Genetically modified alfalfa confirmed in Washington test sample

[Divernan]

5. Obama's USDA had to be sued to force it to do Environmental Impact Statements

Regulations are absolutely useless if regulatory agencies don't enforce them. And federal regulatory agencies operate at the direction of Obama. Just google USDA and Monsanto to see how Monsanto is reported to have taken over the USDA.

USDA Greenlights Monsanto's Utterly Useless New GMO Corn
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/01/monsanto-gmo-drought-tolerant-corn

USDA Forces Whole Foods to Accept Monsanto
http://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/2013/06/usda-forces-whole-foods-to-accept-monsanto.html

Is the USDA a wholly-owned subsidiary of Monsanto?
http://www.cornucopia.org/is-the-usda-a-wholly-owned-subsidiary-of-monsanto/

And more from: http://rt.com/usa/monsanto-protection-extended-house-741/

“It is extremely disappointing to see the damaging ‘Monsanto Protection Act’ policy rider extended in the House spending bill,” said Colin O’Neil, director of government affairs for Center for Food Safety. “Hundreds of thousands of Americans called their elected officials to voice their frustration and disappointment over the inclusion of ‘Monsanto Protection Act’ this past spring. Its inclusion is a slap in the face to the American public and our justice system.”

Largely as a result of prior lawsuits, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) is required to complete environmental impact statements (EIS) to assess risk prior to both the planting and sale of GMO crops. The extent and effectiveness to which the USDA exercises this rule is in itself a source of serious dispute.

The reviews have been the focus of heated debate between food safety advocacy groups and the biotech industry in the past. In December of 2009, for example, Food Democracy Now collected signatures during the EIS commenting period in a bid to prevent the approval of Monsanto’s GMO alfalfa, which many feared would contaminate organic feed used by dairy farmers; it was approved regardless.

The biotech rider “could override any court-mandated caution and could instead allow continued planting. Further, it forces USDA to approve permits for such continued planting immediately, putting industry completely in charge by allowing for a ‘back door approval’ mechanism,” the Center for Food Safety said.