# Good news for the U S BEEKEEPER



## Ted (Feb 20, 2000)

June 10, 2010

Schumer: Import rule needed to limit honey 'fraud'
Impure Chinese imports hurting American producers, senator says
By MICHAEL GORMLEY
Associated Press Writer 

ALBANY — U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer of New York wants a national standard for pure honey to sting fraudulent imports from China that are hurting an American honey market valued at up to $12 billion.

Schumer is asking the federal food and drug commissioner for a standard that would halt imports of adulterated or mislabeled honey from abroad. It's called "honey laundering" and Florida and Wisconsin have enacted their own pure honey standards, with other states preparing similar legislation to protect their markets.

Honey laundering includes intentionally mislabeling shipments of honey and setting up shell companies to disguise the country of origin to avoid tariffs or limit restrictions designed to protect U.S. producers.

A Chinese executive pleaded guilty in August to a federal charge he conspired to smuggle adulterated honey into the United States to avoid the decade-old tariffs enacted to curb imports. That case in Seattle was one of two such criminal cases filed last year.

"Chinese companies, like common criminals, are honey laundering," Schumer said. "They're intentionally hiding the true origin and content of their honey."

Schumer said Wednesday that more than 144 million pounds of honey is produced each year in the U.S. The Democrat said losses are as much as $200 million a year in the U.S.

Schumer is also introducing legislation that would provide greater enforcement power at customs offices along borders.


----------



## BigT (Mar 6, 2006)

*Thumbs Up!*
Big T


----------



## FindlayBee (Aug 2, 2009)

One might find that the Definition of honey the Federal Government comes up with changes over time or becomes so strict that very few will be able to comply with it. One also may find that everyone with a single hive will be required by law to have a dedicated honey processing facility.


----------



## Bens-Bees (Sep 18, 2008)

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is a federal responsibility and ICE agents do not and will not enforce state laws or regulations at the international ports. The point in taking federal action is to stop this stuff at the ports, where it's easiest to catch it. Once it's in the country, it is much more difficult to catch the offenders.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Ted, is this about adulteration of honey or about protecting our product and our market from China?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

What about the Bill? Regardless of who is proposing it, what is it worth? Is it a good idea? Or not? How do you feel about that?

Should Congress be doing something to protect the American Honey Producers from unfair/illegal practices of another country? Should Congress try to protect the American Consumer from possibly tainted honey?

If our customers get some bad honey, whose country of origin is China, they won't care where it came from, they will suspect Honey, not just Chinese Honey.

So, again, is this bill something we should support or not and why?


----------



## Brenda (Nov 23, 2006)

It has to go through the Senate and the House, so he will probably only get 1/2 of what he's asking for. Question is, will the other Senators make it better or worse?


----------



## alpha6 (May 12, 2008)

I think most of you are missing a VERY important point. Importation of Chinese adultered honey is ALREADY illegal. ICE and members of Congress have been briefed and are informed about the ways Chinese honey is being sent through other countries and arriving in the US. The Honey Packing Companies are WELL aware of this as countries that have no honey production are suddenly a primary source of foreign honey to these packers and they REFUSE to report to the USG when they discover honey that has been altered referring instead to "return" it to the sender. 

Like everything else, the existing laws need to be enforced but are not. ICE should have a task force set up to work on this issue, but they do not. If individual ICE agents do not take it upon themselves to initiate an investigation one does not get done. ALL imported honey should be inspected and verified. Any packer who buys honey from foreign honey should have to verify and certify it's purity and country of origin. If they are caught utilizing or not adhering to these regulations they should be fined heavily and/or face criminal charges.

The kicker is that NOTHING is going to be done until you get a bunch of people that are sickened or worse killed from bad imported honey. Then it will be too late. The packers will all cry "I didn't know." but the honey industry, including the US producers and our friends in Canada will have a heck of a time regaining the consumer trust and most will not be able to survive while we wait for people to forget.

Rather then new laws write your congressman. and have them place calls to ICE and the FBI. Your letter should contain some of the following language.

Dear Congressman,

As a US honey producer and or consumer, I am worried about the contamination of our food supply through the importation of honey that contains dangerous levels of chemicals produced in China and various other countries. It is also common knowledge that the Chinese are shipping their honey to the US through other countries listing this countries as the country of origin to evade excise taxes and detection. I am writing you to let you know that failure to inspect these foreign imports threatens our food supply and the livelihood of US honey producers. I am asking that you contact the heads of ICE, the FBI and any other government entity to initiate investigations into this serious and potentially dangerous situation before we have a national crisis.


Keep copies of the letters. Congressman hate this type of thing because the HAVE to act on it. Should something happen and the press and public is made aware that the Congressman was made aware of the problem and did nothing then it is political suicide. So write to as many congressmen as possible...much better way to go then new regulations that are also not enforced.


----------



## wdcrkapry205 (Feb 11, 2010)

Thank you Alpha6 for professionally wrapping that up!


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

Just sent it to my rep and senators.


----------



## Trevor Mansell (Jan 16, 2005)

Since the government has gotten out of the bee industry ,honey loan program or other programs the price of honey has steadily risen . Now that they are going to get back into it prices will steadily fall. All they have to do is enforce the laws that are already there and leave our industry alone. Any industry the federal govt. gets involved with they screw it up. 

The honey standard sounds so nice and easy but people forget China can bring pure honey to our shore for .30 a lb. if something like this goes thru there will be some loop hole and China will start dumping here again. These politicians need leave the private sector alone.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Trevor Mansell said:


> Since the government has gotten out of the bee industry ,honey loan program or other programs the price of honey has steadily risen . Now that they are going to get back into it prices will steadily fall. All they have to do is enforce the laws that are already there and leave our industry alone. Any industry the federal govt. gets involved with they screw it up.
> 
> The honey standard sounds so nice and easy but people forget China can bring pure honey to our shore for .30 a lb. if something like this goes thru there will be some loop hole and China will start dumping here again. These politicians need leave the private sector alone.


I don't see how you draw the corrolation between the end of the honey loan program and the the rise in honey price. I think it is quite a stretch to say one has anything to do w/ the other.

To your second paragraph: China is already dumping honey into our market by sending it through countries thatdon't have a honey producing industry. And "bring pure honey to our shore"? That is also part of the problem, it ain't pure.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

The op of this Thread is about importation fraud, not purity of U.S. honey.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

On Schumers' website this news release is currently posted. Parts of it read:
"Two days after Schumer exposes Chinese honey laundering, FDA announces seizure of 64 barrels of illegal, contaminated Chinese honey" "contaminated w/ a potent antibiotic".

Chloramphenicol


----------



## mike haney (Feb 9, 2007)

FindlayBee said:


> One might find that the Definition of honey the Federal Government comes up with changes over time or becomes so strict that very few will be able to comply with it. One also may find that everyone with a single hive will be required by law to have a dedicated honey processing facility.


one might also find that the markets have been flooded with green cheese from the moon, but that aint likely either.


----------



## Trevor Mansell (Jan 16, 2005)

sqkcrk said:


> On Schumers' website this news release is currently posted. Parts of it read:
> "Two days after Schumer exposes Chinese honey laundering, FDA announces seizure of 64 barrels of illegal, contaminated Chinese honey" "contaminated w/ a potent antibiotic".
> 
> Chloramphenicol


What year was the article written ? That was the reason Chinese went to ultra filtration what like 10 years ago. We all agree there needs to be some standard of identity for honey . I feel that if you put the words "honey" on the label of your food product then it needs to be pure honey and not bakers blend. This bill is not going to address trans-shipped honey . 

As far as the honey loan program of the 80's and early 90's it was price fixing ,and subsidizing the bee industry. Beekeepers would take loans out on the honey for a higher than market value then walk away from the honey. The govt would then sell the honey to packers for a loss keeping prices low. Kinda like whats going on today with crop disaster insurance and beekeepers. Produce honey for a few years , buy ins then do pollination. Use the honey crop to make splits and get a check from the govt. for half your average crop. 

My point is if China can meet the pure honey standards ,which they can thru ultra filtration , it can be a possible loop hole to get out of the anti-dumping suit. Honey prices are slowly creeping up ,wouldnt be wise to just leave things alone?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Trevor Mansell said:


> What year was the article written ?
> 
> My point is if China can meet the pure honey standards ,which they can thru ultra filtration ,


June 11,2010.

Well, apparently just because China can ultrafilter their honey, according to you, that doesn't mean that they do.

This is now.


----------



## Trevor Mansell (Jan 16, 2005)

I see the article $32,000 dollars for 64 barrels of honey ,thats like $.70 a lb. So if they ultra filtered that or it didn't have the antibiotic you would be ok with that price? I guess its better that $.30lb.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

No I wouldn't. Would you?


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Alpha - Is your idea that knowledge of a violation of law(Tainted honey), with out remedial action to correct said violation, exposes the Sen.Rep to liability for damages incurred by said violation? So they are in trouble not for what they do, but what they did not do?

I have been working on my Rep, with little avail, but this maybe a new tool..

Roland


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Voter pressure on Representatives spurs them to apply pressure to those in a position to go after the violaters of our import laws. Many drops of water eventually wear away stone.


----------



## Elwood (Apr 8, 2009)

When Congress passes a law it almost always has a Trojan Horse in it somewhere. Be careful what you ask for, you may end up getting something you don't want or need.


----------



## JPK (May 24, 2008)

Enforce current laws on the books....thats all we need.

More laws are just pointless on this subject.


----------



## waynesgarden (Jan 3, 2009)

Elwood said:


> When Congress passes a law it almost always has a Trojan Horse in it somewhere. Be careful what you ask for, you may end up getting something you don't want or need.


I hear that a lot. Like the anti-NAIS folks that said voluntary registration of their herds is a really a plot by Big Brother to micro-chip and monitor every American or that the last Farm Bill would outlaw back yard gardens or force all gardeners and farmers to use Monsanto products.

So, what exactly is the Trojan Horse you are referring to? Specifics, please.

Wayne


----------



## alpha6 (May 12, 2008)

Roland said:


> Alpha - Is your idea that knowledge of a violation of law(Tainted honey), with out remedial action to correct said violation, exposes the Sen.Rep to liability for damages incurred by said violation? So they are in trouble not for what they do, but what they did not do?
> 
> I have been working on my Rep, with little avail, but this maybe a new tool..
> 
> Roland


Roland,

The heads of ICE, FBI and all other branches of government are appointees. Their mandates are set and changed depending on the current administration. When a Congressman makes an "inquiry" about an issue with these agencies it becomes a priority and other day to day operations, missions, investigations, etc. take a back seat while the head of the agency awaits a response from the field so they can "report back" to the congressman or administration staff. If several Congressman are making the same "inquires" to an agency it becomes a real priority, especially if there are safety/large scale effects type issue. In writing to your Congressman ask you can request a "Congressional Inquiry" into the issue. In our case it would be adulterated honey and the use of their countries as transhipment ports to flood the US market with substandard products that contain potentially dangerous levels of banned chemicals and substances in addition to containing added products like rice syrup, etc. Agency Heads must respond in detail to a Congressional Inquiry...it is a very powerful tool.


----------



## JPK (May 24, 2008)

waynesgarden said:


> I hear that a lot. Like the anti-NAIS folks that said voluntary registration of their herds is a really a plot by Big Brother to micro-chip and monitor every American or that the last Farm Bill would outlaw back yard gardens or force all gardeners and farmers to use Monsanto products.
> 
> So, what exactly is the Trojan Horse you are referring to? Specifics, please.
> 
> Wayne


Wayne, you would be well served by doing some research on 2 bills in particular from the 2009 season. HR 875 and S 425. Both would have a very negative impact on small farms not to mention backyard farmers and farmers markets.

You can look them up on thomas.gov as well as google them.

The problem with the vast majority of legislation being passed is that it is FAR to long, complicated and is poorly written to allow unintended (intended?) actions and consequences and has content not germane to the subject/title of the bill

These two bills along with many others places rulemaking authority in the hands of unelected bureaucrats....in essence our Elected Officials are abdicating their responsibilities as lawmakers to these unaccountable, unelected bureaucrats.

If I may quote a former president that is the proverbial broken clock

You do not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered.
Lyndon B. Johnson


----------



## waynesgarden (Jan 3, 2009)

JPK said:


> Wayne, you would be well served by doing some research on 2 bills in particular from the 2009 season. HR 875 and S 425. Both would have a very negative impact on small farms not to mention backyard farmers and farmers markets.


They are no longer active bills. The Farm Bill has been passed and signed into law. Researched them as they were being proposed and found little to support the wild claims that were being made. Now that the last farm bill is law and has been for a while, what major specific problems are actually being experienced by farmers and gardeners? Am I a criminal now because I garden organically? Is my little garden under the thumb of Monsanto? Have there been widespread closures of farmers markets?

Really want to know what specific "Trojan Horse" would be in a new law about honey laundering. I need to know if I need to do something or if I should just put my tin foil hat on again.

Wayne


----------



## waynesgarden (Jan 3, 2009)

FindlayBee said:


> One also may find that everyone with a single hive will be required by law to have a dedicated honey processing facility.


Has that bee proposed also? Specifics, please.

Wayne


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

FindlayBee said:


> One also may find that everyone with a single hive will be required by law to have a dedicated honey processing facility.


Maybe there may come a time when such a thing happens, but I doubt it. There are too many small individuals spread far and wide for such a law to be enforcable.

Not saying that it can't possibly happen. Just saying it ain't practical.


----------



## JohnK and Sheri (Nov 28, 2004)

OK, time to take this to tailgater?....this post is specific to the OP bill, any broad political commentary or debate belongs in tailgatoer. 
Sheri


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Alpha6 - Thanks. so that is how the game is played. I have been working with my Rep's aide. I will approach her on Monday with the request for a "Congressional Inquiry".


Roland


----------



## JPK (May 24, 2008)

waynesgarden said:


> They are no longer active bills. The Farm Bill has been passed and signed into law. Researched them as they were being proposed and found little to support the wild claims that were being made. Now that the last farm bill is law and has been for a while, what major specific problems are actually being experienced by farmers and gardeners? Am I a criminal now because I garden organically? Is my little garden under the thumb of Monsanto? Have there been widespread closures of farmers markets?
> 
> Wayne


Wayne, I wish you were right but both bills are current and active in the 111th Congress.

Both have been read at least once and are in committee.

Now, they will likely go nowhere as they stand but make no mistake about it they will likely resurrected or rolled into some Omnibus bill that has too many juicy bits to NOT get passed.

Please note that these bills have absolutely nothing to do with any "Farm Bill".

In addition there's a related bill as per below

H.R.815
Title: Safe And Fair Enforcement and Recall for Meat, Poultry, and Food Act of 2009
Sponsor: Rep DeGette, Diana [CO-1] (introduced 2/3/2009) Cosponsors (13)
Latest Major Action: 4/23/2009 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry. 

Here are the two I originally referenced.

H.R.875
Title: Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009
Sponsor: Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [CT-3] (introduced 2/4/2009) Cosponsors (40)
Latest Major Action: 4/23/2009 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry. 

S.425
Title: Food Safety and Tracking Improvement Act
Sponsor: Sen Brown, Sherrod [OH] (introduced 2/12/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 2/12/2009 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. 

Go read the billa, they are chock full of new rules and regulations, penalties and fines. 

Here's 875
http://thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.875:

Its just like a large percentage of legislation cranking through Congress these days that is vague and makes it increasingly difficult to operate a small business......its to the point where its nearly impossible NOT to run afoul of SOME regulation and if someone gets a bug up their butt its not that hard to find something significant to charge you with.......its a lot like some of the old blue laws that are still on the books, they are not enforced for the most part but they ARE still illegal and once in a while someone gets prosecuted for running afoul of one of them.

The legal code should be simple, clear and easy to follow.

It shouldn't be the hundreds of thousands of pages of nonsense that has accumulated since the 1930's.

This law is just going to be more noise and won't make a difference.

Enforce the laws on the books which already prohibit the import of tainted products.


----------



## waynesgarden (Jan 3, 2009)

I wish that my manuals for treating honey bee ailments was as simple as those written in the 1930s but the beekeeping world isn't that simple anymore. Neither is the rest of the world we live in and wishing the laws and regulations required were simpler is a bit naive.

Florida and Wisconsin have standards such as Sen. Schumer is calling for and as Bens-Bees points out, the Federal government is powerless to enforce them at our nations borders. Sen Schumer is correct in calling for stricter standards regarding imported honey and for more enforcement power at the border.

While there is apparently a weakness in our customs laws that requires legislation to strengthen it, the standard that Senator Schumer is calling for will not be a new law. It is a rule. If it were a new law, he would have announced new legislation, not called on the FDA Commisioner to take action. The law that established the Food and Drug Administration is in place and it empowers the agency to create such rules. It follows a series of steps involving one or more drafts, publishing it in the Federal Register, hearings and public comment periods before becoming a final rule. It will not be voted on by Congress. 

JPK, I stand corrected. I was mixing up these two bills with previous legislation and regulations, such as Farm Bills, a proposed farm animal ID system and others that I've had similar discussions about.

My point isn't to re-argue these (and as you have noted the 2 bills in question have not been argued on the floors of Congress yet.) My only point is that if and when new standards are proposed that we should discuss what is actually in the proposal, not what is in the imagination of others such as requiring that "everyone with a single hive will be required by law to have a dedicated honey processing facility." While the person who wrote that obviously has no knowledge of a yet to be written standard, that's precisely the type of misinformation that makes it into discussions about propsed regualtions or bills. By way of example, during recent Farm Bill debates, some groups pushed the idea that NAIS (National Animal Identification System) was to become mandatory and that I would be required to microchip each of my chickens. All this was imagined because someone read that the bill would require importers of animals into the US for food provide documentation of Country of Origin. Having said it, it became a fact in the minds of the easily led, much as the "death panels that would pull the plug on Granny" that Sen Grassley said was in the health reform bill. Even though he later admitted it was fiction and not in any proposal, there are still those who believe it to be in the law enacted.

When someone actually finds something onerous in the proposed FDA standard or in Sen Schumer's legislation strengthening our borders, please point to the actual text and then I'll get all excited. Until then, I keep my tin-foil hat at the ready for all other imagined horrors.

Wayne


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

I am confused. How is the U.S. government powerless? Transshipping honey is clearly a circumvention of tarriffs. This was clearly laid out in the Suit by the Crayfish/Mushroom/Honey industries in United States Court of International trade, Case 09-00140. (I have the Pdf ). All they have to do is enforce the existing laws. . The Carbon 13 isotope analysis only shows one country as the source of funny honey at this time, so upholding the current tariffs against this country would clear up most of the present problems. 

Yes, definition of honey will help, but there is no need to wait for the promogulation of administrative codes. 

Roland


----------



## JPK (May 24, 2008)

Roland is right on the mark.

We don't need more legislation to control the problem of contaminated/adultered honey from foreign countries.


----------



## waynesgarden (Jan 3, 2009)

I will await for publication of any proposed regulations concerning honey imports before commenting on the specifics. Except for some cheerleaders for failure, I would think we all would have helping the interests of US honey producers in common. Any tools that would help are welcome in my opinion. Obviously, there are weaknesses in the current laws and regulations that are being exploited.

Wayne


----------

