The Dangers of Vilsack as Secretary of Agriculture
It’s being rumored that Barack Obama is considering Former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack for his Secretary of Agriculture. Vilsack is for reducing subsidies and claims he wants to make agriculture more environmentally-friendly. Which is all fine and dandy, but for Vilsack’s enthusiasm for corn-based ethanol and his support of genetically modified crops, including pharmeceuticals in crops.
Leaving aside the ethanol question for right now, I want to say that I do not support GMOs as a long or short term solution to the challenges facing agriculture. Labeling requirements on GMO crops are nonexistent, making it basically impossible to monitor for long-term health consequences or allergenic effects. In addition, they may cause health problems in pollinators (speculation abounds about their possible role in colony collapse disorder in honeybees), and they can contaminate and push out non-GMO crops, reducing biodiversity and thereby threatening our long-term food security.
Most importantly, we do not have enough long-term data on the effects of GMOs to push for their expansion. Vilsack’s willingness to do so is deeply troubling. Despite all our fondest illusions, plants are not under our control. Cross-pollination occurs with wind, with insects, with a wide variety of critters—all of which we can not predict, control, or contain.
Despite all that, Big Ag commodity groups have apparently been mobilizing to try to block Vilsack’s apointment, due to his otherwise environmentally-friendly leanings. Whether or not to support Vilsack as front-runner is a tough call for a lot of people. I know I still need to do some digging on the top contenders for myself, though Vilsack’s GMO stance is hard for me to get past. And it’s not just me; a few petitions have been making the rounds at Care2 and the Organic Consumers association to ask Obama not to choose Vilsack. If you want more info on the future of the USDA, check out the short list of potential Secretaries of Agriculture at Grist. Get the details and then decide…who would you choose, and why? Let me know in the comments section here.
2 Comments so far
Leave a reply
Great post! Me, I like Boyd or, though I doubt he’d take the position, Kucinich.
I’m in total agreement w/ you re: GMOs and I believe the very least we deserve as consumers is the right to have products that contain them labeled as such.
Almost every independent study finds some problem with GMOs, the most recent being a study done by the Austrian government that found RR corn diminishes fertility in mice. The only people that benefit from GMOs are the patent holders and the chemical corporations (who happen to be the same folks.)
Our industrialised agriculture system is broken or on the verge of breaking down. It’s time for a change in the way we treat our food producers and our environment.
[...] readers can go for more info or to try to make themselves heard. Also—she reports that word is Vilsack is out of the running for the Secretary of Agriculture post. Check it [...]