It’s a balance political candidates are up against all the time: How do you keep the troops’ spirits up over the course of a long struggle, especially when the chances of victory aren’t guaranteed?
I think that’s the challenge Organic Pastures Dairy Co. and Claravale Farm are contending with right now. It’s easy to be misled and become overly optimistic about victory, as Barak Obama and his supporters discovered in the New Hampshire primary.
Collette Cassidy, one of the people who run raw milk producer Claravale Farm, together with her husband, Ron Garthwaite, worries that people may have become lulled into complacency by the news that the California Assembly will hold hearings about adjusting AB 1735 and talk of a compromise. I may have been a factor in such talk as well, by suggesting that a deal is in the works.
I spoke with Collette today and she says such talk is a bit premature, the result of speculation by a political consultant Claravale and Organic Pastures engaged to help them negotiate the ways of Sacramento.
She sent out an email today to supporters trying to tamp down expectations a bit. “Many of you have mistakenly believed after reading various emails that the battle for raw milk is over. This is not the case!”
This is a departure from the good-news approach taken by Mark McAfee of Organic Pastures. Though Claravale and Organic Pastures have joined forces to reverse AB 1735, they have somewhat different personalities, as it were. “Ron stays away from the debate. He just wants to farm. Mark just wants to market.” I should add that she says this matter-of-factly, not as a criticism.
The good news, she says, is that Nicole Parra, chairperson of the California Assembly Agriculture Committee, who had indicated in November that she backed AB 1735, seems to have changed her attitude and now is inclined toward eliminating the 10-coliform-per-milliliter standard. Other legislators seem favorably inclined, apparently as a result of all the emails and calls they have received from raw milk drinkers.
But the proposed legislation, which would un-do the AB 1735 standard, must still be okayed by the assembly for addition to the agriculture committee’s schedule on Wednesday. Then, the legislation must be approved by the committee, and sent on to the full assembly, and eventually the senate and governor. And always lurking in the background is the rabid opposition of the California Department of Food and Agriculture, under the governor’s authority. I appreciate Lacedo’s inquiry from my previous post about who within CDFA is responsible for pushing so hard against raw milk, and I agree it should be smoked out. For now, I think it’s safe to say the agency’s top officials have a long history of trying to sabotage availability of raw milk, and remain true to their heritage.
I think what the people at Claravale and Organic Pastures want to affirm is that a loud enough public outcry can at least temporarily mute whatever corporate forces are at work in the CDFA. They have definitely made progress in getting the issue re-visited.
Collette feels that at this point, the key to overcoming all the obstacles necessary to negate AB 1735 is the turnout Wednesday at the committee hearing in Sacramento. “If we pack the place, that is really going to speak volumes. If we don’t do that, it is kind of iffy what the outcome will be.”
Right now, she has a good feeling. “I had a dream last night I was on a plane with the governor and he had signed the bill.”
we should all have good feelings. we are fighting the good fight. the govt isn’t.
"Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson says Bush administration agencies are skimming millions of dollars from congressional earmarks and using the money for undisclosed purposes without statutory authority."
Reported by the Lincoln, NE Journal Star: http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2008/01/13/news/politics/doc47893d1e6bf89244080409.prt
This paragraph especially caught my attention:
"USDAs Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service reported three separate assessments and deductions that redirected between 13 percent and 19.5 percent of the original earmark."
One wonders who is pocketing our tax dollars and for what purpose (other than embezzlement). And I wonder, in particular, if the APHIS deductions are from the NAIS program (fat chance) or from programs that actually benefit us.
In the face of widespread opposition to the act by state governments, the deadline for implementation was pushed back to the end of 2009.
This is NAIS for American citizens. I read DHS wants to encode an RFID chip so every move and
whereabouts of U.S. citizens can be traced and tracked.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=REAL_ID_Act_of_2005