in sound bites.

The surface innocence of Republican claims continues to amaze me. It's like the world and all its people are totally honest and harmless. After all, no red-blooded (or red state) company would purposely sell tainted food to the public just to make a higher profit, right? I mean, they would never take advantage of their fellow citizens like that, right? And besides, if some tainted food did get out and someone dies, it's their own fault for not being having full coverage health insurance and reaching a medical facility in time, right? A law suit, you say? Why, that's a good idea - you say my food poisoned your husband, but without a third party like the FDA to back you up that's slander against my company, lady, and my paid experts swear my products are top rate. Thank you to your family for their entire net worth - and we'll be taking your husband's fancy grave stone to resell, too, by the way.
 
 
0 # Rick Levy 2010-11-21 17:51
The bottom line is food safety, period. Do whatever it takes to protect the American public from further outbreaks of food borne illness.
 
 
0 # Jody B. 2010-11-21 22:53
Quoting Rick Levy:
The bottom line is food safety, period. Do whatever it takes to protect the American public from further outbreaks of food borne illness.


So, do you think we should all be made to eat "safe" McPlastic food? No thanks! I'll take my chances with small scale organic farmers.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN