Month of January, 2008

Dispatch from Foreclosure-stan

Submitted: Jan 03, 2008

Come on down to Foreclosure-stan. We got brand-new houses for sale, real cheap, down at the county courthouse. On second thought, wait a few months and they’ll be even cheaper.

Yessiree, Folks, Come on down to Foreclosure-stan—San Joaquin, Stanislaus and Merced counties—highest mortgage foreclosure rates in the nation. If the motels are full, consider spending the night in the branches of the eucalyptus trees on M Street in Merced along with the wintering Turkey Vultures, not far from the auctions. Get a bird’s-eye view.

Local grassroots environmentalists, who once earnestly studied resource-agency biological documents on the endangered species habitats these new subdivisions obliterated, are now boning up on economics, psychology, sociology and local history, trying to get a handle on the growth cult that swallowed Foreclosure-stan.

Both the California Environmental Quality Act and the federal Endangered Species Act contain sections on economic impacts, but in Foreclosure-stan, economics were used solely to override environmental concerns to justify construction of the half-finished subdivisions that now ring the metropolitan areas with new homes, many of them empty. When a region’s only defense against a ruinous speculative real estate boom is a collection of environmental and public-process laws and regulations, and grassroots environmentalists are facing land-use officials obsessed with the growth cult, environmental law and public processes get violated and environmental regulation is corrupted. There is no “dialogue” across that frontier and some judges decide environmental cases on impeccable business principles. Although it is no solace to remember the comment attributed to John Muir – all things hang together – it is particularly apt when viewing Merced, where after a rain you can see Yosemite. All things hang together: the growth cult destroyed much agricultural land and wildlife habitat before it busted. How much damage will have been done to the local economy through loss of farm and ranch land and through foreclosure of subprime loads remains to be seen. Hanging is a kind of suspense.

Foreclosure-stan is contained within two congressional districts: the 11th, represented until 2006 by Richard Pombo, former chair of the former House Resources Committee, and the 18th. Pombo is now a lobbyist and the committee is once again called Natural Resources. But, his sidekick, Dennis Cardoza, still represents the 18th CD, which contains the core of the foreclosure problem: Stockton, Modesto and Merced.

In the old days, we called the area Pombozastan, in honor of the greedy duo’s repeated attempts to gut provisions in the federal Endangered Species Act that would directly benefit their developer contributors. In 2006, Pombo was assailed by former Rep. Pete McCloskey, a Republican and coauthor of the ESA and other environmental legislation from the 1970s, and what Pete didn’t do to Pombo in the primary, state and national environmental groups did to him in the general. Pombo now lobbies for developer interests intent on turning the Delta into a gated community. Cardoza was removed from Natural Resources. He does a lot of backroom work to weaken environmental law and regulation while muttering pieties about more Farm Bill pork for specialty orchards.

Home prices in Foreclosure-stan tripled in less than a decade before the speculative boom busted. In 2006, Merced and Modesto were judged number four and five nationwide for containing the least affordable housing. Meanwhile, our two relatively stable leading industries, dairy and almonds, are having their own problems. Dairy got a big price increase in January 2007 but what with ethanol and drought, feed prices are eating that up rapidly. Foreclosure-stan produces 80 percent of the world’s supply of almonds, entirely dependant for pollination on the timely work of honeybees that arrive early each spring from all over the nation and abroad. Lately, honeybees have developed a disconcerting habit of wandering off from their hives never to return. It’s called “hive collapse,” and learned scientists disclose that there are probably several reasons for it. The largest cheese factory in the country is leaving Foreclosure-stan for Dalhart TX, already attracting some local dairymen to the Panhandle. Hilmar Cheese announced it would leave shortly after it was fined several million dollars for having polluted the groundwater around Hilmar for years. Its interim solution has been deep injection wells to pollute the deepest aquifers of groundwater as a going-away gift to the region. But the giant cheese factory and its supplying dairies will have some real estate for sale, smack dab in the path of growth come the next boom.

The Main Street analysis goes: A lot of people (who haven’t already lost their homes) will lose their homes because their mortgages are upside-down. Banks will lose a lot of money on the upside-down mortgages. Then it will start over again. And this is the upbeat, positive and hopeful view of local business.
Local government, forever planning for the future, is putting out the message that revenues are going to fall, services will be curtailed, and gaggles of erstwhile boom boosters will be dispatched to the state and federal capitols to whine for public funds. This is happening because "development pays for itself."
Local land-use authorities were the only possible obstacle to the dream of turning Foreclosure-stan into San Fernando Valley in one speculative boom. Grassroots environmental groups argued and sued. The arguments and the lawsuits did not convince the local elected officials of anything but the pernicious nature of grassroots local environmental groups. The more compelling the public comment, the more articulate the legal brief, the greater the hostility from authority.

The big winners were owners of agricultural parcels near urban areas. Official farming spokespersons, representing farmers living outside the zone of mad speculative land-price increases muttered righteously about food security, the preciousness of prime farm land, the sanctity of the family farm, water supply and quality. Landowners up close to the boom made their fortunes. People who sold their houses at as much as 10 times what they paid for them a few decades ago also made out pretty well if they retired to the Midwest.

Foreclosure-stan is largely the result of a decade-long con game, in which fabulous propaganda and sales techniques were employed to utterly disorient the communities that inhabit this area. It began when the eternally youthful University of California administration and board of regents spied a $12-billion state budget surplus, which excited its edifice complex. This resulted in a high state of tumescence for 2,000 acres of donated seasonal pasture near Merced. The site was in the middle of the richest fields of seasonal wetlands in the state, wetlands that contained 15 endangered species terribly inconvenient to UC, whose biologists know more about them than any other biologists in the world. UC called upon its deepest flak reserves and declared they were building a “green campus” to serve the under-served minority students of the Valley (big emphasis on Hispanics who, according to UC, won’t leave home). So the first phase of the campus was erected (after numerous lawsuits), solar panels and all, in the middle of the fields of vernal pools. Incidentally, the ardent UC administration let on, it would also be a “high-tech, bio-tech engine of growth” that would transform the entire Foreclosure-stan into – you guessed it! – “Another Silicon Valley.” Then, the sidewalks outside the three Starbucks that miraculously appeared in Merced, the former cowtown, were filled with strangers on cell phones buying and flipping houses. Some made money. Others couldn’t find a chair when the music stopped. Meanwhile, any criticism of the UC Regents’ decision was labeled “anti-environmental” and probably racist, because of all the under-served minority students in the Valley that would now be served. Criticism was definitely anti-theamericanwayoflife, and since it all happened around both 9/11 and the national chiliasm, criticism of a deal like this was sure as Hell godless. So, a “green” UC community college opened its doors as a prep school for real UC campuses. Tuitions rose right along with Valley unemployment. We don’t hear much anymore about great tidal wave of UC applicants concocted by the finest demographic flak c. 2000. Academically, the rumor is that UC Merced is breaking new ground in grade inflation.

Melquiades, decked out in blue and gold, had arrived in Macondo, wagons loaded with nanotechnology. Hot damn!

The demand for the campus, like the demand for the housing, was manufactured by propaganda for the purpose of finance, insurance and real estate (FIRE) special interests along with well-placed landowners. UC Merced was the finest anchor tenant for growth that money and political influence could buy. During the period of the boom, Foreclosure-stan and neighboring San Joaquin Valley counties achieved another distinction: they now vie annually with Los Angeles for the worst air quality in the nation.

All that UC has forgotten about rural California is recalled in a concluding line in Steven Stoll’s Fruits of Natural Advantage:

What unifies these thinker (critics of the land grant colleges like Jim Hightower) is a resistance to ‘commercial valuations of life’ and the conviction that rural places have a value apart from their capacity to produce export commodities. They recognize, moreover, that no other aspect of our relationship with nature is more important than agriculture. Farming remains what it has always been: the central biological and ecological relationship in any settled society, the source of our material production and human reproduction, and the most profound way humankind has changed the earth … the nature we have mixed up with ourselves, in the cultivated lands, in the middle landscape that we can still reclaim. – The Fruits of Natural Advantage, Stoll, p. 185.

FIRE agents were all over the backrooms of Foreclosure-stan land-use authorities, thoughtfully indemnifying them for any legal actions arising from their often actionable land-use decisions. But what we humble local citizens really enjoyed were the crews of “value-free facilitators” dispatched to ease our anxieties and to inhibit any sort of comment that might be construed as the least bit “negative” or “critical” about the speculative boom as it developed, gobbling up farm and ranch land, worsening quality of life, polluting groundwater resources, and contributing to public health and safety dangers (childhood asthma is a growing epidemic in Foreclosure-stan). We were particularly impressed by facilitators that told us we had to be like Ventura and Sonoma counties when some think we are so much like Argentina that Andre Gunder Frank wrote The Development of Underdevelopment about the San Joaquin Valley. Once, Merced County hired a pollster to tell us how she would design a questionnaire to measure the public’s true opinions of the UC campus. Before value-free facilitators could intervene, a member of the audience asked if, given the UC Merced campus memorandum of understanding with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, would she ask what the public thought about the possibility of nuclear weapons research in the county? This is just the sort of local rudeness the value-free facilitators were engaged to facilitate into a gentle coastal fantasy where the eternally young and wealthy gambol through heirloom orchardettes, chewing the leaves of the aromatic arugula and having real pretty thoughts.

We do not live in a value-free world. We’ve been colonized for two centuries on other peoples’ visions of wealth through the exportation of agricultural commodities – everything from hides and tallow to cotton. We’re just full up with aspiration. We don’t need “value-free” New Age organics and a “free-market” credit collapse. What we need are policies that take into account our history and that promote environmental, social and economic justice. We need policies that conserve the sustainable agriculture that exists and reclaims more of it from the factory models and the agribusiness latifundia. We need an agriculture as if the environment, the farmers, workers and townspeople mattered. Those sorts of policies do not begin with the slogan: “Growth is inevitable.” It would be more along the lines of: “Conserve and evolve our agriculture, our farmers, workers and local businesses!”

The Valley does not want to become the Flint, Mich. of agriculture and it cannot become Sebastopol or Oxnard. Merced cannot become Davis, however much our yuppies wish it so, without terrible environmental, social and economic injustice. The consequences of it becoming another San Fernando Valley are incalculably bad.

Foreclosure-stan has a proud tradition of struggles for justice beneath its “for sale” signs, dead lawns and traffic jams. Estanislao led the largest Indian rebellion against Mexican rule here. Joaquin Murrieta fought here. Farmers wrested control of river water from the hydraulic gold miners and formed the first irrigation districts in the state here. John Muir made his greatest stands and founded the modern environmental movement near here. Migrant workers struck here in the 1930s and one of the nation's greatest novelists, John Steinbeck, wrote Grapes of Wrath about that period, near here. Cesar Chavez fasted in the Modesto City jail during the Gallo organizing drive here. Foreclosure-stan has had a strong peace and justice movement since the Vietnam War. The most active eco-justice movement in the San Joaquin Valley continues here. Its mission statement is more than 20 years old and we find no reason to change it even if it has gone out of fashion among those too addled to resist UC and finance, insurance and real estate propaganda that this land is an empty canvas for every knuckleheaded land boondoggle:

CENTRAL VALLEY SAFE ENVIRONMENT NETWORK
MISSION STATEMENT

Central Valley Safe Environment Network is a coalition of organizations and individuals throughout the San Joaquin Valley that is committed to the concept of "Eco-Justice" -- the ecological defense of the natural resources and the people. To that end it is committed to the stewardship, and protection of the resources of the greater San Joaquin Valley, including air and water quality, the preservation of agricultural land, and the protection of wildlife and its habitat. In serving as a community resource and being action-oriented, CVSEN desires to continue to assure there will be a safe food chain, efficient use of natural resources and a healthy environment. CVSEN is also committed to public education regarding these various issues and it is committed to ensuring governmental compliance with federal and state law. CVSEN is composed of farmers, ranchers, city dwellers, environmentalists, ethnic, political, and religious groups, and other stakeholders.

| »

Ideas that won't be discussed at this weekend's California Women For Agriculture/UC Merced/Great Valley Center gala

Submitted: Jan 08, 2008

Below are two lengthy reviews of William Enghahl's Seeds of Destruction, a critical look at the political, economic and scientific history behind the development of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Once again they come to us through an indespensible website for people concerned with agribusiness science and the political economy behind it, ge_news@eco-farm.org. For those of us trying to understand the complex relationships between agriculture, the environment, economics and science in order to better understand the San Joaquin valley, Engdahl's Seeds of Destruction sounds like a must companion book to Jeffrey Smith's Seeds of Deception. The recurring image of the American population acting as "lab rats" for a gigantic, unregulated experiment on the long-term impacts to health of a diet full of GMOs is daunting, as are the stories of corporate thuggery against scientists who have dared to raise any alarm. The specter of world domination of patented seed by a handful of gigantic corporations is chilling and should be of the highest interest in the San Joaquin Valley, where many of the political, economic, agricultural and chemical forms of agribusiness originated.

Badlands editorial board
---------------------

F. William Engdahl's 'Seeds of Destruction'

Review By Stephen Lendman - 1-2-8

Part I of "Seeds of Destruction"

In 2003, Jeffrey Smith's "Seeds of Deception" was published. It exposed
the dangers of untested and unregulated genetically engineered foods most
people eat every day with no knowledge of the potential health risks.
Efforts to inform the public have been quashed, reliable science has been
buried, and consider what happened to two distinguished scientists.

One was Ignatio Chapela, a microbial ecologist at the University of
California, Berkeley. In September, 2001, he was invited to a carefully
staged meeting with Fernando Ortiz Monasterio, Mexico's Director of the
Commission of Biosafety in Mexico City. The experience left Chapela shaken
and angry as he explained. Monasterio attacked him for over an hour. "First
he trashed me. He let me know how damaging to the country and how
problematic my information was to be."

Chapela referred to what he and a UC Berkeley graduate student, David
Quist, discovered in 2000 about genetically engineered contamination of
Mexican corn in violation of a government ban on these crops in 1998. Corn
is sacred in Mexico, the country is home to hundreds of indigenous varieties
that crossbreed naturally, and GM contamination is permanent and
unthinkable - but it happened by design.

Chapela and Quist tested corn varieties in more than a dozen state of
Oaxaca communities and discovered 6% of the plants contaminated with GM
corn. Oaxaca is in the country's far South so Chapela knew if contamination
spread there, it was widespread throughout Mexico. It's unavoidable because
NAFTA allows imported US corn with 30% of it at the time genetically
modified. Now it's heading for nearly double that amount, and if not
contained, it soon could be all of it.

The prestigious journal Nature agreed to publish Chapela's findings,
Monasterio wanted them quashed, but Chapela refused to comply. As a result,
he was intimidated not to do it and threatened with being held responsible
for all damages to Mexican agriculture and its economy.

He went ahead, nonetheless, and when his article appeared in the
publication on November 29, 2001 the smear campaign against him began and
intensified. It was later learned that Monsanto was behind it, and the
Washington-based Bivings Group PR firm was hired to discredit his findings
and get them retracted.

It worked because the campaign didn't focus on Chapela's contamination
discovery, but on a second research conclusion even more serious. He learned
the contaminated GM corn had as many as eight fragments of the CaMV promoter
that creates an unstable "hotspot." It can cause plant genes to fragment,
scatter throughout the plant's genome, and, if proved conclusively, would
wreck efforts to introduce GM crops in the country. Without further
evidence, there was still room for doubt if the second finding was valid,
however, and the anti-Chapela campaign hammered him on it.

Because of the pressure, Nature took an unprecedented action in its 133
year history. It upheld Chapela's central finding but retracted the other
one. That was all it took, and the major media pounced on it. They denounced
Chapela's incompetence and tried to discredit everything he learned
including his verified findings. They weren't reported, his vilification was
highlighted, and Monsanto and the Mexican government scored a big victory.

Ironically, on April 18, 2002, two weeks after Nature's partial
retraction, the Mexican government announced there was massive genetic
contamination of traditional corn varieties in Oaxaca and the neighboring
state of Puebla. It was horrifying as up to 95% of tested crops were
genetically polluted and "at a speed never before predicted." The news made
headlines in Europe and Mexico. It was ignored in the US and Canada.

The fallout for Chapela was UC Berkeley denied him tenure in 2003 because
of his article and for criticizing university ties to the biotech industry.
He then filed suit in April, 2004 asking remuneration for lost wages,
earnings and benefits, compensatory damages for humiliation, mental anguish,
emotional distress and coverage of attorney fees and costs for his action.
He won in May, 2005 but not in court when the university reversed its
decision, granted him tenure and agreed to include retroactive pay back to
2003. The damage, however, was done and is an example of what's at stake
when anyone dares challenge a powerful company like Monsanto.

The other man attacked was the world's leading lectins and plant genetic
modification expert, UK-based Arpad Pusztai. He was vilified and fired from
his research position at Scotland's Rowett Research Institute for publishing
industry-unfriendly data he was commissioned to produce on the safety of GMO
foods.

His Rowett Research study was the first ever independent one conducted on
them anywhere. He undertook it believing in their promise but became alarmed
by his findings. The Clinton and Blair governments were determined to
suppress them because Washington was spending billions promoting GMO crops
and a future biotech revolution. It wasn't about to let even the world's
foremost expert in the field derail the effort. His results were startling
and consider the implications for humans eating genetically engineered
foods.

Rats fed GMO potatoes had smaller livers, hearts, testicles and brains,
damaged immune systems, and showed structural changes in their white blood
cells making them more vulnerable to infection and disease compared to other
rats fed non-GMO potatoes. It got worse. Thymus and spleen damage showed up;
enlarged tissues, including the pancreas and intestines; and there were
cases of liver atrophy as well as significant proliferation of stomach and
intestines cells that could be a sign of greater future risk of cancer.
Equally alarming - this all happened after 10 days of testing, and the
changes persisted after 110 days that's the human equivalent of 10 years.

GM foods today saturate our diet. Over 80% of all supermarket processed
foods contain them. Others include grains like rice, corn and wheat; legumes
like soybeans and soy products; vegetable oils; soft drinks; salad
dressings; vegetables and fruits; dairy products including eggs; meat and
other animal products; and even infant formula plus a vast array of hidden
additives and ingredients in processed foods (like in tomato sauce, ice
cream and peanut butter). They're unrevealed to consumers because labeling
is prohibited yet the more of them we eat, the greater the potential threat
to our health.

Today, we're all lab rats in an uncontrolled, unregulated mass human
experiment the results of which are unknown. The risks from it are beyond
measure, it will take many years to learn them, and when they're finally
revealed it will be too late to reverse the damage if it's proved GM
products harm human health as independent experts strongly believe. Once GM
seeds are introduced to an area, the genie is out of the bottle for keeps.

Despite the enormous risks, however, Washington and growing numbers of
governments around the world in parts of Europe, Asia, Latin America and
Africa now allow these products to be grown in their soil or imported.
They're produced and sold to consumers because agribusiness giants like
Monsanto, DuPont, Dow AgriSciences and Cargill have enormous clout to demand
it and a potent partner supporting them - the US government and its
agencies, including the Departments of Agriculture and State, FDA, EPA and
even the defense establishment. World Trade Organization (WTO) Trade-Related
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) patent rules also back them
along with industry-friendly WTO rulings like the February 7, 2006 one.

It favored a US challenge against European GMO regulatory policies in
spite of strong consumer sentiment against these foods and ingredients on
the continent. It also violated the Biosafety Protocol that should let
nations regulate these products in the public interest, but it doesn't
because WTO trade rules sabotaged it. Nonetheless, anti-GMO activism
persists, consumers still have a say, and there are hundreds of GMO-free
zones around the world, including in the US. That and more is needed to take
on the agribusiness giants that so far have everything going their way.

In "Seeds of Deception," Jeffrey Smith did a masterful job explaining the
dangers of GM foods and ingredients. Engdahl explains them as well but goes
much further brilliantly in his blockbuster book on this topic. It's the
story of a powerful family and a "small socio-political American elite
(that) seeks to establish control over the very basis of human survival" -
future life through the food we eat. The book's introduction says it "reads
(like) a crime story." It's also a nightmare but one that's very real and
threatening.

This review covers the book in-depth because of its importance. It's an
extraordinary work that "reveals a diabolical World of profit-driven
political intrigue (and) government corruption and coercion" that's part of
a decades-long global scheme for total world dominance. The book deserves
vast exposure and must be read in full for the whole disturbing story. It's
hoped the material below will encourage readers to do it in their own
self-interest and to marshal mass consumer actions to place food safety
above corporate profits.

Engdahl's book supplies the ammunition to do it and is also a sequel to
his earlier one on war, oil politics and The New World Order and follows
naturally from it. It covers the roots of the strategy to control "global
food security" that goes back to the 1930s and the plans of a handful of
American families to preserve their wealth and power. But it centers on one
in particular that above the others "came to symbolize the hubris and
arrogance of the emerging American century" that blossomed post-WW II. Its
patriarch began in oil and then dominated it in his powerful Oil Trust. It
was only the beginning as the family expanded into "education of youth,
medicine and psychology," US foreign policy, and "the very science of life
itself, biology, and its applications" in plants and agriculture.

The family's name is Rockefeller. The patriarch was John D., and four
powerful later-generation brothers followed him - David, Nelson, Laurance,
and John D. III. Engdahl says the GMO story covers "the evolution of power
in the hands of an elite (led by this family), determined (above all) to
bring the entire world under their sway." They and other elites already
control most of it, including the nation's energy, the US Federal Reserve,
and other key world central banks. Today, three brothers are gone, David
alone remains, and he's still a force at age 92 although he no longer runs
the family bank, JP Morgan Chase. He's active in family enterprises,
however, including the Rockefeller Foundation to be discussed in Part II of
this review.

F. William Engdahl is the author of Seeds of Destruction, the Hidden
Agenda of Genetic Manipulation just released by Global Research. He is also
the author of A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New
World Order, Pluto Press Ltd.. To contact him by e-mail:
info@engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net.

http://www.rense.com/general79/rev.htm

F. William Engdahl's
'Seeds of Destruction' - Part 2
By Stephen Lendman
1-3-8

William Engdahl's book is a diabolical account of how four
Anglo-American agribusiness giants plan world domination by patenting life
forms to gain worldwide control of our food supply and our lives. This
review is in three in-depth parts. Part I was published and is available on
this web site. Part II follows below.

Washington Launches the GMO Revolution

The roots of the story go back decades, but Engdahl explains the
science of "biological and genetic-modification of plants and other life
forms first" came out of US research labs in the 1970s when no one noticed.
They soon would because the Reagan administration was determined to make
America dominant in this emerging field. The biotech agribusiness industry
was especially favored, and companies in the early 1980s raced to develop
GMO plants, livestock and GMO-based animal drugs. Washington made it easy
for them with an unregulated, business-friendly climate that persisted ever
since under Republicans and Democrats alike.

Food safety and public health issues aren't considered vital if they
conflict with profits. So the entire population is being used as lab rats
for these completely new, untested and potentially hazardous products. And
leading the effort to develop them is a company with a "long record of
fraud, cover-up, bribery," deceit and disdain for the public interest -
Monsanto.

Its first product was saccharin that was later proved to be a
carcinogen. It then got into chemicals, plastics and became notorious for
Agent Orange that was used to defoliate Vietnam jungles in the 1960s and
1970s and exposed hundreds of thousands of civilians and US troops to deadly
dioxin, one of the most toxic of all known compounds.

Along with others in the industry, Monsanto is also a shameless
polluter. It has a history of secretly dumping some of the most lethal
substances known in water and soil and getting away with it. Today on its
web site, however, the company ignores its record and calls itself "an
agricultural company (applying) innovation and technology to help farmers
around the world be successful, produce healthier foods, better animal feeds
and more fiber, while also reducing agriculture's impact on our
environment." Engdahl proves otherwise in his thorough research that's
covered below in detail.

In spite of its past, Monsanto and other GMO giants got unregulated
free rein in the 1980s and especially after George HW Bush became president
in 1989. His administration opened "Pandora's Box" so no "unnecessary
regulations would hamper them. Thereafter, "not one single new regulatory
law governing biotech or GMO products was passed then or later (despite all
the) unknown risks and possible health dangers."

In a totally unfettered marketplace, foxes now guard the henhouse
because the system was made self-regulatory. An elder Bush Executive Order
assured it. It ruled GMO plants and foods were "substantially equivalent" to
ordinary ones of the same variety like corn, wheat or rice. This established
the principle of "substantial equivalence" as the "lynchpin of the whole GMO
revolution." It was pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo, but was now law, and
Engdahl equated it to a potential biologically catastrophic "Andromeda
Strain," no longer the world of science fiction.

Monsanto chose milk as its first GMO product, genetically
manipulated it with recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH), and marketed
it under the trade name, Posilac. In 1993, the Clinton FDA declared it safe
and approved it for sale before any consumer use information was available.
It's now sold in every state and promoted as a way cows can produce up to
30% more milk. Problems, however, soon appeared. Farmers reported their
stock burned out up to two years sooner than usual, serious infections
developed, and some animals couldn't walk. Other problems included the udder
inflammation mastitis as well as deformed calves being born.

The information was suppressed, and rBGH milk is unlabeled so
there's no way consumers can know. They also weren't told this hormone
causes leukemia and tumors in rats, and a European Commission committee
concluded humans drinking rBGH milk risk breast and prostate cancer. The EU
thus banned the product, but not the US. Despite clear safety issues, the
FDA failed to act and allows hazardous milk to be sold below the radar. It
was just the beginning.

The Fox Guards the Henhouse

Engdahl reviewed the Pusztai affair, the toll it took on his health,
and the modest vindication he finally got. Already out of a job, the
300-year old British Royal Society attacked him in 1999 and claimed his
research was "flawed in many aspects of design, execution and analysis and
that no conclusions should be drawn from it." It was another blow to a
distinguished man who deserved better than what Engdahl called a
"recognizable political smear" that also tarnished the Royal Society's
credibility for making it. It had no basis in fact and was done because
Pusztai's bombshell threatened to derail Britain's hugely profitable GMO
industry and do the same thing to its US counterpart.

As for Pusztai, after five years, several heart attacks, and a
ruined career, he finally learned what happened after he announced his
findings. Monsanto was the culprit. The company complained to Clinton who,
in turn, alerted Tony Blair. Pusztai's findings had to be quashed and he
discredited for making them. He was nonetheless able to reply with the help
of the highly respected British scientific journal, The Lancet. In spite of
Royal Society threats against him, it's editor published his article, but at
a cost. After publication, the Society and biotech industry attacked The
Lancet for its action. It was a further shameless act.

As a footnote, Pusztai now lectures around the world on his GMO
research and is a consultant to start-up groups researching the health
effects of these foods. Along with him and his wife, his co-author,
Professor Stanley Ewen, also suffered. He lost his position at the
University of Aberdeen, and Engdahl notes that the practice of suppressing
unwanted truths and punishing whistleblowers is the rule, not the exception.
Industry demands are powerful, especially when they affect the bottom line.

The Blair government went even further. It commissioned the private
firm, Grainseed, to conduct a three-year study to prove GMO food safety.
London's Observer newspaper later got UK Ministry of Agriculture documents
on it that showed tests were rigged and produced "some strange science." At
least one Grainseed researcher manipulated the data to "make certain seeds
in the trials appear to perform better than they really did."

Nonetheless, the Ministry recommended a GMO corn variety be
certified, and the Blair government issued a new code of conduct under which
"any employee of a state-funded research institute who dared to speak out on
(the) findings into GMO plants could face dismissal, be sued for breach of
contract or face a court injunction." In other words, whisleblowing was now
illegal even if public health was at stake. Nothing would be allowed to stop
the agribusiness juggernaut from proceeding unimpeded.

The Rockefeller Plan - "Tricky" Dick Nixon and Trickier Rockefellers

Richard Nixon took office at a time of national crisis. Along with
the Vietnam morass, the economy was in trouble after the "golden age of
capitalism" peaked in 1965 and corporate profits were declining. The
globalization phenomenon began at this time when American companies and the
nation's wealthiest families found investing abroad more profitable than at
home because more opportunities were available outside the country.

Food was one of them and was about to be renamed "agribusiness."
Engdahl called it "a paradigm shift" with one man having the most decisive
role - former New York governor Nelson Rockefeller "who deeply wanted to be
President" but had to settle for number two under Gerald Ford.

He and his brothers ran the family's Rockefeller Foundation and
various other tax-exempt entities like the Rockefeller Brothers Trust.
Nelson and David were the most influential figures, and their power center
was the exclusive New York Council on Foreign Relations. Engdahl states: "In
the 1960s the Rockefellers were at the power center of the US establishment
(and) Secretary of State Henry Kissinger (was) their hand-picked protege."
It was a marriage made in hell.

Enter the "crisis of democracy" or as right wing Harvard professor,
Samuel Huntington, called it, an "excess of democracy" at a time masses of
ordinary citizens protested their government's policies. It captured media
attention, posed a threat to the country's establishment, and had to be
addressed. In 1973 it was at a meeting of 300 influential, hand-picked
Rockefeller friends from North America, Europe and Japan. They founded a
powerful new organization called the Trilateral Commission with easily
recognizable member names.

Zbigniew Brzezinski was its first Executive Director, and other
charter members included Jimmy Carter (who became David Rockefeller's
favored 1976 presidential candidate over Gerald Ford), George HW Bush, Paul
Volker (Carter's Fed Chairman) and Alan Greenspan who was then a Wall Street
investment banker.

The new organization "laid the basis for a new global strategy for a
network of interlinked international elites," many of whom were Rockefeller
business partners. Combined, their financial, economic and political clout
was unmatched. So was their ambition that George HW Bush later called a "new
world order." Trilateralists laid the foundation for today's globalization.
They also followed Huntington's advice about democracy's unreliability that
had to be checked by "some measure of (public) apathy and non-involvement
(combined with) secrecy and deception."

The Commission further advocated privatizing public enterprises
along with deregulating industry. Trilateralist Jimmy Carter embraced the
dogma enthusiastically as President. He began the process that Ronald Reagan
continued in the 1980s almost without noticing its originator or placing
blame where it's due.

In 1973, Nixon was in office with Kissinger his Svengali. One
observer described him at the time as "like sludge out of a swamp without a
spark of life....no soul, a slip of life, a kind of ghoul (and) a sort of
lubricant (to keep the ship of state running)." So he did by "tak(ing)
complete control (of) US foreign policy" as both Secretary of State and
National Security Advisor. Further, he "was to make food a centerpiece of
his diplomacy along with oil geopolitics."

In the Cold War era, food became a strategic weapon by masquerading
as "Food for Peace." It was cover for US agriculture to engineer the
transformation of family farming into global agribusiness with food the tool
and small farmers eliminated so it could be used most effectively. World
agriculture domination was to be "one of the central pillars of post-war
Washington policy, along with (controlling) world oil markets and
non-communist world defense sales." The defining 1973 event was a world food
crisis.

The shortage of grain staples along with the first of two 1970s oil
shocks advanced a "significant new Washington policy turn." Oil and grains
were rising three to fourfold in price when the US was the world's largest
food surplus producer with the most power over prices and supply. It was an
ideal time for a new alliance between US-based grain trading companies and
the government. It "laid the groundwork for the later gene revolution."

Enter what Engdahl called the "great train robbery" with Kissinger
the culprit. He decided US agriculture policy was "too important to be left
in the hands of the Agriculture Department" so he took control of it
himself. The world desperately needed grain, America had the greatest
supply, and the scheme was to use this power to "radically change world food
markets and food trade." The big winners were grain traders like Cargill,
Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) and Continental Grain that were helped by
Kissinger's "new food diplomacy (to create) a global agriculture market for
the first time." Food would "reward friends and punish enemies," and ties
between Washington and business lay at the heart of the strategy.

The global food market was being reorganized, corporate interests
were favored, political advantage was exploited, and the 1990s "gene
revolution" groundwork was laid. Rockefeller interests and its Foundation
were to play the decisive role as events unfolded over the next two decades.
It began under Nixon as the cornerstone of his farm policy, free trade was
the mantra, corporate grain traders were the beneficiaries, and family farms
had to go so agribusiness giants could take over.

Bankrupting them was the plan to remove an "excess (of) human
resources." Engdahl called it a "thinly veiled form of food imperialism" as
part of a scheme for the US to become "the world granary." The family farm
was to become the "factory farm," and agriculture was to be "agribusiness"
to be dominated by a few corporate giants with incestuous ties to
Washington.

Dollar devaluation was also part of the scheme under Nixon's New
Economic Plan (NEP) that included closing the gold window in 1971 to let the
currency float freely. Developing nations were targeted as well with the
idea that they forget about being food-sufficient in grains and beef, rely
on America for key commodities, and concentrate instead on small fruits,
sugar and vegetables for export. Earned foreign exchange could then buy US
imports and repay IMF and World Bank loans that create a never-ending cycle
of debt slavery. GATT was also used and later the WTO with corporate-written
rules for their own bottom line interests.

A Secret National Security Memo

In the midst of a worldwide drought and stock market collapse,
consider Henry Kissinger's classified memo in April, 1974. It was on a
secret project called National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM 200) that
was shaped by Rockefeller interests and aimed to adopt a "world population
plan of action" for drastic global population control - meaning to reduce
it. The US led the effort, and it worked like this - it made birth control
in developing countries a prerequisite for US aid. Engdahl summed it up in
blunt terms: "if these inferior races get in the way of our securing ample,
cheap raw materials, then we must find ways to get rid of them."

Kissinger's scheme was "simpler contraceptive methods through
bio-medical research" that almost sounds like DuPont's old slogan, "Better
things for better living through chemistry." Later on, DuPont dropped
"through chemistry" as evidence mounted on their toxic effects and a
changing company in 1999 began using "The Miracles of Science" in their
advertising. The Nazis also aimed big and sought control. Population culling
was part of it that for them was called "eugenics" and their scheme was to
target "inferior" races to preserve the "superior" one.

NSSM 200 was along the same idea and was tied to the agribusiness
agenda that began with the 1950s and 1960s "Green Revolution" to control
food production in targeted Latin American, Asian and African countries.
Kissinger's plan had two aims - securing new US grain markets and population
control with 13 "unlucky" countries chosen. Among them were India, Brazil,
Nigeria, Mexico and Indonesia, and exploiting their resources depended on
drastic population reductions to reduce homegrown demand.

The scheme was ugly and pure Kissinger. It recommended forced
population control and other measures to ensure strategic US aims. Kissinger
wanted global numbers reduced by 500 million by the year 2000 and argued for
doubling the 10 million annual death rate to 20 million going forward.
Engdahl called it "genocide" according to the strict definition of the 1948
UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
statute that defines this crime legally. Kissinger was guilty under it for
wanting to withhold food aid to "people who can't or won't control their
population growth." In other words, if they won't do it, we'll do it for
them.

The strategy included fertility control called "family planning"
that was linked to the availability of key resources. The Rockefeller family
backed it, Kissinger was their "hired hand," and he was well-rewarded for
his efforts. It included keeping him from being prosecuted where he's wanted
as a war criminal and could be arrested overseas like Pinochet was in the UK
when he was placed under house arrest in 2006.

Besides his better-known crimes, consider what he did to poor
Brazilian women through a policy of mass sterilization under NSSM 200. After
14 years of the program, the Brazilian Health Ministry discovered shocking
reports of an estimated 44% of all Brazilian women between ages 14 and 55
permanently sterilized. Organizations like the International Planned
Parenthood Federation and Family Health International were involved, and
USAID directed the program. It has a long disturbing history backing US
imperialism while claiming on its web site it extends "a helping hand to
those people overseas struggling to make a better life, recover from a
disaster or striving to live in a free and democratic country."

Even more disturbing was an estimated 90% of Brazilian women of
African descent sterilized in a nation with a black population second only
to Nigeria's. Powerful figures backed the scheme but none more influential
than the Rockefellers with John D. III having the most clout on population
policy. Nixon appointed him head of the Commission on Population Growth and
the American Future in 1969. Its earlier work laid the ground for
Kissinger's NSSM 200 and its policy of extermination through subterfuge that
was based on a "decades old effort to breed human traits" by the Nazi
"Eugenics" process.

The Brotherhood of Death

Long before Kissinger (and his assistant Brent Scowcroft) made
population reduction official US foreign policy, the Rockefellers were
experimenting on humans. JD III led the effort. In the 1950s, while Nelson
exploited cheap Puerto Rican labor in New York and on the island, brother JD
III conducted mass sterilization experiments on their women. By the
mid-1960s, Puerto Rico's Public Health Department estimated the toll -
one-third or more of them of child-bearing age (unsuspecting poor women)
were permanently sterilized.

JD III expressed his views in a 1961 UN Food and Agriculture
Organization lecture: "To my mind, population growth (and its reduction) is
second only to control of atomic weapons as the paramount problem of the
day." He meant, of course, its unwanted parts to preserve valuable resources
for the privileged. He was also influenced by eugenicists, race theorists
and Malthusians at the Rockefeller Foundation who believed they had the
right to decide who lives or dies.

Powerful figures were behind the effort as well as leading American
business families. So were notables in the UK then and earlier like Winston
Churchill, John Maynard Keynes and others. Alan Gregg was as well as
Rockefeller Foundation Medical Division chief for 34 years. Consider his
views. He said "people pollute, so eliminate pollution by eliminating
(undesirable) people." He compared city slums to cancerous tumors and called
them "offensive to decency and beauty." Better to remove them and cleanse
the landscape.

This was policy, and it was "key to understanding (the Foundation's
later efforts) in the revolution in biotechnology and plant genetics." Its
mission from inception was to "(cull) the herd, or systematically (reduce)
populations of 'inferior breeds.' " The problem for supremacists is too many
of a lesser element spells trouble when they demand more of what the
privileged want for themselves. Solution - remove them with lots of ways to
do it from birth control to sterilization to starvation to wars of
extermination.

These ideas were American, they took root 100 years ago, noted names
backed it like Rockefeller, Carnegie and Harriman, and they later influenced
the Nazis. Hitler praised the practice in his 1924 book, "Mein Kampf," then
used it as Fuhrer to breed a "master race." Supreme Court Justice Oliver
Wendell Holmes also supported it, and consider his 1927 decision in Buck v.
Bell. He ruled Virginia's forced sterilization program was constitutional
and wrote: "It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute
degenerate offspring for crime....society can prevent those who are
manifestly unfit from continuing their kind....Three generations of
imbeciles are enough." This from a noted Supreme Court Justice that would
have horrific consequences still in play. It "opened the floodgates" for
sterilizing many thousands of women considered "subhuman" detritus and in
the way.

JD III was right in step with this thinking. He was nurtured on
Malthusian pseudo-science and embraced the dogma. He joined the family
Foundation in 1931 where he was influenced by eugenicists like Raymond
Fosdick and Frederick Osborn. Both were founding members of the American
Eugenics Society. In 1952, he used his own funds to found the New York-based
Population Council in which he promoted studies on over-population dangers
that were openly racist. For the next 25 years, the Council spent $173
million on global population reduction and became the world's most
influential organization promoting these supremacist ideas.

But it avoided the term "eugenics" because of its Nazi association
and instead used language like birth control, family planning and free
choice. It was all the same, and before the war Rockefeller associate and
family Foundation board member, Frederick Osborn, enthusiastically supported
Nazi eugenics experiments that led to mass exterminations now vilified. Back
then, he believed this was the "most important experiment that has ever been
tried" and later wrote a book. It was called "The Future of Human Heredity"
with "eugenics" in the subtitle. It stated women could be convinced to
reduce their births voluntarily and began substituting the term "genetics"
for the one now out of favor.

During the Cold War, culling the population drew supporters that
included the cream of corporate America. They backed private population
reduction initiatives like Margaret Sanger's International Planned
Parenthood Federation (IPPF). The major media also spread the notion that
"over-population in developing countries leads to hunger and more poverty
(which, in turn, becomes) the fertile breeding ground for" international
communism. American agribusiness would later get involved through a policy
of global food control. Food is power. When used to cull the population,
it's a weapon of mass destruction.

Consider the current situation with the UN Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO) reporting sharply higher food prices along with severe
shortages, and warned this condition is extreme, unprecendented and
threatens billions with hunger and starvation. Prices are up 40% this year
after a 9% rise in 2006, and it forced developing states to pay 25% more for
imported food and be unable to afford enough of it.

Various explanations for the problem are cited that include growing
demand, higher fuel and transportation costs, commodity speculation, the use
of corn for ethanol production (taking one-third of the harvest that's more
than what's exported for food) and extreme weather while ignoring the above
implications - the power of agribusiness to manipulate supply for greater
profits and "cull the herd" in targeted Third World countries. Affected ones
are poor, and FAO cites 20 in Africa, nine in Asia, six in Latin America and
two in Eastern Europe that in total represent 850 million endangered people
now suffering from chronic hunger and related poverty. They depend on
imports, and their diets rely heavily on the type grains agribusiness
controls - wheat, corn and rice plus soybeans. If current prices stay high
and shortages persist, millions will die - maybe by design.

Fateful War and Peace Studies

Engdahl reviewed how American elites in the late 1930s began
planning an American century in the post-war world - a "Pax Americana" to
succeed the fading British Empire. The New York Council of Foreign Relations
War and Peace Studies Group led the effort, and Rockefeller Foundation money
financed it. As Engdahl put it: they'd be paid back later "thousands-fold."
First though, America had to achieve world dominance militarily and
economically.

The US business establishment envisioned a "Grand Area" to encompass
most of the world outside the communist bloc. To exploit it, they hid their
imperial designs beneath a "liberal and benevolent garb" by defining
themselves as "selfless advocates of freedom for colonial peoples (and) the
enemy of imperialism." They would also "champion world peace through
multinational control." Sound familiar?

Like today, it was just subterfuge for their real aims that were
pursued under the banner of the United Nations, the new Bretton Woods
framework, the IMF, World Bank and the GATT. They were established for one
purpose - to integrate the developing world into the US-dominated Global
North so its wealth could be transfered to powerful business interests,
mostly in the US. The Rockefeller family led the effort, the four brothers
were involved, and Nelson and David were the prime movers.

While JD III was plotting depopulation and racial purity schemes,
Nelson worked "the other side of the fence....as a forward-looking
international businessman" in the 1950s and 1960s. While preaching greater
efficiency and production in targeted countries, he schemed, in fact, to
open world markets for unrestricted US grain imports. It became the "Green
Revolution."

Nelson concentrated on Latin America. During WW II, he coordinated
US intelligence and covert operations there, and those efforts laid the
groundwork for family interests post-war. They were tied to the region's
military because friendly strongmen are the type leaders we prefer to
guarantee a favorable business climate.

>From the 1930s, Nelson Rockefeller had significant Latin American
interests, especially in areas of oil and banking. In the early 1940s, he
sought new opportunities and along with Laurance bought vast amounts of
cheap, high-quality farmland so the family could get into agriculture. It
wasn't for family farming, however. The Rockefellers wants global
monopolies, and their scheme was to do in agriculture what the family
patriarch did in oil along with using food and agricultural technology as
Cold War weapons.

By 1954, PL 480, or "Food for Peace," established surplus food as a
US foreign policy tool, and Nelson used his considerable influence on the
State Department because every post-war Department Secretary, from 1952
through 1979, had ties to the family through its Foundation: namely, John
Foster Dulles, Dean Rusk, Henry Kissinger and Cyrus Vance.

These men supported Rockefeller views on private business and knew
the family saw agriculture the way it sees oil - commodities to be "traded,
controlled, (and) made scarce or plentiful" to suit the foreign policy goals
of dominant corporations controlling their trade.

The family got into agriculture in 1947 when Nelson founded the
International Basic Economy Corporation (IBEC). Through it, he introduced
"mass-scale agribusiness in countries where US dollars could buy huge
influence in the 1950s and 1960s." Nelson then allied with grain-trading
giant Cargill in Brazil where they began developing hybrid corn seed
varieties with big plans for them. They would make the country "the world's
third largest producer of (these) crop(s) after the US and China." It was
part of Rockefeller's "Green Revolution" that by the late 1950s "was rapidly
becoming a strategic US economic strategy alongside oil and military
hardware."

Latin America was the beginning of a food production revolution with
big aims - to control the "basic necessities of the majority of the world's
population." As agribusiness in the 1990s, it was "the perfect partner for
the introduction....of genetically engineered food crops or GMO plants."
This marriage masqueraded as "free market efficiency, modernization (and)
feeding a malnourished world." In fact, it was nothing of the sort. It
cleverly hid "the boldest coup over the destiny of entire nations ever
attempted."

Creating Agribusiness - Rockefeller and Harvard Invent USA
"Agribusiness"

The "Green Revolution began in Mexico and spread across Latin
America during the 1950s and 1960s." It was then introduced in Asia,
especially in India. It was at a time we claimed our aim was to help the
world through free market efficiency. It was all one way, from them to us so
corporate investors could profit. It gave US chemical giants and major grain
traders new markets for their products. Agribusiness was going global, and
Rockefeller interests were in the vanguard helping industry globalization
take shape.

Nelson worked with his brother, JD III, who set up his own
Agriculture Development Council in 1953. They shared a common goal -
"cartelization of world agriculture and food supplies under their corporate
hegemony." At its heart, it aimed to introduce modern agriculture techniques
to increase crop yields under the false claim of wanting to reduce hunger.
The same seduction was later used to promote the Gene Revolution with
Rockefeller interests and the same agribusiness giants backing it.

In the 1960s, Lyndon Johnson also used food as a weapon. He wanted
recipient nations to agree to administration and Rockfeller preconditions
that population control and opening their markets to US industry was part of
the deal. It also involved training developing world agriculture scientists
and agronomists in the latest production concepts so they could apply them
at home. This "carefully constructed network later proved crucial" to the
Rockefeller strategy to "spread the use of genetically-engineered crops
around the world," helped along with USAID funding and CIA mischief.

"Green Revolution" tactics were painful and took a devastating toll
on peasant farmers. They destroyed their livelihoods and forced them into
shantytown slums that now surround large Third World cities. There they
provide cheap exploitable labor from people desperate to survive and easy
prey for any way to do it.

The "Revolution" also harmed the land. Monoculture displaces
diversity, soil fertility and crop yields decrease over time, and
indiscriminate use of chemical pesticides causes serious later health
problems. Engdahl quoted an analyst calling the "Green Revolution" a
"chemical revolution" developing states couldn't afford. That began the
process of debt enslavement from IMF, World Bank and private bank loans.
Large landowners can afford the latter. Small farmers can't and often, as a
result, are bankrupted. That, of course, is the whole idea.

The "Green Revolution" was based on the "proliferation of new hybrid
seeds in developing markets" that characteristically lack reproductive
capacity. Declining yields meant farmers had to buy seeds every year from
large multinational producers that control their parental seed lines in
house. A handful of company giants held patents on them and used them to lay
the groundwork for the later GMO revolution. Their scheme was soon evident.
Tradition farming had to give way to High Yield Varieties (HYV) of hybrid
wheat, corn and rice with major chemical inputs.

Initially, growth rates were impressive but not for long. In
countries like India, agricultural output slowed and fell. They were losers
so agribusiness giants could exploit large new markets for their chemicals,
machinery and other product inputs. It was the beginning of "agribusiness,"
and it went hand-in-hand with the "Green Revolution" strategy that would
later embrace plant genetic alterations.

Two Harvard Business School professors were involved early on - John
Davis and Ray Goldberg. They teamed with Russian economist, Wassily
Leontief, got Rockefeller and Ford Foundation funding, and initiated a
four-decade revolution to dominate the food industry. It was based on
"vertical integration" of the kind Congress outlawed when giant
conglomerates or trusts like Standard Oil used them to monopolize entire
sectors of key industries and crush competition.

It was revived under Trilateralist President Jimmy Carter disguised
as "deregulation" to dismantle "decades of carefully constructed....health,
food safety and consumer protection laws." They would now give way under a
new wave of industry-friendly vertical integration. Supported by a public
campaign, it claimed that government was the problem, it encroached too much
on our lives, and it had to be rolled back for greater personal "freedom."

Early in the 1970s, agribusiness producers controlled US food
supplies. They'd now go global on a scale without precedent. The goal -
"staggering profits" by "restructur(ing) the way Americans grew food to feed
themselves and the world." Ronald Reagan continued Carter's policy and let
the top four or five monopoly players control it. It led to an unprecedented
"concentration and transformation of American agriculture" with independent
family farmers driven off their land through forced sales and bankruptcies
so "more efficient" agribusiness giants could move in with "Factory Farms."
Remaining small producers became virtual serfs as "contract farmers."
America's landscape was changing with people trampled on for profits.

Engdahl explained a gradual process of "wholesale merger(s) and
consolidation....of American food production....into giant corporate global
concentrations" with familiar names - Cargill, Archer Daniels Midland (ADM),
Smithfield Foods and ConAgra. As they grew bigger, so did their bottom lines
with annual equity returns rising from 13% in 1993 to 23% in 1999. Hundreds
of thousands of small farmers lost out for it as their numbers dropped by
300,000 from 1979 to 1998 alone. It was even worse for hog farmers with a
drop from 600,000 to 157,000 so 3% of producers could control 50% of the
market.

The social costs were staggering and continue to be as "entire rural
communities collapsed and rural towns became ghost towns." Consider the
consequences:

-- by 2004, the four largest beef packers controlled 84% of steer
and heifer slaughter - Tyson, Cargill, Swift and National Beef Packing;

-- four giants controlled 64% of hog production - Smithfield Foods,
Tyson, Swift and Hormel;

-- three companies controlled 71% of soybean crushing - Cargill, ADM
and Bunge;

-- three giants controlled 63% of all flour milling, and five
companies controlled 90% of global grain trade;

-- four other companies controlled 89% of the breakfast cereal
market - Kellogg, General Mills, Kraft Foods and Quaker Oats;

-- in 1998, Cargill acquired Continental Grain to control 40% of
national grain elevator capacity;

-- four large agro-chemical/seed giants controlled over 75% of the
nation's seed corn sales and 60% of it for soybeans while also having the
largest share of the agricultural chemical market - Monsanto, Novartis, Dow
Chemical and DuPont; six companies controlled three-fourths of the global
pesticides market;

-- Monsanto and DuPont controlled 60% of the US corn and soybean
seed market - all of it patented GMO seeds; and

-- 10 large food retailers controlled $649 billion in global sales
in 2002, and the top 30 food retailers account for one-third of global
grocery sales.

At the dawn of a new century, family farming was decimated by
corporate agribusiness' vertically integrated powers that surpassed their
earlier 1920s heyday dominance. The industry was now the second most
profitable national one after pharmaceuticals with domestic annual sales
exceeding $400 billion. The next aim was merging Big Pharma with Big food
producing giants, and the Pentagon's National Defense University took note
in a 2003-issued paper - "Agribusiness (now) is to the United States what
oil is to the Middle East." It's now considered a "strategic weapon in the
arsenal of the world's only superpower," but at a huge cost to consumers
everywhere.

Engdahl reviewed the "revolution" in animal factory production that
EarthSave International founder and Baskin-Robbins heir, John Robbins,
covered honestly, thoroughly and compassionately in two explosive books on
the subject - "Diet for A New America" in 1987 and "The Food Revolution" in
2001. They were both stinging indictments of corporate-produced foods -
horrifying animal cruelty, unsafe foods, unsanitary conditions, rampant use
of anti-biotics humans then ingest, massive environmental pollution, and new
unknown dangers from genetic engineering - all allowed by supposed
government watchdog regulatory agencies that ignore public health concerns.

Agribusiness was on a roll, government supports it with tens of
billions in annual subsidies, and the 1996 Farm Bill suspended the Secretary
of Agriculture's power to balance supply and demand so henceforth
unrestricted production is allowed. Food producing giants took full
advantage to control market forces. They crushed family farmers by
over-producing and forcing down prices. They also pressured land values as
small operators failed. It created opportunities for land acquisition on the
cheap for greater concentration and dominance.

Next came integrating the Gene Revolution into agribusiness the way
Harvard's Ray Goldberg saw it coming. Entire new sectors were to be created
from genetic engineering. It would include GMO drugs from GMO plants in a
new "argi-ceutical system." Goldberg predicted a "genetic revolution
(through) an industrial convergence of food, health, medicine, fiber and
energy businesses" - in a totally unregulated marketplace. Unmentioned was a
threatening consumer nightmare hidden from view.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at
lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The
Steve Lendman News and Information Hour on The MicroEffect.com Mondays at
noon US Central time.

Dylan Ford is the author of the proposal at www.ideaforpresident.com , a
website devoted to an idea that could provide an avenue to address pollution
issues, food safety, social justice, prison reform and healthcare.

| »

What now?

Submitted: Jan 12, 2008

The level of failure

There is a theory about the American economy that it advances and recedes via speculative bubble these days. This seems to be particularly true of our regional economy in the San Joaquin Valley, with its unaffordable housing and nationally top rate of mortgage foreclosure, following the big boom in residential real estate speculation.

Southern California home builders, after tremendous growth during the boom, have suffering hundreds of millions in losses in the second half of 2007. However, their losses are not as severe as the losses of five San Joaquin Delta fish species that "continue marching toward extinction, according to new data released Wednesday, a result that some observers warn may signify a major ecological shift in the West Coast's largest estuary." The tremendous construction boom in Southern California, coming at the time Colorado River exports to the region was slowed by drought and new agreements among the states that take water from that river, put "excessive" pressure for the last five years on the Delta pumps, slowed only as a result of near extinction of species and lawsuits by environmental groups. Another problem in the Delta is deteriorating water quality, caused by urban and farm runoff. As it heads north on the west side of the Valley, the San Joaquin River has become an agricultural drainage sewer.

Farm and ranch land prices are also up. First, starting about a decade ago, demand from Southern California dairymen, who, having sold small dairies for large land prices there, bought large parcels and established even larger dairies here. This bubble, driven by the need to get money into land to avoid taxes, got bigger when local landowners started selling parcels to developers and buying more land. As home prices fall, agricultural land prices rise. We live in a complicated economy.

However, while dairy costs seem to be chasing milk prices (which received a hefty increase early last year) up to break-even dairy economics, rising almond prices signal business to buy orchards and to plant them in what is already by far the world's largest almond-producing area. Agriculturally, in the north San Joaquin Valley we are in the midst of an almond bubble. Yet, through the last 12 months, the same story appears periodically in the media. According to this story, honeybee hives are collapsing, their residents leaving in the morning and not returning at night. Although scientists have fixed their attention on this cause and that cause, the same story of hive collapse -- "CCD – colony collapse disorder – has resulted in a loss of 50 percent to 90 percent of beehives in the United States" -- ends with the scientific speculation that, "The evidence today is pointing to the effects of a complex chain of factors: pesticides, viruses and fungi and parasites such as mites."

Colony collapse disorder could be to the almond industry what the subprime mortgage credit collapse has been to the speculative housing boom.

If the speculative bubble in ethanol is added to the picture, perhaps we can understand a simple story told by a dairyman about feed supplies and prices. Dairies import a lot of corn from the Midwest. The prices for this corn, under pressure from the speculative boom in corn-based ethanol production, have been going through the roof. Dairies have been partly compensating by buying more alfalfa. In at least one instance, a local dairyman was unable to buy a field of west-side alfalfa because the alfalfa grower found it more economically advantageous to sell the amount of water necessary to finish the crop to a neighboring almond grower, who needed it to keep his trees alive and was evidently able to make it worth the alfalfa grower's while to sell it to him and lose a crop. Nevertheless, courts have ruled there will be up to 30-percent less pumping from the Delta this year than there was last year.

We had a recent series of storms that partially recharged Valley groundwater and dumped a great deal of snow in the Sierra. The drought would seem to be over. However, a warm rain up to 6,000 feet in early spring could convert the healthy snow pack into floods and breaks in our decrepit levee system rather than an adequate supply of water for Valley farmers, 25 million Southern California residents and Valley subdivisions dependent on surface water supplies. It is hard these days to know which weather gods to pray to for what, when. It is equally hard to blame those weather gods for an economy that lurches from boom to bust and back again without any respect for the natural resources that sustain both agriculture and urban communities.

"Long-range collateral damage" in the California real estate boom/bust economy has been our public education system. California is now

ranked 40th based on the likelihood students will thrive in school and have successful adult lives, according to Education Week newspaper's annual Quality Counts report.
It ranks high, however, when comparing students in Advanced Placement programs.
Children who live in poverty, whose parents are not fluent in English or do not have a college degree were among the factors that weaken a California child's chance for success, according to the report.
The state ranks 38th in the nation for academic achievement.
California fourth-graders ranked 48th in the nation based on their scores on a national reading test called the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Only 23 percent of California fourth-graders were proficient in reading, compared with 32 percent nationwide.
Those students also fell behind the national average in math, with less than 30 percent testing proficient, compared with a 39 percent U.S. average...

Our educational ranking has been going in the opposite direction of population growth over the last 40 years. Development does not pay for itself in this most essential category: public investment in children and young people at which California once excelled and was in the highest rank in the nation.

At the level of public higher education in the state, the governor has announced deep cuts in spending and the University of California and the State university system have announced tuition hikes, making, in a coming recession, public higher education less attainable than ever. One still hears the grand developer-driven hoopla around the necessity for UC Merced because of "tidal-wave 2" echoing in the hollowed-out economy. But the governor needs to cut the state deficit, which is growing as real estate prices fall. Real estate prices are falling because the speculative bubble burst. So, we must sacrifice investment in the real engine of growth, the resources for technological invention that exist in a well-educated workforce.

The illiteracy among home buyers, realtors and mortgage lenders, the simple inability to read small print, has had a large role in the global credit crisis.

It has been recognized, even by the state Legislature, that the real-estate "engine of growth" that has been driving California from bubble to bust to bubble again, sweeping many more modest but steadier economies before it, has had a gross impact on the state's environment. Last year, in an historic gesture, the Legislature declared itself against global warming. It also asserted the right "to adopt strict curbs on greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks." The federal Environmental Protection Agency denied California this right to do something more than what the federal government requires to clean up its own air quality, the worst in the nation. On the other hand, a Valley state senator is having to launch a political campaign to stop confirmation of the Hun's latest appointment to the state air board, a Fresno County supervisor with a strong record in support of air polluters.

Bank of America announced today it would take over California-based Countrywide Financial Corp., the nation's largest mortgage lender. BofA already had a $2-billion investment in the company, rumored for months to be on the brink of bankruptcy.

The takeover removes the threat that Countrywide could fail and wreak more havoc in the mortgage market, where loan defaults are soaring and federal policymakers have been struggling to limit the spillover in the economy.
The rescue of Countrywide could help calm the "crisis of confidence" that has slammed the financial system as the housing and mortgage markets have crumbled, said Brian Bethune of Global Insight, an economic forecasting firm in Lexington, Mass. "This will change perceptions."
Fear that the housing mess could drag the U.S. economy into recession has depressed the stock market in recent months and spurred the Federal Reserve to cut short-term interest rates three times. On Thursday, Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said the central bank was ready to make further "substantive" moves to ease credit to help the economy.
In the case of Countrywide, policymakers had to be concerned about "a big domino going down," Bethune said..
For Countrywide, a takeover by a financially robust suitor is "a gift from heaven," said banking industry analyst Richard Bove of Punk, Ziegel & Co.

The stock market responded by falling another 267 points but: "Countrywide Financial Corp. founder Angelo Mozilo, one of the nation's highest-paid chief executives, stands to reap $115 million in severance-related pay if his troubled company is acquired by Bank of America Corp., regulatory filings show."

This is a failed chief executive -- a failed and overpaid chief executive -- who has driven his company to the brink of bankruptcy," said Daniel Pedrotty, director of the office of investment at the AFL-CIO. "I think shareholders are going to be especially outraged if he walks away with another pay-for-failure package."...
"He has driven the stock price into the ground and the company has been destroyed," Ferlauto said. "Their customers have lost their homes and he is potentially walking away with more than $100 million. For us, that's unconscionable enrichment.

It is possible that the result of this “take over” will simply be that the largest corrupt mortgage lender in the nation drags down the bank that had most to do with the agricultural development of the San Joaquin valley. It is also possible that if enough bubbles burst simultaneously in the north San Joaquin Valley, we may not live long enough to dig ourselves out of the collapse. These "possibilities," left to us by our leading public officials and special interests, are rotten. They harm our quality of life, our health, our economic futures and our childrens' futures are worse. Local politics, our own "art of the possible," has few good choices to make.

It’s no secret that Merced faces many steep challenges. Ours is among the poorest counties in California with one of the state’s highest unemployment rates and lowest levels of educational attainment. Poverty, substance abuse, and child neglect are daily realities for many of our children and neighbors. -- Merced County Human Services Agency Director Ana Pagan.

Merced was poorer than competing counties for the UC campus in the San Joaquin Valley. Maybe that was one of the deciding factors in locating it here -- the idea that it would have more positive economic and cultural benefit here than at an alternative site. In the short run, UC's largest impact on Merced has been to have acted the engine for growth of the highest foreclosure rate in the nation the worst series of assaults on state and federal environmental law and its enforcement in the history of those laws and the agencies enforcing them. In Merced, this was accompanied by a wholesale devaluation of anyone not in on the speculative boom. Local land-use officials and an endless parade of real estate boosters both promoted and believed in an instant transformation of the poor old agricultural economy of Merced. It didn't happen. It will take at least a generation for UC Merced to exert much positive economic influence here. Meanwhile, thanks to the spectacular extent of the bust in this region, it may take almost a generation for development to pick up steam again. Meanwhile, the county remains full of people who are not part of the famous "high-tech, bio-tech engine of growth" promised by UC and who are wondering what's next.

Badlands Journal editorial board
---------------------------

1-10-08
Sacramento Bee
Fish: Delta drop sparks fears of ecological shift...Matt Weiser
http://www.sacbee.com/378/v-print/story/623644.html

Bees: Steep population loss hits agriculture hard...Ngoc Nguyen
http://www.sacbee.com/378/v-print/story/623661.html

Modesto Bee
Report: California a tough place for children to get ahead
California ranked 40th in nation on likelihood students will find success...MERRILL BALASSONE
http://www.modbee.com/local/story/175786.html

1-11-08
Los Angeles Times
U.S. denial of California emissions waiver criticized
Sen. Boxer, chairman of a Senate environment panel, says she might subpoena documents concerning possible White House interference...Margot Roosevelt
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/environment/la-me-epa11jan11,1,33705,print.story?coll=la-news-environment

Bank of America announces Countrywide takeover
The $4-billion deal removes the threat of a bankruptcy that could wreak more havoc in the mortgage market. Both firms' stocks decline...Walter Hamilton, Tom Petruno and E. Scott Reckard
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-countrywide12jan12,0,786793,print.story?coll=la-home-center

Mozilo could reap $115 million
The Countrywide CEO's potential pay if his company is acquired rankles critics...Kathy M. Kristof
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-mozilo11jan11,1,5951348,print.story?coll=la-headlines-business

| »

Dumbest questions in town

Submitted: Jan 23, 2008

Absolutely the dumbest question anyone around here can ask is: How come when housing prices were rising astronomically, everyone was buying; yet now that housing prices are falling, very few are buying?

There are smooth answers to this question floating around but none of them quite stick. However, a comment made by a local realtor the other day may provide a clue. She said that home prices are falling so low there is once again some interest from out-of-town investors.

Chewing over this one for a few days, we came up with the novel notion that a great deal of the housing built in Merced during the last several years was for investment more than it was for actual living in a house. Perhaps, when the bottom of the market is discovered, the crap game can begin again. There is no doubt that the local land-use authorities, composed of elected officials, are still disposed to approve whatever subdivision is proposed, if only more subdivisions would be proposed. However, we are in
a glut of housing stock -- unsold houses, foreclosed houses, and half-built subdivisions.

They call it "planning." Because whatever it is is not "planning," conversations with local planners have become absurd exercises in listening to people who believe their own pathetic propaganda.

Meanwhile, thanks to the subprime meltdown, which has caused a credit crisis, and the falling housing prices associated with the crisis, European finance markets are tumbling. If it weren't such illogical journalism on a serious topic, this line about today's "surprise" Fed interest-rate reduction from the Associated Press, would be funny:

The surprise Fed move was aimed at fears that trouble in financial markets from the U.S.
subprime crisis was spreading to the broader economy. Interest rate cuts tend to boost
stocks. Asian Markets Rebound After Fed Cut...YURI KAGEYAMA
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h3kgMAkbLwyfxBdjzw8Pc4KZ7DhQD8UBAFIO1

The headline of the article refers to an Asian stock-market rally today on news that the Fed had lowered the prime rate from 4.25 to 3.50. European financial markets continued to fall for a second day. Europe is concerned about a US recession; Asia economies, much more integrated into the American consumer economy, rise are fall on news of Fed rate cuts at this point, evidently.

Meanwhile, inflation is increasing rapidly. The traditional way inflation evens out is through lower prices for exports but the US no longer exports enough to balance the trade deficit however cheap the dollar gets. Except for arms, the US manufacturing industry has been off-shored for three decades. None of the financial stimulus packages about which one reads every morning in this presidential election year contemplates taking a wire brush to the Rust Bowl.

Chalmers Johnson, whose Blowback trilogy is extremely helpful for understanding the shape \of things past, present and future in our crumbling empire, estimated today that the Pentagon 2008 budget would run to $1 trillion and commented that "military Keynesianism" is a suicidal course.

...The current account measures the net trade surplus or deficit of a country plus cross-border payments of interest, royalties, dividends, capital gains, foreign aid, and other income. For example, in order for Japan to manufacture anything, it must import all required raw materials. Even after this incredible expense is met, it still has an $88 billion per year trade surplus with the United States and enjoys the world's second highest current account balance. (China is number one.) The United States, by contrast, is number 163 -- dead last on the list, worse than countries like Australia and the United Kingdom that also have large trade deficits. Its 2006 current account deficit was $811.5 billion; second worst was Spain at $106.4 billion. This is what is unsustainable.
It's not just that our tastes for foreign goods, including imported oil, vastly exceed our ability to pay for them. We are financing them through massive borrowing. On November 7, 2007, the U.S. Treasury announced that the national debt had breached $9 trillion for the first time ever. This was just five weeks after Congress raised the so-called debt ceiling to $9.815 trillion. If you begin in 1789, at the moment the Constitution became the supreme law of the land, the debt accumulated by the federal government did not top $1 trillion until 1981. When George Bush became president in January 2001, it stood at approximately $5.7 trillion. Since then, it has increased by 45%. This huge debt can be largely explained by our defense expenditures in comparison with the rest of the world. The world's top 10 military spenders and the approximate amounts each country currently budgets for its military establishment are:

1. United States (FY08 budget), $623 billion
2. China (2004), $65 billion
3. Russia, $50 billion
4. France (2005), $45 billion
5. Japan (2007), $41.75 billion
6. Germany (2003), $35.1 billion
7. Italy (2003), $28.2 billion
8. South Korea (2003), $21.1 billion
9. India (2005 est.), $19 billion
10. Saudi Arabia (2005 est.), $18 billion

World total military expenditures (2004 est.), $1,100 billion
World total (minus the United States), $500 billion

Our excessive military expenditures did not occur over just a few short years or simply because of the Bush administration's policies. They have been going on for a very long time in accordance with a superficially plausible ideology and have now become entrenched in our democratic political system where they are starting to wreak havoc. This ideology I call "military Keynesianism" -- the determination to maintain a permanent war economy and to treat military output as an ordinary economic product, even though it makes no contribution to either production or consumption...
On May 1, 2007, the Center for Economic and Policy Research of Washington, D.C., released a study prepared by the global forecasting company Global Insight on the long-term economic impact of increased military spending. Guided by economist Dean Baker, this research showed that, after an initial demand stimulus, by about the sixth year the effect of increased military spending turns negative. Needless to say, the U.S. economy has had to cope with growing defense spending for more than 60 years. He found that,
after 10 years of higher defense spending, there would be 464,000 fewer jobs than in a baseline scenario that involved lower defense spending.

Baker concluded:

"It is often believed that wars and military spending increases are good for the economy. In fact, most economic models show that military spending diverts resources from productive uses, such as consumption and investment, and ultimately slows economic growth and reduces employment"...

Some of the damage done can never be rectified. There are, however, some steps that this
country urgently needs to take. These include reversing Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for the wealthy, beginning to liquidate our global empire of over 800 military bases, cutting from the defense budget all projects that bear no relationship to the national security of the United States, and ceasing to use the defense budget as a Keynesian jobs program. If we do these things we have a chance of squeaking by. If we don't, we face probable national insolvency and a long depression. -- "Going Bankrupt," Johnson,
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174884/chalmers_johnson_how_to_sink_america)

Prediction of depression is a tricky business. Is a generation of economists that has achieved prominence under the dogma of laissez faire capitalism adept at coping with information that throws that dogma into doubt? All of us of a certain age have passedthrough periods of war-boom economies and economic recession. What else have we known, actually? Many people seem to feel alarm about this one because of the common belief that the underlying economy is not "fundamentally sound." This gives force to Johnson's main thesis of "imperial overreach" and its dire economic consequences (quite aside from the slaughter of the innocent), all laid out 25 years ago by Mancur Olson in his Rise and Decline of Nations with its frequent references to the economic decline of the British Empire. The various economic stimulus packages drawing bipartisan support will help credit card companies and foreign manufacturers of imported goods, but will they help those of us caught in this economy? Why should we assume these stimuluses would increase employment in a population whose jobs have been offshored or taken by imported foreign workers (legal or illegal)? At this point the US has lost a generation of manufacturing and the innovations in it that might have stalled global warming. But, don't worry: drilling leases in the Artic will soon be auctioned in the end-of-days feeding frenzy of wealthy contributors to this brutal, corrupt political regime. The larger fear is that the economic stimuluses will fail, depression will happen, and the government will respond with imperialism rather than peace, repression rather than relief, education and health care. There is a point beyond which no economy can be abused by its rulers without collapsing. Today don't we have more to fear from hubris, arrogance and recklessness than from "fear itself"?

»

A law that works a hardship on the public

Submitted: Jan 27, 2008

Regular Badlands readers may have noticed that the 157-pp official transcript of the trial-court hearing on the CEQA case brought against Merced County and the Riverside Motorsports Park by San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center, Protect Our Water and the Merced County Farm Bureau was removed last weekend from the site. This was done pursuant to the following notification from the president of the California Court Reporters Association and the advice of attorneys.

Mr. H....

The official transcript of the court hearing in the case of San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center vs. County of Merced must be removed from your Web site, Badlandsjournal, pursuant to Government Code Section 69954(d).

(d) Any court, party, or person who has purchased a transcript may, without paying a further fee to the reporter, reproduce a copy or portion thereof as an exhibit pursuant to court order or rule, or for internal use, but shall not otherwise provide or sell a copy or copies to any other party or person.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact me.


Lesia J. Mervin
CSR #4753, RMR, CRR
President - California Court Reporters Association
www.cal-ccra.org

Tulare County Trial Courts
211 S. Mooney Blvd., Room 303
Visalia, CA 93291
(559) 733-6561 X 130
(559) 967-1765 (cell)
lesia@quik.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this message is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify me by reply e-mail at lesia@quik.com , and destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading them or saving them to disk. Thank you.

We have several remarks to make about this tendentious interference with freedom of speech.

First, as frequent readers of court transcripts produced by California court reporters, we can understand how their guild might wish to assert a copyright similiar in force to that of any other novelist to protect the product of her creative genius. Court transcripts, although "official" and definitely public documents, are not always accurate.

Secondly, we sympathize with court reporters' difficulties extracting payment from unscrupulous attorneys for their official and public productions. In the case where Whiplash Willie is representing Duane X against MegaCorp, Willie doesn't always pay for the transcript. Likewise with the litigator from Slaughter, Gutbubble and Trash, representing Acme, Inc. v. ABC Import-Export on who pays the rent on the container full of 16-p nails on the Oakland docks. Also, it is possible that in this particular case, which has involved stories of the project proponent not paying legal bills, respondents have not paid for their transcripts. Should petitioners and the public on behalf of which they sued, who have paid their bills, be punished?

However, the court reporters' effective lobbying to assure them their justly deserved fees -- righting what is apparently an historical wrong done to hardworking, underpaid court reporters -- works an unfair disadvantage on the public bringing and supporting lawsuits under the California Environmental Quality Act. These are cases in which petitioners represent the public against their land-use authorities. More than 100 people testified or tried to at the public hearing before the Merced Board of Supervisors on this project. In fact, at the close of that marathon session, an elderly farmer remarked in the elevator: "Only the Raptors can save us now." Many of them supported the bringing of the lawsuit against Merced County and RMP. In CEQA, the public brings the suits against their local governments. The public unable to attend a full-day court hearing of the case should have the right to read the transcript. Despite the view of local organizers and public officials that CEQA is something to be memorized like Scripture to spice up public comments and staff overviews of projects, the public best learns it seeing arguments in local trial court made by petitioners and respondents about projects in the public's own backyard

We appreciate the difficulties court reporters face that occasioned this law. But the Legislature should amend Government Code Section 69954(d) to allow transcripts of cases brought on behalf of the public to be shared with the public. Private property rights in public documents strike us as peculiar doctrine.

Bill Hatch

| »

Score one more for Valley clean air activists

Submitted: Jan 27, 2008

Why should the legislature have to constantly prod, push, urge and sadly beg the board that Ms. Case is a leader on to act in the public's interest? – State Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter

1-25-08
California Progress Report
California Senate Votes for Clean Air in Rejecting Schwarzenegger Appointee…Senator Dean Florez

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/01/california_sena_17.html

The California State Senate voted this morning to reject the confirmation of Fresno County Supervisor Judy Case to the California Air Resources Board, based on her repeated votes to extend Valley air clean-up deadlines and resistance to reforms of the board itself.

Case, who was appointed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to a four-year term on CARB in May of 2007, could have served until May of this year without confirmation. With today's vote to reject her appointment, she will have 60 days to leave the post.

Central Valley clean air advocates, including respiratory therapists, asthma sufferers and representatives of the American Lung Association, Sierra Club, and others, trekked to Sacramento to me in voicing their opposition to Case's nomination. A common theme in their testimony was concern that someone who has voted twice to extend Valley air clean-up deadlines does not possess the type of leadership needed to move the
nation's dirtiest basin forward with progressive pollution policies.

When we needed leadership, we got opposition. When we needed decisive action, we got equivocation. When deadlines were missed, we got excuses.

Case was appointed by the Governor prior to her vote last year to extend the Valley air deadline. That vote was reason enough for the Governor to fire CARB chairman Robert Sawyer, but inexplicably did not affect his opinion of Case. In addition to her foot-dragging on Valley air clean-up, Case opposed efforts by legislators to reform the air
board to include members with expertise in public health.

This is a very important position that inordinately affects the residents of the Central Valley who breathe the dirtiest air in the nation.

What is at Stake Here

Valley cities have been ranked as having the worst air quality in the nation. Three of the four dirtiest cities in the entire country in terms of air pollution — Fresno (#2), Bakersfield (#3), and Visalia (#4) -- are right here in our Valley.

Asthma rates in the San Joaquin Valley are three times the national average. Today, 1 in 6 children going to school today in Fresno carry books, pencils, paper and a RESPIRATORY INHALER.

Why I Opposed the Case Appointment

My opposition centered on her record and work on the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control Board, specifically:

--She voted to delay clean air for 10 more years in the valley. The Governor disagreed and took the highly unusual step of publicly chastising the board for doing so.

--She voted to oppose putting more diversity and public health expertise on the San Joaquin valley air board, the most polluted region in the state. The Governor disagreed and signed SB 719 (Machado) into law.

--She voted to oppose closing the loophole in state law that exempted agribusiness from clean air rules every other business must meet. The Governor disagreed and signed SB 719 into law. The agricultural industry HAD been 100% EXEMPT from federal, state and local air quality laws. For over FIFTY YEARS, literally two lines in our health and safety code HAD protected agriculture from the same air pollution controls that EVERY OTHER industry in the state has followed.

On this point, Ms. Case and her Air Board could have closed the agricultural loophole on its own – but they didn't.

In fact, from my experience during this historic clean air fight, at every step Ms. Case stood in the way of these important changes. Changes that today even the Air Board itself says take nearly 87 tons a day of bad air out of the Valley due to their implementation.

The business interests, ag interests, oil companies, and other groups all have their champions in the Administration. But the breathing public in the valley does not have a champion in their corner when it comes to clean air.

They need someone to champion their efforts, not be a balancer of choices between industry economic concerns and kids lungs.

Her list of accomplishments is only the result of being prodded, or being forced to do the right thing.

Why should the legislature have to constantly prod, push, urge and sadly beg the board that Ms. Case is a leader on to act in the public's interest?

Consider the power and decisions the ARB will have to make in the next few months. Decision on the AB 32 Scoping Plan which includes controls on agriculture. Workplans for 2008 that will set the agenda for massive actions to come on Greenhouse Gas.

As a scientific matter, clean air and greenhouse gas pollution go hand in hand. And even on the greenhouse gas front Ms. Case opted for a limited set of "early action measures" rather than a more robust effort.

Senator Dean Florez was born and raised in the Central Valley and has represented the lower half of the Valley for eight years. He was first elected to the State Assembly in 1998 and served two terms. He was subsequently elected to the Senate in 2002. Florez has been a leading figure in finding workable solutions to the Valley's air pollutioncrisis, taking on powerful interests along the way. He authored five historic clean air laws which took dramatic steps to cleaning the second dirtiest air in the nation.

| »

The idiocies of California water journalism

Submitted: Jan 29, 2008

One of the ways we used to wile away our time in the newsroom during the first Gray Davis administration was to observe the subtleties of developer propaganda. Our favorite example was that shifting figure, the amount of water it took to supply a California household. At the beginning of the Davis administration it was two acre-feet per year for a household of four. Shortly before the Davis recall and the arrival of the Hun, our present governor, the figure had shrunk to one acre-foot per household.

We were delighted to see that development flaks are still plying their trade despite the resent misfortune in the credit market. See below for the latest statement of fact on the amount of water it takes to supply a household in California according to the San Diego press.

1-29-08
North County Times
Threats to imported water supplies make clouds welcome sight...Gig Conaughton, staff writer
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2008/01/29/news/top_stories/21_59_461_28_08.txt

...An acre foot of water is 325,900 gallons, enough to sustain two households for a year.

| »

A key to congressional decision-making

Submitted: Jan 31, 2008

"If a player sliding into home plate reached into his pocket and handed the umpire $1,000 before he made the call, what would we call that? A bribe. And if a lawyer handed a judge $1,000 before he issued a ruling, what do we call that? A bribe. But when a lobbyist or CEO sidles up to a member of Congress at a fund-raiser or in a skybox and hands him a check for $1,000, what do we call that? A campaign contribution." -- Bill Moyers, "Restoring the Public Trust," TomPaine.com, Feb. 24, 2006

Open Secrets
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp?CID=N00024874&cycle=2008

The top industries supporting Dennis Cardoza are:
Crop Production & Basic Processing, $69,250
Dairy, $19,350
Livestock, $16,640
Beer, Wine & Liquor, $16,538
Industrial Unions, $16,000
Commercial Banks, $14,750
Real Estate, $14,100
Lawyers/Law Firms, $12,300
Retail Sales, $10,000
Lobbyists, $8,500
Home Builders, $8,500
Misc Finance, $8,480
Electric Utilities, $7,000
Hospitals/Nursing Homes, $6,800
Building Trade Unions, $6,500
Health Professionals, $6,500
Public Sector Unions, $6,000
Casinos/Gambling, $6,000
Misc Unions, $6,000
Agricultural Services/Products, $5,500
Transportation Unions, $5,500
General Contractors, $5,500

Dennis Cardoza is a top House recipient from the following industries for the 2007-2008 election cycle: Livestock

DENNIS CARDOZA (D-CA)
Top Contributors

Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, $10,000
E&J Gallo Winery, $8,800
American Crystal Sugar, $7,000
Edison International,$6,000
American Bankers Assn, $5,000
AT&T Inc, $5,000
California Dairies Inc, $5,000
California Rice Industry Assn, $5,000
Dean Foods, $5,000
Farmers' Rice Cooperative, $5,000
National Assn of Home Builders, $5,000
National Thoroughbred Racing Assn, $5,000
United Food & Commercial Workers Union, $5,000
American Hospital Assn, $4,000
Farm Credit Council, $4,000
Granite Construction, $4,000
MoneyTree Inc, $4,000
Trical Inc, $4,000
Honeywell International, $3,500
Financial Center Credit Union, $3,300
Joseph Gallo Farms, $3,300

| »


To manage site Login