Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

USDA's snooping machine: Henry Lamb warns of agency's questionnaire seeking property owners' info
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | 1/13/07 | Henry Lamb

Posted on 01/12/2007 11:42:59 PM PST by JohnHuang2

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is looking more and more like the Big Brother government that has infected Washington in recent years. The "2006 Agricultural Identification Survey," recently mailed to thousands of private landowners, is a good example.

The instructions for the questionnaire say "Response to this survey is legally required by Title 7, U.S. Code." Title 7 of the U.S. Code is an enormous document, containing 105 chapters, each of which is a lengthy book unto itself. To find the specific requirement, a person would have to read all the way to Chapter 55, Section 2204g, to discover that a person who falsifies an answer to the questions asked may be fined $500; a person who fails or refuses to answer may be fined $100.

The questionnaire asks 22 multi-part questions. The USDA wants to know what is on the privately owned land, how it is used, if there are animals on the land, and the variety and quantity of each. The agency wants to know if the owner has any contracts that affect the land or produce revenue, and how much total revenue the land produces.

Does the collection of this information – under penalty of law – by the U.S. government violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which clearly says, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects ... shall not be violated ..." without a warrant? This USDA survey is an infringement on the Fourth Amendment right of private landowners to be secure in their "persons, houses, papers and effects." Why does the government need this information?

Actually, this Agriculture Survey was authorized by a 1997 law that was enacted to relieve the U.S. Census Bureau from collecting farm data, which had been an expanding part of its mission for several years. The Census Bureau is authorized by the Constitution to simply count the citizens every 10 years in order to maintain balanced congressional representation. Like all bureaucracies, however, mission-creep has transformed the Census Bureau into a national snooping machine.

According to the 1997 law, the Agriculture Survey was supposed to be taken in 1998 and every five years thereafter. If a survey was taken in 1998, or 2003, it certainly missed thousands of landowners who received this 2006 survey, which should not be taken until 2008.

It may be purely coincidental that the "Premises Registration" required by the National Animal Identification System, or NAIS, is precisely the same information that is solicited on the 2006 Agriculture Survey form. Until 2006, the NAIS was intended, and expected, to be mandatory, beginning with premises registration by 2007. Affected landowners and small farmers raised such a ruckus, that the USDA had to back down and promise that the NAIS would be voluntary.

Organizations such as the Liberty Ark Coalition, nonais.org, stopanimalid.org and dozens of Internet groups have sprung up across the country in opposition the NAIS and to similar programs being developed at the state level using funds provided by the USDA.

The NAIS was developed by large meatpackers and technology manufacturers to enhance export markets. It was sold to the public as a public-safety program to track and trace-back the source of any animal sickness. The program fell apart when analyzed by the people who would be forced to comply with it, and the USDA has been forced to publicly abandon its plan to make the program mandatory.

Privately, however, the USDA is using all the tools it can muster to impose this animal identification program. The agency has provided funding to states that develop a mandatory program and has endorsed certain types of electronic technology – produced by the companies that helped develop the original program. Now, coincidentally, comes this 2006 Agriculture Survey, two years ahead of schedule, which requires – under penalty of law – the same information that the NAIS program cannot compel, since it is now voluntary, rather than mandatory.

Some landowners will simply ignore the questionnaire, pay the $100 fine and consider it to be an expense of keeping the government out of their business. Some folks may try to avoid the fine and maintain their Fourth Amendment rights by responding to each and every question with, "It's none of your damn business," and mailing the form to the USDA by the Jan. 29 deadline.

It is a sad state of affairs when Congress has so little concern for the U.S. Constitution that it allows this kind of abuse by federal agencies. This 2006 Agriculture Survey and the NAIS are but small examples of disrespect for the constitutional rights of all Americans. Congress will change its collective attitude, however, only when required to do so by the voters.


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: animalid; censusbureau; farms

1 posted on 01/12/2007 11:43:03 PM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

And guess who was in control of congress at the time...


2 posted on 01/12/2007 11:58:40 PM PST by DB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
...to discover that a person who falsifies an answer to the questions asked may be fined $500; a person who fails or refuses to answer may be fined $100.

One hundred dollars seems like a reasonable amount to pay to avoid further government intrusions as opposed to paying $500 and being on record for submitting false information.

3 posted on 01/13/2007 12:03:24 AM PST by backslacker (Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding Job 38)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backslacker
Martha Stewart did some jail time for lying to the Feds.

The $100 might be the best way out.

4 posted on 01/13/2007 12:10:40 AM PST by TYVets (God so loved the world he didn't send a committee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2


A good read:

Animal ID Makers in Hog Heaven (long but good)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1574414/posts



More reading:


All livestock to be registered with state [WI-Yes, fish too] ^
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1509267/posts


Farm trucks must obtain Federal ID
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1489145/posts

Amish oppose animal ID
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1485362/posts?page=53#53

National ID cards: REAL ID goes too far
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1487846/posts


5 posted on 01/13/2007 12:24:25 AM PST by quietolong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Affected landowners and small farmers raised such a ruckus, that the USDA had to back down and promise that the NAIS would be voluntary.

It'll be 'voluntary' for about 6 months. Then they'll complain about 'compliance levels' and make it mandatory and a felony offense for failure to comply.

L

6 posted on 01/13/2007 12:32:27 AM PST by Lurker (Europeans killed 6 million Jews. As a reward they got 40 million Moslems. Karma's a bitch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quietolong

Might want to add this one:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1766921/posts

They don't call Animal ID the 'Mark of the Beast' for nothing.


7 posted on 01/13/2007 12:35:00 AM PST by FLOutdoorsman (The Man who says it can't be done should not interrupt the man doing it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

.


8 posted on 01/13/2007 12:39:38 AM PST by sauropod ( "The View:" A Tupperware party in the 10th circle of Hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
"...to discover that a person who falsifies an answer to the questions asked may be fined $500; a person who fails or refuses to answer may be fined $100."

Bite me.

9 posted on 01/13/2007 4:56:40 AM PST by pigsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

bkmark


10 posted on 01/13/2007 9:00:25 AM PST by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/Ron_Paul_2008.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: JohnHuang2

bump


12 posted on 01/13/2007 8:42:14 PM PST by righthand man (WE'RE SOUTHERN AND PROUD OF IT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quietolong

http://arkansasanimalproducers.8k.com/custom4.html


13 posted on 01/13/2007 8:44:44 PM PST by righthand man (WE'RE SOUTHERN AND PROUD OF IT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

Same article posted here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1767314/posts

I added my data there.


14 posted on 01/13/2007 9:33:41 PM PST by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson