Print

[SMASH]

Yet another story of government regulation and bureaucratic over reach by the non-elected in Washington.

______________________________________________________________

The "Food Safety Modernization Act" that was enacted earlier this year gives the FDA almost unlimited authority to decide if food is harmful, even without credible evidence. But farmers who have been persecuted by the FDA for selling raw milk, like Amish Farmer Dan Allgyer, are not backing down. Allgyer's case is going to court.

According to the Washington Times, Attorney Jonathan Emord, who has defeated the FDA in court eight times, is focusing on the deeper issues that this case stems from. Emord says:
 

"We would not be here today were it not for the fact that over the past seventy-five years, the Congress of the United States has delegated away to some 230 independent regulatory commissions the power to make law, the power to execute the law, and the power to judge law violation. That delegation of governing power from Congress to the unelected heads of the regulatory agencies violates the Constitution, which vests exclusively in Congress the obligation to make law".

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/07/06/ron-paul-vs-the-fda-milk-police.aspx

[lordfly]

So Congress cannot create authorities to regulate things? Everything has to be mandated by the 500-some congresscritters directly?

Do you trust Dingell checking your food supply?

[T-M-T]

So Congress cannot create authorities to regulate things? Everything has to be mandated by the 500-some congresscritters directly?

Do you trust Dingell checking your food supply?

Only if he is wearing a powdered wig while doing the inspections.  God forbid we deviate from exactly what the founding fathers intended.  I sure he could fit in the inspections when he isn't coining money, collecting taxes or negotiating with Indian Tribes.

[SMASH]

So Congress cannot create authorities to regulate things? Everything has to be mandated by the 500-some congresscritters directly?

Do you trust Dingell checking your food supply?

First question.
If we had a free market is would regulate itself. Congress can't even regulate itself.

Second question.
No. Look at how much time they wasted figgerin' out how much water a toilet should flush.

Third question.
Umm no.

[SMASH]

So Congress cannot create authorities to regulate things? Everything has to be mandated by the 500-some congresscritters directly?

Do you trust Dingell checking your food supply?

Only if he is wearing a powdered wig while doing the inspections.  God forbid we deviate from exactly what the founding fathers intended.  I sure he could fit in the inspections when he isn't coining money, collecting taxes or negotiating with Indian Tribes.

Why do you hate the idea of free people being left the hell alone to live their own lives?

[ducksoup]

Wasn't there something in the MEN in the last few weeks about a bunch of people seriously sick and I think hospitalized and the source was raw milk?

Seems a small regulatory cost to spare us a huge medical cost down the road is a good thing?

[T-M-T]

Why do you hate the idea of free people being left the hell alone to live their own lives?

People ARE free to do just that.  While you feel the constant pull of that imaginary yoke, I enjoy the fact that I can buy foods without constant worry about e-coli or botulism.

[Baby Hitler]

Yes, it is unfortunate that there HAS to be a regulation for darn near everything.

Otherwise, Joe Sixpack would blow himself up at the gas pump while smoking his cigarette filling up his pick up truck.

You would think that common sense would prevent that from happening, but common sense is no longer all that common.

[sawdust]

First question.
If we had a free market is would regulate itself.

Careful there.   Your implication is that when the number of deaths or lawsuits from tainted food exceeds some financial threshold, then the free market will put that company out of business.   Yeah, that's probably true.   But do you REALLY want to live in a society where free market decisions are governed by deaths and illness?

Frankly, I see the pendulum swinging both ways.  For a period of time, people die, get sick and it's caused by some farmer or rancher doing what is legal.  Voila, Congress makes (whatever) illegal.  So people stop dieing.   Then years or decades later, society completely forgets about all those deaths and illnesses.   Then the start complaining about Govt oversight, and onerous regulations.   

Personally, of all the things I want my government overseeing, it's the safety of the food I eat.  Regulate away...go for it. 

[sammy]

Careful there.   Your implication is that when the number of deaths or lawsuits from tainted food exceeds some financial threshold, then the free market will put that company out of business.   Yeah, that's probably true.   But do you REALLY want to live in a society where free market decisions are governed by deaths and illness?

Frankly, I see the pendulum swinging both ways.  For a period of time, people die, get sick and it's caused by some farmer or rancher doing what is legal.  Voila, Congress makes (whatever) illegal.  So people stop dieing.   Then years or decades later, society completely forgets about all those deaths and illnesses.   Then the start complaining about Govt oversight, and onerous regulations.   

Personally, of all the things I want my government overseeing, it's the safety of the food I eat.  Regulate away...go for it. 

Let me drink my raw milk. If I die, i die.

[SidecarFlip]

So Congress cannot create authorities to regulate things? Everything has to be mandated by the 500-some congresscritters directly?

Do you trust Dingell checking your food supply?

I don't believe Dinkass can wipe his butt properly, let alone anything else.

[BigRedDog]

Wasn't there something in the MEN in the last few weeks about a bunch of people seriously sick and I think hospitalized and the source was raw milk?

Seems a small regulatory cost to spare us a huge medical cost down the road is a good thing?

Don't know if it was in the MEN or not duck...  but I posted an article a few weeks agon on Q Fever which is what you can get from drinking unpasteurized milk...  There was at least one case right here in Monroe county...

http://monroetalks.com/forum/index.php?topic=23935.msg525280#msg525280

[BigRedDog]

Let me drink my raw milk. If I die, i die.

You can have my share sammy...   

and you can even walk down the middle of northbound I-75 (blindfolded) while you drink it

[sawdust]

Let me drink my raw milk. If I die, i die.

Fine...more power to ya.  Drink from the udder if you choose.   But don't expect me to feed that same milk to my kids or grandkids.   It's perfectly fine for each of us to make our own decisions about the safety of (whatever) for ourselves.  But when folks start forcing that same cavalier attitude on MY kids, I take exception.   When your choices for your own safety, or risk of injury are extended to the rest of society, I think you need to have your head examined.

[SMASH]

Wasn't there something in the MEN in the last few weeks about a bunch of people seriously sick and I think hospitalized and the source was raw milk?

Seems a small regulatory cost to spare us a huge medical cost down the road is a good thing?

Spare us?

Who's us?

How many "small regulatory costs" can we afford?

Who's we?

You make a lot of assumptions here.