____________________________________
 From: [log in to unmask]
Reply-to:  [log in to unmask]
To:  [log in to unmask]
Sent: 9/27/2013 11:34:45 A.M.  Central Daylight Time
Subj: GREAT JOB EVERYONE


Thanks to grassroots efforts, Monsanto won't have it's way (for  now)!


* Please invite others to subscribe to this forum, where I post action  
alerts and the latest news on biotech and
our Pollinator Protection Campaign, which is a special project of the  
Genetic Engineering Action Team.
*A reminder: Please do NOT hit REPLY. Rather, email me at   
<[log in to unmask]>
Laurel Hopwood, Chair, Sierra Club Genetic Engineering Action Team


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/senate-funding-bill-strips-controvers
ial-provision-on-genetically-modified-crops/2013/09/26/353247ae-26c4-11e3-b3
e9-d97fb087acd6_story.html
Senate funding bill strips controversial provision on genetically  modified 
crops
(edited)
The short-term spending plan moving through the Senate would eliminate  
legislative language that allows farmers to continue growing genetically  
modified crops even if a court has blocked their use.
The Farmer Assurance Provision - dubbed the Monsanto Protection Act by  its 
critics - was inserted into an earlier government funding bill. In  
unusually direct language, the provision in the House bill instructs the  
agriculture secretary to allow farmers or producers to continue to use GM  seeds and 
harvest crops grown with them even if a federal judge finds that  they pose 
a potential risk, overturns their approval, and orders more studies  of the 
plants.
Monsanto supports this provision.
But consumer groups, organic food advocates and others complained that  the 
measure provided a sweetheart deal for corporate interests and a dangerous  
way to avoid court review of government agencies.


The Senate bill explicitly cuts the crops provision, a move that food  
safety advocates hailed as an important victory.
Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) for  
leading the effort in the Senate.
House aides said they did not expect the agricultural provision to be  
reinserted.


As a possible sign of lessening support for the provision, the 2014  
agriculture spending bills approved by the House and Senate appropriations  
committees - but not the full House or Senate - did not contain the  measure.
"We take things year by year," said Jennifer Hing, communications  director 
for the House Appropriations Committee. "This year, a decision was  made 
not to continue it."


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - To 
unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-BIOTECH-FORUM list,  send any message to:  
[log in to unmask] Check out our  Listserv 
Lists support site for more information:  
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp Sign up to receive Sierra Club  Insider, the flagship e-newsletter. 
Sent out twice a month, it features the  Club's latest news and activities. 
Subscribe and view recent editions at  http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]

Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp