Michael Taylor: Monsanto's Man?

[G_j]

Michael Taylor: Monsanto's Man in the Obama Administration
By Isabella Kenfield

Counterpunch, August 14, 2009
Straight to the Source

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_18866.cfm/

Michael R. Taylor's appointment by the Obama administration to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on July 7th sparked immediate debate and even outrage among many food and agriculture researchers, NGOs and activists. The Vice President for Public Policy at Monsanto Corp. from 1998 until 2001, Taylor exemplifies the revolving door between the food industry and the government agencies that regulate it. He is reviled for shaping and implementing the government's favorable agricultural biotechnology policies during the Clinton administration.

Yet what has slipped under everyone's radar screen is Taylor's involvement in setting U.S. policy on agricultural assistance in Africa. In collusion with the Rockefeller and Bill and Melinda Gates foundations, Taylor is once again the go-between man for Monsanto and the U.S. government, this time with the goal to open up African markets for genetically-modified (GM) seed and agrochemicals.

In the late 70s, Taylor was an attorney for the United States Department of Agriculture, then in the 80s, a private lawyer at the D.C. law firm King & Spalding, where he represented Monsanto. When Taylor returned to government as Deputy Commissioner for Policy for the FDA from 1991 to 1994, the agency approved the use of Monsanto's GM growth hormone for dairy cows (now found in most U.S. milk) without labeling. His role in these decisions led to a federal investigation, though eventually he was exonerated of all conflict-of-interest charges.

Taylor's re-appointment to the FDA came just after Obama and the other G-8 leaders pledged $20 billion to fight hunger in Africa over the next three years. "President Obama is currently embedded in a bubble featuring some of the fervent promoters of the biotech industry and a Green Revolution in Africa," says Paula Crossfield in the Huffington Post. Before joiningObama's transition team, Taylor was a Senior Fellow at the D.C. think tank Resources for the Future, where he published two documents on U.S. aid for African agriculture, both of which were funded by the Rockefeller Foundation.

..more..

----------

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_R._Taylor

Taylor is featured in the documentaries The Future of Food and The World According to Monsanto as a pertinent example of revolving door since he is a lawyer who has spent the last few decades moving between Monsanto and the FDA and USDA.

[blkmusclmachine]

1. .

.

[WonderGrunion]

2. 2009?

Ummmmm..definitely old news.

[jazzimov]

3. Please read the rest of the Wiki article

Upon arriving at the FDA in the summer of 1991, Taylor recused himself for one year from taking part in any agency action dealing directly with Monsanto or any other King and Spalding clients."[13] It also reported that "Some longtime agency critics found the charges against Taylor misplaced. Sidney Wolfe, a physician who heads the Public Citizen Health Research Group here, has filed complaints with the FDA about revolving-door ethics issues concerning other officials. But he said yesterday that 'It's barking up a silly kind of tree to be going up against Mike Taylor.' Wolfe said that 'as far as we're concerned, he's done a perfectly good job.' Wolfe compared Rifkin's charges to saying that anyone who worked for a drug company and began working for the FDA should not be allowed to say anything about drugs in general -- a stance that Wolfe characterized as 'preposterous.'"

Also:

During this time, according to Marion Nestle, Taylor made strong arguments for a more rigorous and unified approach to food safety, in which he argued for:

"A single agency accountable for providing consistent and coordinated oversight of food safety, from farm to table.
Institution of Pathogen Reduction: HACCP, with performance standards verified by pathogen testing, at every step of food production.
Recall authority, access to records, and penalties for lapses in safety procedures.
Standards for imported foods equivalent to those for domestic foods.
Food safety to take precedence over commercial considerations in trade disputes."

Also much, much more which argues for Taylor's competency, rather than against.

[Cha]

5. thanks for that, jazzimov

[sabrina 1]

47. Thanks for what?

When Taylor returned to government as Deputy Commissioner for Policy for the FDA from 1991 to 1994, the agency approved the use of Monsanto's GM growth hormone for dairy cows (now found in most U.S. milk) without labeling. His role in these decisions led to a federal investigation, though eventually he was exonerated of all conflict-of-interest charges.

So we have a Monsanto CEO in charge of the FDA, who was in charge of the FDA when they ended up under federal investigation for what they did to the food supply??

Since when did Democrats start loving Monsanto? Are you at all familiar with this Corporation? I don't think I have ever met a Democrat who supported this Corporation until the past few weeks. I keep asking people who do, to explain it, to present something that this Corporation is doing that warrants any defense at all, so far I have not received a single answer.

Republicans have always supported evil Corps like Monsanto. When I asked THEM why, they claimed that 'since people in Africa are so inferior, unable to feed themselves, even if genetically modified food does cause cancer, 'it's better than starving'. The level of ignorance and bigotry in this kind of response, should be obvious. But now, I am seeing whispers of this defense coming from the 'left' in their efforts to try to defend the appointments of Monsanto CEOs to a democratic administration.

[One of the 99]

54. CEO???

Are you refering to Taylor or someone else?

[SidDithers]

8. Facts are good...

too bad so many DUers aren't interested in facts.

At DU, sputtering outrage rules the day.

Sid

[sabrina 1]

48. So what are these facts you keep talking about but never enlighten us about?

The subject is the evil, Right Wing Corporation, Monsanto. There are so many facts available about this Corporation that it is easy to find them. But I don't know what facts YOU are referring to. Can you enlighten us ignorant Democratic Americans as to what are these facts we do not have? Are you DEFENDING Monsanto, are you criticizing it (I haven't seen that, but could have missed it)? What are the facts we do not have here on DU about Monsanto?

[SidDithers]

51. Why, sabrina. One might get the impression you're following me from thread to thread...

Sid

[sabrina 1]

55. Why Sid, one might get the impression you didn't tell us what the facts were

that you keep talking about and you thought no one would notice if you used the old 'you're following me' tactic.

[brentspeak]

11. Translation: A PR firm working for Monsanto edited the Wikipedia article

Only a fool or a shill would actually believe that Taylor's presence in the FDA isn't to benefit Big Agribusiness, especially Monsanto.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

18. But I thought facts are facts

no matter who wrote them.

[sabrina 1]

49. Yes, they do it all the time. Lol, I have already asked people NOT to

use Wiki as a source on Monsanto for that reason.

[zeemike]

13. Oh...so he recused himself for a whole year...

that changes everything

[roody]

32. Will readers get your sarcasm?

[zeemike]

36. You did.

but I know some won't...But I can't live for them.

[progressoid]

4. Monsanto has it fingers everywhere.

[Heather MC]

6. Are Monsanto Employees or former employees the only ones

submitting applications for these positions, We need Mitt Romney's binders full of women.

[sabrina 1]

50. Including on Wikipedia!

[lunasun]

7. assistance in Africa. In collusion with the Rockefeller/ Bill and Melinda Gates foundations

this time with the goal to open up African markets for genetically-modified (GM) seed and agrochemicals.

[Berlum]

9. Interlockitude

[bvar22]

10. If Michael Taylor were the oNLY "Monsanto Man" appointed to hgh positions ...

...in this administration, it wouldn't be so bad.
But he isn't.
Michael Taylor is only the tip of the iceberg.

Tom (Mr Monsanto Corn) Vilsack was appointed to head the US Department of Agriculture.

Google: "Vilsack and Monsanto"

The FDA and the USDA are infested with former Monsanto Execs and Lobbyists.
There is NO counter balancing with voices representing Safe Food, Organic Produce, Non-GMO Food, decentralized, small scale Multi-Crop Farming.... NONE.

Just like the voices for Medicare-for-All were shut out of the administration,
so to the voices for Safe Food.

[ProSense]

23. If only

"If Michael Taylor were the oNLY "Monsanto Man" appointed to hgh positions ...

...in this administration, it wouldn't be so bad.
But he isn't.
Michael Taylor is only the tip of the iceberg.

Tom (Mr Monsanto Corn) Vilsack was appointed to head the US Department of Agriculture.

...we had learned about this before today: Vilsack's nomination was confirmed by the United States Senate by unanimous consent on January 20, 2009.

His confirmation is a few months older than the article in the OP.

[bvar22]

33. ProSense, you make NoSense.

"...we had learned about this before today: Vilsack's nomination was confirmed by the United States Senate by unanimous consent on January 20, 2009.

His confirmation is a few months older than the article in the OP."
---ProSense, Post #23

Tom Vilscack, notorious for his coziness with Monsanto while Governor of the GM Corn State (Iowa), was appointed to the cabinet position of Sec of Ag during the first month of the Obama Administration, and remains in that position over the USDA.

[font size=5]
The DLC New Team
[/font]
(Screen Capped from the DLC Website)
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254886&kaid=86&subid=85


How does that make the Obama Administration any LESS infested with Monsanto Reps,
or more void of voices for Safe Food?


You should take a little break.

[ProSense]

37. Wait,

"ProSense, you make NoSense"

You're saying this: Vilsack's nomination was confirmed by the United States Senate by unanimous consent on January 20, 2009.

...isn't true and makes "NoSense"?

Is that a play on words? Cute.

[bvar22]

40. YOU are making NoSense.

So Vilsack was appointed in early 2009?
How does that affect his well known and well documented ties to Monsanto?
The date of his appointment is irrelevant.

He is STILL there, along with the other Monsanto roaches.
He WAS appointed by President Obama.
He IS Monsanto's Man.
He wields immense power over the food that you eat.




PS: We know you are not really laughing,
but are clutching at cartoons in the desperate attempt to hide the embarrassing fact that you have no cogent rebuttal.
You underestimate the intelligence of most members here.
Of course, there are always the PT Barnum few that will fall for that kindergarten stuff.

[tkmorris]

46. Of course it's true. It's also completely irrelevant

[timdog44]

12. bill and malinda gates

sticking their unknowing asses in more things for which they know nothing but $$$$$$. major assholes

[timdog44]

14. facts can be falsified.

you who think this man is good should rethink. Recused himself for a whole year!!! Big f-ing deal. What is a year to these people. He should have had the good sense to be for the American people. If you think he is good for the African continent, you are deluded. Fact Are Good. Check them all out.

[Buzz Clik]

15. This is an interesting quote:

"He is reviled for shaping and implementing the government's favorable agricultural biotechnology policies during the Clinton administration."

Reviled by whom? There is a small segment of the US that is unglued about GMOs, but it's a damned small group.

I dislike the revolving door between industry and government because it stinks of corruption, but I'd feel the same way if the revolving door was between any group and government. My concern is far less about Monsanto than the trend in general.

[brentspeak]

16. "Reviled by whom?"

How about at least 250,000 American citizens, family farmers included, who signed a petition protesting the Monsanto Protection Act which Obama was only too giddy to sign into law with the spending bill he had plenty of time to shape as he wanted?

[Buzz Clik]

17. I wonder how many of those 250,000 had a clue of what was actually in that provision...

... or that it was totally temporary and was already in existence.

Just curious.

[timdog44]

21. Do you speak in favor

of GMO? Just curious.

[Buzz Clik]

26. Absolutely. I have no fears of GMOs, those released by Monsanto or others.

[timdog44]

29. Sad to hear.

You can have all mine.

You need to do more research. The canaries are dying because of GMOs. That means the higher animals are next.

[Buzz Clik]

34. Hm. More unsubstantiated rumors. This is no shortage of them.

[timdog44]

45. I am not

going to go out do the research for you. You are the one who is calling out people on this. Easy enough to say "hm, unsubstantiated rumors".

[brentspeak]

22. Probably most of them

Which means that 250,000 people know a whole hell of lot more about the provision than you.

The "totally temporary" part is already well-understood to mean that until the next spending bill, we all get to be exposed to GMO and GE crops and that Monsanto and other GMO/GE seed producers are granted almost unprecedented court immunity during legal challenges. No one -- except for you -- ever claimed it was permanent provision. But manufacturing that red herring sure makes for one clumsy attempt at discrediting opponents of the provision.

"The provision was already in existence?"

A provision to grant court immunity wasn't in existence until last week when Obama signed it into law.

[Buzz Clik]

27. Ok. That was meant as an insult, and I'll take it as one.

You need to develop some manners. You embarrass yourself with this silliness.

[Scuba]

53. +1,000

[timdog44]

19. Agreed. GMO

will be the death of America and the rest of the world. Untested. Untried. Poisoning the masses. A monopoly that we cannot have any recourse to because of infiltration of the government by the evil company. Industry execs and lawyers have no place in government and when government reps leave the government have no place in the same industries that they oversaw. Period.

[L0oniX]

24. I'd hardly call it "infiltration". More like obeying corporate overlords. n/t

[timdog44]

25. True. n/t

[ProSense]

20. What the hell

"Reviled by whom?"

How about at least 250,000 American citizens, family farmers included, who signed a petition protesting the Monsanto Protection Act which Obama was only too giddy to sign into law with the spending bill he had plenty of time to shape as he wanted?

...does that petition have to do with this statement:

"He is reviled for shaping and implementing the government's favorable agricultural biotechnology policies during the Clinton administration."

The people who signed that petition likely have no clue about his work during the Clinton administration.

[brentspeak]

28. "The people who signed that petition likely have no clue about his work..."

Prosense:

"The people who signed that petition likely have no clue about his work during the Clinton administration."

Considering that the same organizations which drafted the Strike the Monsanto Protection Act petition have previously circulated petitions or otherwise urged Obama to dump Taylor, you have produced yet another demonstration that you don't really know what you're talking about:

http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/sign/dump_monsanto_mike/

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_25275.cfm

[ProSense]

30. Again,

Prosense:
"The people who signed that petition likely have no clue about his work during the Clinton administration."

Considering that the same organizations which drafted the have previously circulated petitions or otherwise urged Obama to dump Taylo, you have produced yet another demonstration that you don't really know what you're talking about:

http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/sign/dump_monsanto_mike/

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_25275.cfm

...what the hell does that petition have to do with this statement:

"He is reviled for shaping and implementing the government's favorable agricultural biotechnology policies during the Clinton administration."

The people who signed that petition likely have no clue about his work during the Clinton administration.

[brentspeak]

38. So, according to you, the petition signers are nothing but uneducated rubes

who have no idea who Michael Taylor is and have never read any of the numerous articles which have circulated on the Web for years about Taylor's shady activities during the Clinton administration, how he was the Clinton admin's point man in obtaining government approval for Monsanto's recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) through the FDA regulatory process and into the milk supply?

http://www.monitor.net/monitor/9904b/monsantofda.html

http://grist.org/article/obama-and-the-usda/

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/19/663887/-Got-rBST-A-Taylor-made-Wolff-in-the-USDA-Henhouse

I always speculated that you considered the internet masses out there to be idiots ripe for your disinformation postings, but now we have final confirmation.

[ProSense]

39. No,

"So, according to you, the petition signers are nothing but uneducated rubes who have no idea who Michael Taylor is and have never read any of the numerous articles which have circulated on the Web for years about Taylor's shady activities during the Clinton administration, how he was the Clinton admin's point man in obtaining government approval for Monsanto's recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) through the FDA regulatory process and into the milk supply?"

...that's not what I'm saying, and you still haven't explained what the hell the petition has to do with this statement:

"He is reviled for shaping and implementing the government's favorable agricultural biotechnology policies during the Clinton administration."

First, you posted links to the petition that made no mention of Clinton. Now you're posting links to articles that have nothing to do with the petition.

[brentspeak]

41. Yes, you really did in effect say that the 250,000 petition signers are uneducated rubes

By claiming, stupidly, that they are somehow clueless about Taylor, which I just disproved by posting links to petitions urging Obama to dump Taylor -- petitions which were circulated by the very same organizations which circulated the petition urging Obama to veto any bill containing the Monsanto Protection Act.

"First, you posted links to the petition that made no mention of Clinton. Now you're posting links to articles that have nothing to do with the petition."

Now you're just Playing Dumb.

[ProSense]

42. No, I didn't, and

"Now you're just Playing Dumb."

..."playing dumb" is pretending that you have explained the connection between the petition and this statement:

"He is reviled for shaping and implementing the government's favorable agricultural biotechnology policies during the Clinton administration."

There is no connection, no matter how many red herrings, non sequiturs or straw men you throw up.

[brentspeak]

43. Other people understood my post clearly enough

What is equally clear is how you patronizingly look down your nose at the 250,000 petition signers.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2595996

Prosense: "The people who signed that petition likely have no clue about his (Taylor's) work during the Clinton administration."

[ProSense]

44. You

"Other people understood my post clearly enough

What is equally clear is how you patronizingly look down your nose at the 250,000 petition signers."

...still have no explanation, and you're still throwing up straw men.

[G_j]

52. you seem to be missing the fact

that there is a significant group of citizens who do their best to pay attention.

[sabrina 1]

56. Since everyone knew about the rider for one year, a petition was prepared

which received 250,000 signatures and sent to President Obama months ago. So it can hardly be believed that no one knew about it, that Republicans 'sneaked it into the bill' overnight. I believe this is what is being referred to.

[G_j]

31. the same people who were concerned

about free trade agreements etc. under Clinton. Monsanto has been quite unpopular for a long time.

[timdog44]

35. And if they are so proud

about their high carbon footprint GMO crap, they should be proud enough to label it.

Roundup, the reason for GMO, is a poison that has had to be increased to the point of being ineffective. And cause the use of petroleum based fertilizers. And then they take the "food" they produce and put it into cars and trucks as fuel. A sin.