[O.T.] Revocation by Virginia judge just a part of the picture

[John Harvey]

Those interested in an insight into the back and forth of the U.S. health-care bill sometimes known as ObamaCare and the significance of the Virginia judge's decision to revoke the individual mandate on private health insurance may like to see the short article
Insurers Spin Court Decision on Health Insurance Mandate

by Wendell Potter ,
of which an extract appears below:
"The prospect that a reform law would include decent consumer protections but no individual mandate scares the bejesus out of them. Hence, the spin that we are in for skyrocketing health care costs if the Virginia judge's decision is upheld.
"The thing to keep in mind is that, despite the headlines and hype, this is just one judge's opinion. Others have gone the other way. We are a long way from knowing if, and how, the new health reform act will ultimately be implemented."
The entire article appears at .
Cheers --
John
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Because we're supposed to have an open government—a democracy—everything the Government does is presumptively public, and can be legitimately concealed only with compelling justifications. That's not just some lofty, abstract theory; it's central to having anything resembling 'consent of the governed'."
—Glenn Greenwald, "The moral standards of WikiLeaks critics", Salon.com 1 Dec 2010, .

[Tanya Marquette]

Thanks John.
This promises to be a very long battle.
In the meantime, the Senate is now readying to argue the tax/appropriations bill which had the Food (UN)safety bill language
ammended to it. ASAP, CALL YOUR SENATORS AND TELL THEM TO STRIP ALL LANGUAGE REGARDING THIS FOOD BILL
FROM THE APPROPRIATIONS BILL. The Senate is scheduled to begin the discussion Friday 11 a.m, according to a post sent today.
tanya

[John Harvey]

Hi, Tanya --

The bill you're referring to, I think, is S-510, the one that would effectively close down organic growers. After its recent rejection by the upper hourse, its sponsors are attempting to sneak it through inside the appropriations bill, as I understand it. If passed, it will give an unelected government official unappellable rights to search, and seize from, organic growers and even home gardeners. Its official justification is health concerns, but those concerns arise largely from Big Agriculture's abuse of animals and not at all from small-scale operations such as organic farms.

The bill is Big Ag's attack on the organic-food industry, designed to make food production too expensive and oppressive for small firms to continue with any longer.

If not stopped before this crucial vote, it will succeed in doing so. The most up-to-date information I've been able to find on it is at , and it includes helpful action links.

Kind regards,

John

[Tanya Marquette]

Yes, that is the bill. I have recently sent info on this bill to this list asking people to sign petitions and to contact their legislative reps.
I don't know if the entire bill was attached to the House spending bill or just language from the bill. At first I heard the bill was attached
as a rider. Then yesterday received info that 'language' was included in the House bill without explanation. But the danger was put
into the bill and this was a most unusual move.
It is still dangerous and people need to make calls and e-mail and fax instantly!
tanya