criossposted from unbossed
It's hard to imagine that any politician whose nomination for a federal cabinet position would relish having to take a stand on a controversial bill and one that has been heavily financed by agribusiness.
But last week, in the midst of her confirmation hearings and vote for Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kansas Governor Sebelius vetoed HB 2121, a bill that would have used milk labeling as a way to crush dairy farmers who do not inject their dairy cows with rBST / rBGH / Posilac - artificial hormones - and take away the right of Kansans to have information that will let them choose what foods to serve themselves and their families.
But the fight is not over.
By vetoing the bill, Sebelius took a stand for the right of people to know how their food is produced so they can choose what they and their families will eat.
There is a strong possibility that there are enough votes in the Kansas legislature to override that veto and take away the right of Kansans to choose their food based on knowledge. When the food in question is milk, that is taking away the right and ability of parents to make choices about a food that is likely a part of their children's diets.
Here is information about the vote and how you can weigh in on this important issue. This is not just a Kansas issue. It is one that has been rolling through state after state.
First some background.
The bill was introduced about five months ago, and contained a number of provisions. The bill's provisions were discussed and reasons for opposing it were discussed in detail here.
Two of those provisions are of particular concern, because they include strict rules that make it virtually impossible to include anything on a label that says milk is not produced using rBST.
- Dairy farmers may not include this information unless they go through an expensive process to ensure they are telling the truth about how their milk is produced. The process is far stricter than that required for those who may label their food organic.
- If a milk label says rBST is not used it must also include a statement that the FDA has determined that no significant difference has been shown between milk derived from rbSTsupplemented and non-rbST supplemented cows.
While these may seem reasonable, it is very hard to prove a negative, and the FDA's statements about rBST are controversial as a result of Monsanto-connected people in power at the FDA at the time this decision was made.
Here are the votes on the bill. The votes were not strictly by party lines. In the Senate, for example, six Republicans voted against the bill – Bruce, Owens, Pilcher-Cook, Reitz, Schmidt V, Schodorf, Teichman and Vratil. One Democrat voted for the bill, Lee, and another Democrat, Steineger, didn’t vote.
HOUSE VOTE ON HB 2121
On roll call, the vote was: Yeas 82; Nays 42; Present but not voting: 0; Absent or not
voting: 1.
Yeas: Bethell, Bowers, Brookens, A. Brown, Brunk, Burgess, Carlson, Craft, Crum, DeGraaf, Faber, Feuerborn, Fund, D. Gatewood, George, Goico, Goyle, Grange, Grant, Hawk, Hayzlett, Henry, Hermanson, Hineman, C. Holmes, M. Holmes, Horst, Huebert, Jack, Johnson, Kelley, Kerschen, Kiegerl, King, Kleeb, Knox, Light, Lukert, Maloney, Mast, McCray-Miller, McLeland, Merrick, Morrison, Moxley, Myers, Navinsky, Neufeld, O’Neal, Olson, Otto, Palmer, Patton, Pauls, Phelps, Pottorff, Powell, Prescott, Proehl, Rhoades, Roth, Sawyer, Schroeder, Schwab, Schwartz, Siegfreid, Sloan, Swanson, Swenson, Tafanelli, Talia, Trimmer, Vickrey, Ward, Watkins, Wetta, Whitham, Williams, B. Wolf, K. Wolf, Worley, Yoder.
Nays: Aurand, Ballard, Benlon, T. Brown, Burroughs, Carlin, Colloton, Crow, Davis, Dillmore, Donohoe, Finney, Flaharty, Frownfelter, Furtado, Garcia, S. Gatewood, Gordon, Henderson, Huntington, Kinzer, Kuether, Landwehr, Lane, Loganbill, Long, Mah, Menghini, Neighbor, O’Brien, Peck, Peterson, Quigley, Rardin, Ruiz, Seiwert, Shultz, Slattery, Spalding, Svaty, Tietze, Winn.
Present but not voting: None.
Absent or not voting: Hill.
SENATE VOTE ON HB 2121
On roll call, the vote was: Yeas 22, Nays 15, Present and Passing 1, Absent or Not Voting 2.
Yeas: Abrams, Apple, Barnett, Brownlee, Brungardt, Colyer, Donovan, Emler, Huelskamp, Kelsey, Lee, Lynn, Marshall, Masterson, McGinn, Morris, Ostmeyer, Petersen, Pyle, Schmidt D, Taddiken, Umbarger.
Nays: Bruce, Faust-Goudeau, Francisco, Haley, Hensley, Holland, Kelly, Kultala, Owens, Pilcher-Cook, Reitz, Schmidt V, Schodorf, Teichman, Vratil.
Present and Passing: Wagle.
Absent or Not Voting: Steineger, Wysong.
The Conference Committee report was adopted.
The chances of a veto override - banning milk labeling - is high
The vote in the Senate was 22-15 to pass the bill. There are 40 members, so the 2/3 needed for an over-ride would be 27. There are 31 Republicans and only 9 Democrats. Issues such as abortion may muddy this issue and push people to become partisan and vote to override their Democratic governor's veto.
The vote in the House was 82-42. There are 125 members, so it would take 84 votes to override. It would be easy to get an override vote. It is interesting that the vote is that close, given that the Senate split is 77 Republican and 48 Democrats.
These votes show that this issue is more complex than party politics. Issues such as coal and abortion are making this a hot issue.
Kansans
Please contact your state legislators and ask them to vote against overriding the Governor's veto. Let them know you oppose this bill, that you want to know how the food you and your family eat is produced. You can contact your legislators here.
The message says:
I am writing to encourage you to uphold Governor Sebelius' veto of HB 2121. As a consumer, I feel that the bill creates too many barriers for labeling milk that has not been treated with artificial growth hormones, and is unnecessary.
I want to see labels like "rBGH-Free," "Artificial Growth Hormone-Free," and other compositional claims that tell me about the milk I am buying. I rely on these sorts of labels to make informed choices about the food I buy, and these labels would be prohibited under this bill.
This bill is an unnecessary and inefficient use of government, and will place an extra financial burden on struggling dairy farmers and our state budget. This is now the third time this type of bill has failed in Kansas. It's time to recognize that restricting consumers' right to know is bad for the state.
Please uphold the governor's veto.
Sincerely,
Finally, the precautionary principle matters when it comes to new technologies, medicines, food additives, and the like.
The burden of proof should be on those who assert a new food or medicine is safe - not on proving it is unsafe.
Think of the problems caused by our taking the former rather than the latter stance.
What's the rush?
Does anyone really need milk produced with rBST?
There is only one group that does, and that is its inventor and manufacturer. And Monsanto's track record when it comes to fair dealing an honesty is atrocious. There is also the concern about the placement of Monsanto people in positions of power at the FDA just as rBST was being considered.
People have reason to be concerned and at least not to want to give this or other food additives or medicines a free pass.