Update on Biogate: Iowa Suicide Gene Bill
by Linda Thieman
This
past Monday, March 14, the Iowa House, as expected, rushed through the
passage of what has come to be known amongst activists as the Suicide
Gene Bill. This bill would take away the right of local
governments to ban the planting of certain seeds, such as those that
have been genetically modified, in order to avoid contamination from
cross pollination and other methods. Some GM crops have been
modified so that all seed produced from these crops is sterile, hence
the name Suicide Gene, forcing farmers to buy new seed every year and
robbing Mother Earth of her ability to reproduce.
The Inside Scoop
The
expectation was that once the Iowa House rushed the bill through (it
passed 70-27), the Iowa Senate, under pressure from Gov. Vilsack, would
follow suit. However, according to Carlos Jayne, a lobbyist for
Iowa Farmer’s Union, there is some resistance amongst Democrats in the
Iowa Senate who feel this “fast track” is too fast. Opponents of
the bill hope to get Democrats to stand up in caucus for delaying
further consideration of this legislation until next session.
Additionally,
it is Jayne’s perception that Vilsack is suddenly less insistent on
getting this gift to big agribusiness and the biotech industry passed
quickly. This, Jayne believes, is because Sandy Greiner
(R-Washington), the representative who introduced the bill in the
House, crowed too soon on the floor of the House, claiming support from
Vilsack.
Jayne
insists, however, that we aren’t winning this battle yet, so “don’t
anyone let up.” If the bill actually makes it to the floor of the
Senate for a vote, it will probably pass.
Contact your Iowa senator here.
“Democracy Works Best at the Local Level”
One of
the fascinating things to come out of this legislative session thus far was the
testimony to the Agriculture Committee of the Iowa House regarding the
Suicide Gene bill given by George Naylor. Naylor is a farmer from
Churdan, Iowa, and is president of the National Family Farm Coalition.
Naylor’s
testimony was moving and eloquent. It’s the kind of thing we
usually don’t get to hear about. Blog for Iowa is including it
here. After the brief excerpt, scroll down and click on more>> to read the full text of Naylor’s testimony.
George Naylor:
As the
president of the National Family Farm Coalition representing the hopes
of family farmers around the country, my remarks today against passage
of H.F. 202 are based on two simple messages: First, don't fall for the
idea that H.F. 202 will be of benefit to farmers, and second, democracy
works best at the local level which H.F. 202 precisely prohibits. (This
applies to siting hog factories, too.)
Democracy
depends on a well informed citizenry. This must be why the giant
genetic engineering corporations have lied so much to farmers and
consumers about their technology. An executive of DuPont-Pioneer
Seed-as recently as two years ago was repeating the misleading
statement that genetic modification is no different that when people
first made bread and beer. You would have to drink a lot of beer to
believe that moving genes from one species to another at will is the
same as making bread or beer, or for that matter, crossing different
varieties within a species. The statements that genetically engineered
crops were the most regulated and studied plants in history also led
citizens to believe that scientists were confident that there was no
need to worry about these products' effects on human health or the
environment. The fact is, the crops were only voluntarily registered
with the FDA and no transparent scientific studies were ever available
for peer review.
The lack
of regulation of these GE crops starting from the federal government on
down illustrates that the democratic process breaks down the further we
move away from our local communities. There has been a widespread
cover-up of the lack of regulation and possible dangers of the
technology resulting in unbelievable power in the board rooms of giant
corporations over our food and the biosphere. I hope the outcome of the
debate on H.F. 202 may ironically open up the larger debate and reveal
this treacherous cover-up — I would call it Biogate.
The fact
is that consumers and farmers all over the world are rejecting this
technology because of the many unknown consequences and the destruction
of democracy that results by cow-towing to giant corporations. Farmers
and consumers are demanding more regulation and say that if national
governments don't respond, then it is up to local action to protect
farmers, consumers, and the environment.
The
National Family Farm Coalition has many groups doing just that with
much success. Our group in Vermont, Rural Vermont, after passing
resolutions in over 70 traditional New England town meetings, has
passed state legislation requiring genetically engineered (GE) seeds to
be labeled and the state to monitor the quantity of seeds sold. Their
Senate passed the Farmer Protection Act unanimously to make the giant
corporations liable for economic loss due to contamination and prevent
farmers from being sued unjustly by the companies for infringing on
their patents. Passage in the House and a signature by the Governor is
expected.
Our
groups in the northern plains, the Western Organization of Resource
Councils with the help of NFFC's Farmer to Farmer Campaign on Genetic
Engineering, mobilized wheat farmers to stop Monsanto commercializing
RoundUp Ready wheat in their states. Iowa State's Bob Wisner testified
as to the huge loss of markets that would result, and representatives
of food corporations in Europe and Japan said that they would not buy
one kernel of wheat from these states if GE wheat were introduced.
These organizations are also pushing for liability legislation
also.
We are
working with rice farmers in California, Arkansas, and Louisiana to
help prevent the introduction of herbicide resistant rice and
pharmaceutical rice. Yes, pharmaceutical rice, despite the threat to
our food supply. The irresponsibility of the GE corporations and the
allure of huge profits demands democratic action to prevent the loss of
markets and future opportunities in raising non-GE crops. Once again,
H.F. 202 aims to prevent this.
Monsanto
expects non-GMO farmers and organic farmers to have buffers to prevent
Monsanto's GE pollen from contaminating their crop. At a big debate in
Sacramento, I asked Secretary Anne Venneman's chief council why the
non-GMO farmers should be the ones to have a buffer. Many of our
farmers in Vermont have such small organic farms, it would be
impossible. His answer: “I can't answer that.” Maybe local people will
take a different approach.
The
opportunities to meet the demand for non-GMO and organic crops are
burgeoning, and it would seem crazy to prohibit local people from
organizing their communities to meet this lucrative demand. For
instance, shouldn't GE seed sacks carry a label telling a farmer or
gardener that the contents are GE seed? If the state or federal
government doesn't require it, then maybe a local community should. As
a farmer looking for ways to improve my bottom line, I know there are
many more opportunities to produce non-GMO soy and corn this year than
in the past. This is clearly a trend. If local people want to stand up
for their farmers when the state legislature or Congress won't, they
should be allowed to.
How can
anyone predict the need for local people to stand up for themselves and
future generations? Passing H.F. 202 would never happen in a truly
democratic society. If it does, it will be a scandal worthy of the name
Biogate. What we need is a food system that serves people and protects
the environment. What we need is local food sovereignty, not H.F. 202.
Thank you.
George Naylor, Churdan, Iowa
Blog For Iowa 