Farmer Assurance Provision

Last updated

The Farmer Assurance Provision refers to Section 735 (formerly Section 733) of US H.R. 933, a bill that was passed by the Senate on March 20, 2013, and then signed into law as part of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 by President Barack Obama on March 26, 2013. [1] The provisions of this law remained in effect for six months, until the end of the fiscal year on September 30, 2013. The Farmer Assurance Provision was discontinued in Sec. 101 of the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2014. [2] The bill is commonly referred to as the "Monsanto Protection Act" by its critics. [3] [4] [5]

Contents

History

The Farmer Assurance Provision was originally included as Section 733 in the June 2012 initial draft of the FY2013 Agriculture Appropriations bill in the House of Representatives. [6] : 86–87  [7] With respect to the text of the provision, the online news website Politico reported that Senator Roy Blunt (R-MO) "said he worked with the company (Monsanto) and had a valuable partner in the late chairman, Inouye, who was sympathetic given Monsanto’s large seed operations in Hawaii." [8]

Politico further reported that "a House–Senate compromise of the draft (Agriculture Appropriations) bills was brokered in December to include the House language. It was this package that was then folded into the continuing resolution or CR sent onto President Barack Obama ... for his signature." [8]

Text

Sec. 735. In the event that a determination of non-regulated status made pursuant to section 411 of the Plant Protection Act is or has been invalidated or vacated, the Secretary of Agriculture shall, notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon request by a farmer, grower, farm operator, or producer, immediately grant temporary permit(s) or temporary deregulation in part, subject to necessary and appropriate conditions consistent with section 411(a) or 412(c) of the Plant Protection Act, which interim conditions shall authorize the movement, introduction, continued cultivation, commercialization and other specifically enumerated activities and requirements, including measures designed to mitigate or minimize potential adverse environmental effects, if any, relevant to the Secretary's evaluation of the petition for non-regulated status, while ensuring that growers or other users are able to move, plant, cultivate, introduce into commerce and carry out other authorized activities in a timely manner: Provided, That all such conditions shall be applicable only for the interim period necessary for the Secretary to complete any required analyses or consultations related to the petition for non-regulated status: Provided further, That nothing in this section shall be construed as limiting the Secretary's authority under section 411, 412 and 414 of the Plant Protection Act. [1]

If a biotech crop had already been approved (or deregulated) by the USDA and a court reversed that approval, the provision directed the Secretary of Agriculture to grant temporary deregulation status at the request of a grower or seed producer, to allow growers to continue the cultivation of the crop while legal challenges to the safety of those crops would still be underway. [7]

NPR reported that Greg Jaffe, director of the Biotechnology Project at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, said that "It's not clear that this provision radically changes the powers USDA has under the law." [3] NPR went on to report that "That's an authority that the USDA has, in fact, already exercised in the past. Back in 2010, a federal judge in San Francisco ruled that the USDA had approved genetically modified sugar beets for commercial planting without adequately assessing their potential environmental impact. The ruling effectively banned future plantings of GMO sugar beets—which made up most of the country's crop—and raised the specter of a sugar shortage. So two giant biotech seed producers—Monsanto and Germany's KWS—petitioned the USDA to issue a "partial deregulation": Essentially, farmers got the go-ahead to keep planting the beets until the USDA's environmental assessment of the crop was complete." [3]

PolitiFact reported that Karen Batra, the spokeswoman for the Biotech Industry Organization, said, "The language in Section 735 codifies existing USDA authority and elements of a 2010 Supreme Court ruling that lower courts should not automatically prohibit the planting of biotech crop varieties, or the harvest and sale of biotech crops already planted, if/when their commercial use is temporarily banned because of a lawsuit. This applies to products that have ALREADY gone through the approval process and already been deregulated by FDA and therefore deemed to be safe for human health and the environment. If the secretary believes that the crop at issue poses a risk in any way, he can forbid its use." [9]

The law containing the provision remained in effect until September 30, 2013. [3] [7]

Support

A joint letter from ten agricultural trade and technology organizations [note 1] sent to congressmen Hal Rogers and Norman D. Dicks, the chairman and ranking member of the House Committee on Appropriations, on June 12, 2012, stated that the provision was a response to frivolous procedural lawsuits against the USDA which were attempting to "disrupt the regulatory process and undermine the science-based regulation of [agricultural biotechnology]." [10]

Section 733 provides certainty to growers with respect to their planting decisions. If enacted, growers would be assured that the crops they plant could continue to be grown, subject to appropriate interim conditions, even after a judicial ruling against USDA. Moreover, the language would apply only to products that have already satisfactorily completed the U.S. regulatory review process and does not remove or restrict anyone’s right to challenge USDA once a determination of no plant pest risk has been made. The inclusion of Section 733 is a positive step to ensure U.S. farmers and our food chain are shielded from supply disruptions caused by litigation over procedural issues unrelated to sound science or the safety of biotech crops. [10]

Criticism

Those who opposed the provision referred to it as the "Monsanto Protection Act". An amendment proposed by Sen. Jeff Merkley sought, unsuccessfully, to overturn the provision. Merkley's reasoning was that it "allows the unrestricted sale and planting of genetically modified seeds that could be harmful to farmers, the environment and human health". [11] Sen. Bernie Sanders claimed "Essentially, what that Monsanto Protection Act rider said is that even if a court were to determine that a particular product might be harmful to human beings or harmful to the environment, the Department of Agriculture could not stop the production of that product once it is in the ground. So you have deregulated the GMO industry from court oversight, which is really not what America is about." [12]

Notes

  1. ↑ The Agricultural Retailers Association, the American Farm Bureau Federation, the American Seed Trade Association, the American Soybean Association, the American SugarbeetGrowers Association, the Biotechnology Industry Organization, the National Association of WheatGrowers, the National CornGrowers Association, the National Cotton Council, and the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sugar beet</span> Plant grown commercially for sugar production

A sugar beet is a plant whose root contains a high concentration of sucrose and which is grown commercially for sugar production. In plant breeding, it is known as the Altissima cultivar group of the common beet. Together with other beet cultivars, such as beetroot and chard, it belongs to the subspecies Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris. Its closest wild relative is the sea beet.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alfalfa</span> Perennial flowering plant in the legume family Fabaceae

Alfalfa, also called lucerne, is a perennial flowering plant in the legume family Fabaceae. It is cultivated as an important forage crop in many countries around the world. It is used for grazing, hay, and silage, as well as a green manure and cover crop. The name alfalfa is used in North America. The name lucerne is the more commonly used name in the United Kingdom, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand. The plant superficially resembles clover, especially while young, when trifoliate leaves comprising round leaflets predominate. Later in maturity, leaflets are elongated. It has clusters of small purple flowers followed by fruits spiralled in 2 to 3 turns containing 10–20 seeds. Alfalfa is native to warmer temperate climates. It has been cultivated as livestock fodder since at least the era of the ancient Greeks and Romans.

The Monsanto Company was an American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri. Monsanto's best known product is Roundup, a glyphosate-based herbicide, developed in the 1970s. Later, the company became a major producer of genetically engineered crops. In 2018, the company ranked 199th on the Fortune 500 of the largest United States corporations by revenue.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified crops</span> Plants used in agriculture

Genetically modified crops are plants used in agriculture, the DNA of which has been modified using genetic engineering methods. Plant genomes can be engineered by physical methods or by use of Agrobacterium for the delivery of sequences hosted in T-DNA binary vectors. In most cases, the aim is to introduce a new trait to the plant which does not occur naturally in the species. Examples in food crops include resistance to certain pests, diseases, environmental conditions, reduction of spoilage, resistance to chemical treatments, or improving the nutrient profile of the crop. Examples in non-food crops include production of pharmaceutical agents, biofuels, and other industrially useful goods, as well as for bioremediation.

Since the advent of genetic engineering in the 1970s, concerns have been raised about the dangers of the technology. Laws, regulations, and treaties were created in the years following to contain genetically modified organisms and prevent their escape. Nevertheless, there are several examples of failure to keep GM crops separate from conventional ones.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified food controversies</span> Controversies over GMO food

Genetically modified food controversies are disputes over the use of foods and other goods derived from genetically modified crops instead of conventional crops, and other uses of genetic engineering in food production. The disputes involve consumers, farmers, biotechnology companies, governmental regulators, non-governmental organizations, and scientists. The key areas of controversy related to genetically modified food are whether such food should be labeled, the role of government regulators, the objectivity of scientific research and publication, the effect of genetically modified crops on health and the environment, the effect on pesticide resistance, the impact of such crops for farmers, and the role of the crops in feeding the world population. In addition, products derived from GMO organisms play a role in the production of ethanol fuels and pharmaceuticals.

Roundup Ready is the Monsanto trademark for its patented line of genetically modified crop seeds that are resistant to its glyphosate-based herbicide, Roundup.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jeffrey White</span> American judge

Jeffrey Steven White is a Senior United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">SmartStax</span> Seeds protected against bugs, weeds

SmartStax is a brand of genetically modified seed made through a collaboration between Monsanto Company and Dow Chemical Company. It takes advantage of multiple modes of insect protection and herbicide tolerance. SmartStax takes advantage of Yieldgard VT Triple (Monsanto), Herculex Xtra (Dow), RoundUp Ready 2 (Monsanto), and Liberty Link (Dow). The traits included protect against above-ground insects, below-ground insects, and provide broad herbicide tolerance. It is currently available for corn, but cotton, soybean, and specialty crop variations are to be released. Previously, the most genes artificially added to a single plant was three, but Smartstax includes eight. Smartstax also incorporates Monsanto's Acceleron Seed Treatment System which protects against insects at the earliest stages of development. Smartstax is sold under the Genuity (Monsanto) and Mycogen (Dow) brands.

The United States is the largest grower of commercial crops that have been genetically engineered in the world, but not without domestic and international opposition.

Genetically modified wheat is wheat that has been genetically engineered by the direct manipulation of its genome using biotechnology. As of 2020, no GM wheat is grown commercially, although many field tests have been conducted, with one wheat variety, Bioceres HB4 Wheat, obtaining regulatory approval from the Argentinean government.

The Center for Food Safety (CFS) is a 501c3, U.S. non-profit advocacy organization, based in Washington, D.C. It maintains an office in San Francisco, California. The executive director is Andrew Kimbrell, an attorney. Its stated mission is to protect human health and the environment, focusing on food production technologies such as genetically modified plants and organisms (GMOs). It was founded in 1997.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mendocino County GMO Ban</span>

Mendocino County, California, was the first jurisdiction in the United States to ban the cultivation, production or distribution of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The ordinance, entitled Measure H, was passed by referendum on March 2, 2004. Initiated by the group "GMO Free Mendocino", the campaign was a highly publicized grassroots effort by local farmers and environmental groups who contend that the potential risks of GMOs to human health and the ecosystem have not yet been fully understood. The measure was met with opposition by several interest groups representing the biotechnology industry, The California Plant Health Association and CropLife America, a Washington-based consortium whose clients represent some of the largest food distributors in the nation, including Monsanto, DuPont and Dow Chemical. Since the enactment of the ordinance, Mendocino County has been added to an international list of "GMO free zones." Pre-emptive statutes banning local municipalities from such ordinances have now become widespread with adoption in sixteen states.

Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed Farms, 561 U.S. 139 (2010), is a United States Supreme Court case decided 7-1 in favor of Monsanto. The decision allowed Monsanto to sell genetically modified alfalfa seeds to farmers, and allowed farmers to plant them, grow crops, harvest them, and sell the crop into the food supply. The case came about because the use of the seeds was approved by regulatory authorities; the approval was challenged in district court by Geertson Seed Farms and other groups who were concerned that the genetically modified alfalfa would spread too easily, and the challengers won. Monsanto appealed the district court decision and lost, and appealed again to the Supreme Court, where Monsanto won, thus upholding the original approval and allowing the seeds to be sold.

Bowman v. Monsanto Co., 569 U.S. 278 (2013), was a United States Supreme Court patent decision in which the Court unanimously affirmed the decision of the Federal Circuit that the patent exhaustion doctrine does not permit a farmer to plant and grow saved, patented seeds without the patent owner's permission. The case arose after Vernon Hugh Bowman, an Indiana farmer, bought transgenic soybean crop seeds from a local grain elevator for his second crop of the season. Monsanto originally sold the seed from which these soybeans were grown to farmers under a limited use license that prohibited the farmer-buyer from using the seeds for more than a single season or from saving any seed produced from the crop for replanting. The farmers sold their soybean crops to the local grain elevator, from which Bowman then bought them. After Bowman replanted the crop seeds for his second harvest, Monsanto filed a lawsuit claiming that he infringed on their patents by replanting soybeans without a license. In response, Bowman argued that Monsanto's claims were barred under the doctrine of patent exhaustion, because all future generations of soybeans were embodied in the first generation that was originally sold.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">March Against Monsanto</span> International protest movement

The March Against Monsanto is an international grassroots movement and protest against Monsanto, a producer of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and Roundup, a glyphosate-based herbicide. The movement was founded by Tami Canal in response to the failure of California Proposition 37, a ballot initiative which would have required labeling food products made from GMOs. Advocates support mandatory labeling laws for food made from GMOs.

Genetic engineering in Hawaii is a hotly contested political topic. The Hawaiian islands counties of Kauai, Hawaii and Maui passed or considered laws restricting the practice within their borders due to concerns about the health, the environment and impacts on conventional and organic agriculture.

Monsanto was involved in several high-profile lawsuits, as both plaintiff and defendant. It had been defendant in a number of lawsuits over health and environmental issues related to its products. Monsanto also made frequent use of the courts to defend its patents, particularly in the area of agricultural biotechnology.

A genetically modified sugar beet is a sugar beet that has been genetically engineered by the direct modification of its genome using biotechnology. Commercialized GM sugar beets make use of a glyphosate-resistance modification developed by Monsanto and KWS Saat. These glyphosate-resistant beets, also called 'Roundup Ready' sugar beets, were developed by 2000, but not commercialized until 2007. For international trade, sugar beets have a Maximum Residue Limit of glyphosate of 15 mg/Kg at harvest. As of 2016, GMO sugar beets are grown in the United States and Canada. In the United States, they play an important role in domestic sugar production. Studies have concluded the sugar from glyphosate-resistant sugar beets is molecularly identical to and so has the same nutritional value as sugar from conventional (non-GMO) sugar beets.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Biowatch South Africa</span>

Biowatch South Africa is a non-profit, environmental justice NGO which aims to achieve food sovereignty and food justice for smallholder farmers. Biowatch researches, monitors, and publicizes issues around GMOs, as well as promotes biological diversity, biosafety, food sovereignty, and social justice. Biowatch formed in 1997 and was officially established in 1999. The organization works with community members and the government to ensure the protection of farmer's rights, as well as the continuation of sustainable and ethical food production systems. Biowatch encourages the advance of agroecological practices, hoping to advance farmers abilities and freedom while simultaneously protecting the environment.

References

  1. 1 2 "H.R.933 – Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013". Library of Congress. Retrieved March 30, 2013.
  2. ↑ "Summary of Continuing Funding Resolution | United States Senate Committee on Appropriations". www.appropriations.senate.gov. Retrieved 2020-10-17.
  3. 1 2 3 4 Godoy, M. (March 21, 2013). "Did Congress Just Give GMOs A Free Pass In The Courts?". NPR. Retrieved May 29, 2013.
  4. ↑ Boerma, L. (March 28, 2013). "Critics slam Obama for "protecting" Monsanto". CBS News. Retrieved May 29, 2013.
  5. ↑ safe-act-183411792.html "What's Next for the 'Monsanto Protection Act'?". Yahoo! News. April 4, 2013. Retrieved May 29, 2013.{{cite news}}: Check |url= value (help)
  6. ↑ "FY2013 Agriculture Appropriations Bill" (PDF). Retrieved May 17, 2013.
  7. 1 2 3 Monsanto Protection Act. Snopes.com. Accessed 2013-03-30.
  8. 1 2 Rogers, D. (March 25, 2013). "Big Agriculture flexes its muscle". Politico . Archived from the original on May 29, 2013. Retrieved May 17, 2013.
  9. ↑ "Group says Monsanto law skirts courts, requires approval of genetically engineered seeds". PolitiFact. April 5, 2013. Retrieved May 30, 2013.
  10. 1 2 "Letter to Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Dicks" (PDF). June 12, 2012. Archived from the original (PDF) on May 7, 2013. Retrieved April 30, 2013.
  11. ↑ Knowles, D. (May 23, 2013). "Senate GOP quashes attempt to overturn 'Monsanto Protection Act'". NY Daily News. Retrieved May 28, 2013.
  12. ↑ Knowles, D. (May 28, 2013). "Vermont senator continues fight for GMO labeling, defeat of Monsanto Protection Act". NY Daily News. Retrieved May 28, 2013.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.