Agriculture
Chair: Blanche Lincoln (D-AR)
- Max Baucus (D-MT)
- Michael Bennet (D-CO)
- Sherrod Brown (D-OH)
- Bob Casey (D-PA)
- Kent Conrad (D-ND)
- Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
- Tom Harkin (D-IA)
- Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)
- Pat Leahy (D-VT)
- Ben Nelson (D-NE)
- Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)
- Saxby Chambliss (R-GA)
- Thad Cochran (R-MS)
- John Cornyn (R-TX)
- Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
- Mike Johanns (R-NE)
- Dick Lugar (R-IN)
- Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
- Pat Roberts (R-KS)
- John R. Thune (R-SD)
Appropriations
Chair: Daniel Inouye (D-HI) Ag Sub-Committee
Chair: Herb Kohl (D-WI)
- Byron Dorgan (D-ND)
- Dick Durbin (D-IL)
- Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
- Tom Harkin (D-IA)
- Tim Johnson (D-SD)
- Ben Nelson (D-NE)
- Jack Reed (D-RI)
- Robert Bennett (R-UT)
- Christopher Bond (R-MO)
- Sam Brownback (R-KS)
- Thad Cochran (R-MS)
- Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
- Arlen Specter (R-PA)
Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions
- Chris Dodd (D-CT)
Agriculture
Chair: B Collin Peterson (D-MN)
V. Chair: B Tim Holden (D-PA)
B Joe Baca (D-CA)
- John Boccieri (D-OH)
B* Leonard Boswell (D-IA)
- Bobby Bright (D-AL)
B* Dennis Cardoza (D-CA)
- Travis Childers (D-MS)
B Jim Costa (D-CA)
- Henry Cuellar (D-TX)
- Kathy Dahlkemper (D-PA)
B Brad Ellsworth (D-IN)
- Debbie Halvorson (D-IL)
B Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD)
- Steve Kagen (D-WI)
- Larry Kissell (D-NC)
B Frank Kratovil (D-MD)
- Betsy Markey (D-CO)
B Jim Marshall (D-GA)
P Eric Massa (D-NY)
B Mike McIntyre (D-NC)
- Walt Minnick (D-ID)
B Earl Pomeroy (D-ND)
- Mark Schauer (D-MI)
- Kurt Schrader (D-OR)
B David Scott (D-GA)
B Zachary Space (D-OH)
- Timothy Walz (D-MN)
- Frank Lucas (R-OK)
- Bill Cassidy (R-LA)
- K. Michael Conaway (R-TX)
- Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE)
- Virginia Foxx (R-NC)
- Bob Goodlatte (R-VA)
- Sam Graves (R-MO)
- Timothy Johnson (R-IL)
- Steve King (R-IA)
- Robert Latta (R-OH)
- Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO)
- Cynthia Lummis (R-WY)
- Jerry Moran (R-KS)
- Randy Neugebauer (R-TX)
- Phil Roe (R-TN)
- Mike Rogers (R-AL)
- Jean Schmidt (R-OH)
- Adrian Smith (R-NE)
- Glenn Thompson (R-PA) *=House Organic Caucus member B=Blue Dog Democrat
Appropriations
Chair: Dave Obey (D-WI) Ag Sub-Committee
Chair: P Rosa DeLauro (D-CT)
- Sanford Bishop (D-GA)
* Allen Boyd (D-FL)
- Lincoln Davis (D-TN)
*P Sam Farr (D-CA)
*P Maurice D. Hinchey (D-NY)
P Jesse L. Jackson, Jr. (D-IL)
P Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)
- Jack Kingston (R-GA)
- Rodney Alexander (R-LA)
- Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO)
* Tom Latham (R-IA) *=House Organic Caucus member
P=Congressional Progressive Caucus
Education and Labor
P Chair: George Miller (D-CA)
- Jason Altmire (D-PA)
- Robert Andrews (D-NJ)
- Timothy Bishop (D-NY)
P Yvette Clarke (D-NY)
- Joe Courtney (D-CT)
- Susan Davis (D-CA)
P Marcia Fudge (D-OH)
P Raul Grijalva (D-AZ)
P Phil Hare (D-IL)
- Ruben Hinojosa (D-TX)
P Mazie Hirono (D-HI)
- Rush Holt (D-NJ)
- Dale Kildee (D-MI)
P Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)
P Dave Loebsack (D-IA)
- Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY)
P Donald Payne (D-NJ)
- Jared Polis (D-CO)
- Robert Scott (D-VA)
- Joe Sestak (D-PA)
- Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH)
P John Tierney (D-MA)
- Dina Titus (D-NV)
- Paul Tonko (D-NY)
P Lynn Woolsey (D-CA)
- David Wu (D-OR)
- Buck McKeon (R-CA)
- Judy Biggert (R-IL)
- Rob Bishop (R-UT)
- Bill Cassidy (R-LA)
- Michael Castle (R-DE)
- Vernon Ehlers (R-MI)
- Luis F Fortuno (R-PR)
- Brett Guthrie (R-KY)
- Peter Hoekstra (R-MI)
- Duncan D. Hunter (R-CA)
- John Kline (R-MN)
- Kenny Marchant (R-TX)
- Tom McClintock (R-CA)
- Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA)
- Thomas Petri (R-WI)
- Phil Roe (R-TN)
- Todd Russell Platts (R-PA)
- Tom Price (R-GA)
- Mark Souder (R-IN)
- GT Thompson (R-PA)
- Joe Wilson (R-SC) P=Congressional Progressive Caucus
This news is a few weeks old, but I haven't shared it yet and I ought to. Kenya's a country that seems somewhat open to biotechnology (it's home to KARI - the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute) so it is newsworthy that they choose to reject this particular biotechnology. Below, see a press release about this from Food and Water Watch.
It's easy to get rbGH-free (rbST-free) milk nowadays. Even at Starbucks. Or, for that matter, Wal-Mart. Yogurt, too, since Yoplait and Dannon both went rbGH-free in the past year or so. Cheese has been pretty easy for a while since Tillamook's been rbGH-free for years and even Kraft decided to offer an rbGH-free line (now if only they'd get rid of the milk protein concentrate in their cheese too!). Whole Foods and Cabot also offer hormone free cheese. But how about ice cream?
Breyers and Dreyers have one thing in common, besides names that rhyme. Neither is rbGH-free, and thus far both have resisted consumer campaigns asking them to go rbGH-free. Nevermind that the artificial growth hormone is banned by Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and all 27 nations of the EU. And the American Public Health Association and American Nurses Association also officially oppose rBGH, and the former president of the AMA recommended that hospitals only serve rBGH-free milk. And that it's linked to some human cancers and increased human twinning. Plus, there's the increased rate of mastitis in cows injected in rbGH, which means more antibiotics... and more pus in the milk. (Yum. I'd like mine with some whipped cream, chocolate sauce, and a cherry on top.)
Breyers and Dreyer's are the two largest ice cream producers. Breyers, whose labels say "All natural," also includes Good Humor, Klondike Bars and Popsicle. Dreyer's includes Haagen Dazs, Nestle and Edy's.
Breyers and Dreyer's have already received thousands of messages asking them to go rBGH-free, but haven't responded yet. We know they're having discussions on this and every e-mail brings us one step closer to their doing the right thing. So here's what you can do:
Breyers:Email U.S. Ice Cream (which includes Breyers, Good Humor, Klondike Bars, and Popsicle) or call them using the numbers below:
BREYERS: (800) 931-2826
GOOD HUMOR: (800) 931-2854
KLONDIKE: (800) 931-2830
POPSICLE: (800) 931-2849
Dreyers: Email Dreyers (which includes Haagen Dazs, Nestle, and Edy's) or call:
DREYER'S (877) 437-3937
EDY's (888) 590-3397
NESTLE (800) 225-2270
HAAGEN DAZS (800) 225-2270
And in the meantime, eat organic ice cream or go for Ben & Jerry's (which is already rbGH-free).
Turns out that Elanco-sponsored authors admit falsely claiming rbGH safety endorsement. Elanco's the Eli Lilly subsidiary that sells animal drugs like rbGH and ractopamine. They bought rbGH from Monsanto a few years ago. Recently, they put out a paper on how safe rbGH is. This paper was "commissioned through PR company Porter-Novelli, from eight prominent experts and academics in medicine and dairy science." It wasn't peer-reviewed but, you know... whatever. Just because Elanco paid the authors to write it doesn't mean that it's biased.
However, it turns out that a few bits of the paper are actually false.
The paper claims, for instance, that the safety of rbGH is endorsed by the American Medical Association (AMA)... [The] AMA has no policy on rbGH and offers no such endorsement. Instead, they note the April 2008 AMA newsletter cites past president Ron Davis saying "Hospitals should......use milk produced without recombinant bovine growth hormone".
The paper also lists false endorsements by the American Cancer Society and the American Association of Pediatrics. How did such false statements get into the paper? One of the authors, David Clemmons, called the AMA, the AAP and the ACS endorsements "technically untrue". He says, "We counted endorsement as failure to oppose rbGH."
There is, however, one endorsement that I don't doubt is true. The American Council on Science and Health. They might sound scientific and unbiased, but check out their long list of corporate sponsors. Ditto on the International Food Information Council. So, don't worry Elanco, we believe that any endorsement you claim you've gotten from a corporate funded astroturf organization is totally true.
Additionally, the Center for Food Safety put out a press release on this matter, which I've included below.
What do consumers want? Cheap, tasty, convenient food. And they DON'T care how you produce it. That's what Elanco, subsidiary of Eli Lilly, maker of rbGH and other animal drugs says in a white paper available from their website. Details below.
Today I sat on a panel at the International Dairy Food Association's Dairy Forum. The topic was "What do consumers want - really?" The panelists were a longtime Washington Post writer who now works at Powell Tate, Sally Squires, an exec from Sargento cheese, Louie Gentine, and a marketing guru, Tom Nagle. I told the audience that I wore a red shirt so that if they threw rotten tomatoes at me at least the stains would blend in. I was very much there to represent a minority opinion that was probably not a welcome one for many dairy processors. It was an extremely pleasant and lively debate and I really enjoyed each of the panelists and everyone from IDFA that I met here at the Dairy Forum.
Believe it or not, Walter Cronkite actually made a fabulous contribution to our movement. This was news to me, which I found out upon his passing last week. The story is in line with everything else that has been said about him, and about his devotion to journalism.
[USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service administrator Michael] Michener declined to discuss the department's strategy for promoting international acceptance of biotechnology, saying it's still in the works. But he argues that the Obama administration can be more effective than the Bush administration, which went to the World Trade Organization to unsuccessfully break European resistance to the genetically engineered crops.
Vilsack is taking a lighter approach, Michener said, recounting a discussion the secretary had with his German counterpart.
Vilsack "made this very creative argument on how during the eight years of the Bush administration, the Europeans would lecture us on how we had to bring our citizens along and educate them on the science of climate change. He turned that around and said, 'You know, you've got a similar responsibility on biotech'" Michener said.
Forbes just published a piece called How Now, Green Cow? about the recent study "proving" that factory farming dairy is "better" for the environment. I wrote about the study here.
I just sent them the following letter, and I would very much appreciate if you'd send them a piece of your mind as well. Send your letters to readers at forbes.com and be sure to include your name, address, and phone number. Keep your letters brief - under 150 words is best.
I am deeply concerned over the article "How Now, Green Cow?" which summarizes the recent Cornell study that claims factory farming produces more environmentally-friendly milk. The study's conclusion is tainted by the affiliations of its authors. The Cornell researchers involved in the study have previously received funding from Monsanto, the original owner of rbGH, the controversial growth hormone that makes cows produce more milk, and the study included a consultant from Elanco, the current owner of rbGH.
Comparing 1944 milk production to modern day organic production is quite misleading. Due to advances in breeding and other production practices, organic cows produced an average of 13,601 lbs of milk per cow in 2005 according to a recent USDA report on emerging trends in organics compared to 4555 lbs of milk in 1944. That is just one of many flaws in the study and its conclusion that factory farming is "greener" than organic methods.
The usual suspects are still peddling BS about the benefits of factory farmed milk. That's right. You read the words "benefits" and "factory farm" in the same sentence. However the independence of this "study" is tainted by the inclusion of Roger Cady, who once worked for Monsanto and now works for Elanco (the former and current owners of rBGH), on the team of researchers.
Contrary to the negative image often associated with large farm operations, the U.S. population's requirements for dairy products is best fulfilled and most sustainable through the application of modern agricultural techniques, a just-released study has shown.
The study, conducted by Drs. Jude Capper and Dale Bauman of Cornell University and Roger Cady, formerly of Monsanto and now with Elanco Animal Health, compared the environmental impact of modern (2007) U.S. dairy production with that of dairy systems in 1944...
Among the findings were that modern dairy practices require considerably fewer resources than dairying in 1944 with 21% of animals, 23% of feedstuffs, 35% of the water and only 10% of the land required to produce the same 1 billion kg of milk.
Waste outputs were similarly reduced, with modern dairy systems producing 24% of the manure, 43% of CH4 and 56% of N2O per billion kg of milk, compared with equivalent milk from historical dairying.
What's wrong with this picture? There's another factor that has also led to increased dairy output (per cow) since 1944: breeding. In the past 60+ years, we have been aggressively breeding our cows to produce more and more milk. Therefore, the amount of resources required by a 1944 dairy cow to produce a gallon of milk would almost certainly exceed the resources required by a 2009 cow to produce that same gallon of milk today, even if they were raised in the same way.
UPDATE: According to a recent USDA report, organic cows produced an average of 13,601 lbs of milk per cow in 2005, compared with 18,983 for conventional cows. Approximately 2/3 of organic cows were raised on pasture. Comparatively, the cows of 1944 cited in the study produced an average of 4,555 lbs of milk per year.
Yet, according to the study:
In 1944, the U.S. dairy population totaled 25.6 million cows producing a total of 53.0 billion kg of milk annually. It was a system characterized by pasture-based systems with rations reliant on home-grown forages with few purchased concentrate feeds. Draft horses powered the majority of agronomical operations, with only 1.2 tractors employed per farm. Inorganic fertilizer use was not yet widespread; instead, animal manure was used to fulfill crop nutrient requirements.
The researchers noted that many of the characteristics of 1944 dairy farming (low-yielding, pasture-based, no antibiotics, inorganic fertilizers, or chemical pesticides) are similar to those of today's modern organic systems.
Again, they are comparing today's modern organic farming to outdated practices of yesteryear. Even in the practices specified here, obviously the vast majority of organic farmers use tractors instead of horses today. What a slap in the face to today's organic dairy farmers who - like Iowa dairy farmer Francis Thicke - hold PhD's in modern scientific fields and run their organic operations according to the latest scientific & technological innovations. Also, I'd love to see a comparison of the nutrition of 1944 milk compared to the milk of today. Productivity isn't the be-all and end-all goal when you are sacrificing nutrition at the same time.
There is NO reason that the rbGH labeling issue is still out there, but it is. Let me give you a brief history and then I'll provide the latest update (we have news as of this week).
In one of Kathleen Sebelius' last days as Governor of Kansas, she did an amazing and perhaps unexpected thing. She vetoed a bill that would have "made it more difficult for dairy farmers who don't use recombinant bovine growth hormone (rbGH) to label their milk as such" (in the words of Dr. Michael Hansen from Consumers Union). We (and by "we" I mean:
Kansas farms, consumer groups and businesses Catalpa Grove Gardens, Pretty Prairie, Community Mercantile Consumer Coop, Creek Four Mill, Iwig Family Dairy, Janzen Family Farms, Kansas City Food Circle, Kayala Emu Estates, Hesston, Larson Acres, Little Red Hen Bakery, Norm's Flour, Sierra Club Kansas Chapter, Spring Creek Ranch, Wichitaw Food Coop, AllergyKids, Breast Cancer Action, The Cornucopia Institute, Organic Consumers Association, Center for Environmental Health, Center for Food Safety, Center for Media and Democracy, Consumers Union, Family Farm Defenders, Food and Water Watch, The Humane Society of the United States, Institute for Responsible Technology, National Family Farm Coalition, Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility, Organic Farming Research Foundation, Sierra Club, and Stonyfield Farm, Inc.
... and me) have been asking Sebelius to veto this bill since it passed the Kansas state legislature a few weeks ago. I, for one, did not expect her to actually veto it. I am THRILLED that she did veto it and even more thrilled that a public servant who obviously listens to citizens' opinions as well as science will soon take the reins at the Department of Heath and Human Services, which overseas the FDA. The FDA is the agency that legalized the growth hormone rbGH in the first place and I hope to see that decision reversed under Sebelius based on all of the facts that have been revealed since the hormone was first legalized in the early 1990s.
Sebelius' statement from her veto as well as several reactions from various leaders in the food community are posted below.
Kansas Governor and HHS Secretary-to-be Kathleen Sebelius faces rbGH issues everywhere she turns. In her home state of Kansas, a coalition including farmers, environmental groups, and others is asking her to veto a bill about rbGH-free labeling:
The measure requires dairy products claiming to be from cows that don't receive injections of artificial bovine growth hormone to include a disclaimer on their labels.
The qualifier must state that the Food and Drug Administration has found no significant differences between milk from cows supplemented by the hormone, commonly known as rbST or rBGH, and milk from cows that are not.
But Sebelius is headed to the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the FDA. And the FDA legalized rbGH back in 1993. A lot of new science has come out about the hormone in the last decade and a half, and Sebelius might have to revisit the issue once she gets to DC. Will her decision on signing or vetoing the bill be a hint about how she'll act at HHS?
Great news! Baltimore is planting a vegetable garden that is nearly twice the size of the White House garden. The food will go to a local shelter, and Baltimore claims they aren't copying - they had the plans in place long before Michelle Obama announced her garden. (Hat tip Roger Doiron)
Bad news from Ohio. Pro-rbGH advocates won their court case that argued against the legality of labeling milk "rbGH-free." It's been a rough week for rbGH-free labeling, because Kansas has been up to all kinds of anti-labeling mischief too.
The Atlantic tells about the magic of unheated greenhouses. I'm certainly interested. Even the Amish farm I visited heated its greenhouse when the weather got cold.
April is Grilled Cheese month according to the LA Times. Hmm. Do they really live only a few hours north of me? Around here I'm getting geared up for stone fruits not grilled cheese :)
McDonalds might take steps to reduce pesticides in their potatoes. Call me a skeptic, but even though this might be good news it still doesn't make me want to eat their fries.
I haven't given you a sampler platter for a while, so here's an extra long one to make up for that:
Good news from Starbucks - they are switching suppliers for their ice cream from Dreyers to Unilever, which offers them an rbGH-free line. Also, Tillamook ice cream is now rbGH-free. Hooray!
Bill Marler talks about painful sex. Ok, that sounded wrong, I think. Ciguatera fish poisoning (CFP) is a type of foodborne disease from eating predatory ocean fish contaminated with ciguatoxins. It's rare, but there was a recent "cluster" of cases, and the patients reported dyspareunia, or painful sex, as a symptom.
The rbGH-free label ban is coming up for a vote in Kansas. So says Hutchnews.com. In fact, the title of the article says it all: "Milk labeling measure coming up for floor debate; Rep. Powell, in favor of the bill, doesn't think opposition will be much of an obstacle."
