Posted on 04/06/2019 3:30:00 AM PDT by Kaslin
Aurelia Skipwith has a BS in biology from Howard University, a Master’s in molecular genetics from Purdue and a law degree from Kentucky. She has worked as a molecular analyst and sustainable agriculture partnership manager. She was also co-founder and general counsel for AVC Global, a Washington, D.C.-based agricultural supply chain development company that helps small farmers link up with multinational buyers and with agronomy, business, financial and other service providers.
For two years, she served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Interior Department, where she performed her duties so well that last October President Trump nominated her to become the next Director of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) at Interior. She is an ideal candidate for the post.
She’s also only the third woman ever nominated for this position – and the first African American. Her impeccable scientific, legal, agricultural and conservationist background would ensure fairness, balance, integrity, solid science and multidisciplinary thinking in FWS decision making.
And yet, Ms. Skipwith lingers in confirmation limbo, along with hundreds of others whose nominations have been stalled for many months to well over a year. Too many Democratic senators appear determined to prevent the president from having people onboard who would implement his policies.
In fact, the US Senate has already been forced to hold cloture votes – ending drawn-out debates – on 128 Trump nominees! In glaring contrast, the Senate had a grand total of only 24 such cloture votes for all six previous presidents combined: Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush II and Obama! That’s 32 times more nominees by this president sidelined by Congress than during all ten previous presidential terms.
Why is Ms. Skipwith being treated this way? It appears to be simple ideological politics. Senate Democrats seem to be acquiescing to the demands of Deep Green environmentalists and Deep State career bureaucrats who do not like having their views and policies challenged.
Her molecular analysis and sustainable agriculture work were with Monsanto, the ultimate Evil Corporation to many of her opponents, because it manufactures both Roundup weedkiller and genetically engineered (GE) crops like Bt corn and Roundup-Ready soybeans. As Deputy Assistant Secretary, Ms. Skipwith supported reversing Obama era bans on planting such crops and using advanced-technology neonicotinoid pesticides in wildlife refuges administered by Fish & Wildlife.
The 2014 bans resulted from collusive sue-and-settle lawsuits between environmentalist groups and Obama DOI officials. They were reversed in August 2018, following a careful review process. As I have noted in many articles (here, here and here, for example), GE crops, glyphosate (the active ingredient in Roundup) and neonics are safe for humans and the environment. They also enable farmers to produce more food from less land, using less water and fewer pesticides, and with greater resistance to droughts, floods, insects and climate change, than is possible with conventional or organic crops.
Genetically engineered crops promote sustainable agriculture and help the world feed billions who otherwise face prolonged malnutrition and starvation. And yet, radical greens oppose them. They even attack Golden Rice, which prevents blindness and death in malnourished children and parents, by incorporating genes that produce Vitamin A precursors, vastly expanding nutritional values in rice.
Americans alone have consumed more than four trillion servings of foods with at least one GE ingredient – without a single documented example of harm to a person or the environment.
Regarding glyphosate, only one agency, the International Agency for Cancer Research (IARC), says the chemical is “probably carcinogenic” to humans – and its analysis is tainted by fraud and blatant conflicts of interest. Studies by the European Food Safety Authority, Food and Agriculture Organization, Germany’s Institute for Risk Assessment, Australia’s Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, and other respected organizations worldwide have concluded that glyphosate is safe and non-carcinogenic.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency scientists conducted a “comprehensive systematic review of studies submitted to the agency and available in the open literature,” and concluded that the chemical “is not likely to be carcinogenic in humans.” Health Canada conducted a similarly extensive review of global studies, found no likely cancer risk, and noted that “no pesticide regulatory authority in the world” believes glyphosate is a cancer risk to humans “at the levels at which humans are currently exposed.”
As cancer researcher Arthur Lambert noted recently, “exposure to carcinogens influences the risk of developing cancer, which is a function of many factors, including the dose and duration of the exposure” – to glyphosate for example. But other factors also play integral roles, including inherited genes and genetic mutations, how well one’s immune system can find and eliminate mutated cells before they develop into cancer, personal lifestyle choices, and exposure to additional carcinogens over the years. Separating all those factors is virtually impossible.
Risks associated with glyphosate fall “somewhere between the small hazard that comes from eating a considerable amount of bacon (for colorectal cancer) and consuming very hot tea (for esophageal cancer),” Lambert notes. In fact, IARC lumps bacon, sunlight and plutonium together in its “definitely carcinogenic” category and lists as “possible” carcinogens pickled vegetables, caffeic acid found in many fruits and vegetables, and even drinking hot beverages or working the night shift.
If glyphosate poses few risks of cancer in humans, its threats to ducks, geese, turkeys and other animals in wildlife refuges are likely infinitesimal. The same is true for GE crops and neonicotinoid pesticides.
Most neonics are used as seed coatings, which get absorbed into plant tissues as crops grow. They protect plants against insect damage by targeting only pests that actually feed on the crops – and are largely gone by the time mature plants flower, which means they are barely detectable in pollen.
As to claims that neonics harm bees and thus should be banned from wildlife refuges, a 2015 international study of wild bees found that most wild bees never even come into contact with crops or the neonics that supposedly threaten them. The same study also determined that the 2% of wild bees that do visit crops – and so would be most exposed to these pesticides – are among the healthiest bee species on Earth.
The eight senators who recently expressed concern that chlorpyrifos and other pesticides threaten multiple protected species should applaud Interior’s reversal of bans on modern agricultural technologies (which reduce the use of such pesticides). Ducks Unlimited and the National Wild Turkey Federation certainly did.
The bans “were clearly not based on science,” they said, adding that the reversal restored GE crop use as an “essential tool” for waterfowl and wildlife management in national wildlife refuges. Many refuges were established along migratory bird flyways to provide food for waterfowl. But some can provide sufficient food only through cooperative agreements that let local farmers plant crops on refuge lands in exchange for leaving some of their crops unharvested, to supplement natural food on the refuge.
Genetically modified crops maximize crop yields, the FWS has explained, and “a blanket denial” of their use limits the latitude that refuge managers need to fulfill the purposes of each refuge. The ban on neonics was equally problematical because they are often used with GE crops and Roundup.
Aurelia Skipwith’s actions reflect the best in science-based government decision making. Her broad expertise enables her to separate fact from fiction, and reality from ideological agendas. She is the right person for this job – and indeed may turn out to be one of the best FWS directors ever. The Senate should confirm her forthwith.
Democrats are racist and sexist:
“She’s also only the third woman ever nominated for this position – and the first African American.”
I do have some criticism for this article, which is otherwise excellent. That is that the article describes genetically modified foods (or organisms) as if they are a recent development. They are not. Humans have been using various methods to genetically modify organisms for millenia. Anyone who has ever consumed beef, for example, is consuming an animal that would not exist without human intervention. The same is true of tomatoes, corn, pork—in fact, just about every food we eat unless it is harvested in the wild. If a wild counterpart exists, and the domestic form does not look and/or taste like the wild counterpart, it is genetically modified.
Here you have a highly accomplished woman with all the right qualifications except one: she is NOT a treetard.
Your points about the penchant of the squeamers for abhorring “genetically-modified” are extremely well taken. They can’t seem to get it through their thick heads that, yes, climate does change (all by itself), and that genetics are constantly being modified (it’s a human endeavor called agriculture).
btt
The pervasiveness of greed and the rejection of God is the two soul drivers of the Democrats for these actions . I need to also point out that multiple republicans aid and abet this while under the cloak of their label (republican.) Just as we battle daily to not submit to darkness , we witness the constant barrage of slander and semantics within the political antics perpetuated by these self-serving persons whose only goal is to undermine a truly great man who loves God and is doing his best for the republic while battling these empty souls at every corner . The only thing that (to be expected) is troubling is the amount of Americans who believe this tripe spewed by the constant propaganda in our lost press/media . But , with that being said I say to all God loving Freepers enjoy these years with Donald John Trump as he is the absolute best President we will witness , and his touch will resonate for decades . Just keep in mind the amount of years that subversive Presidents have had to put in place people that are also empty and void of compassion . Faith and thanks to God for placing President Trump at the head of our government . God knows and I do not question his actions . May God be with all of you and your loved ones .
I am so glad to read a Kaslin post. Thank you, Kaslin. I truly appreciate your referencing your material and your viewpoints.
After reading about this insanity of the Democrats rejecting this very qualified woman from a very important government post, I feel frustrated and angry. And in the midst of that I thought, the Democrats are consistently making it more and more difficult to tolerate them.
I think the time is coming when we must separate our States based on political beliefs, religious and ideological beliefs and maybe even our physical health. All I can say at this point is “Don’t leave me behind!”. I will help in anyway I can.
I’m with you. Putting Vit. A into rice is such a fantastic creation. Why is that supposed to be bad when they add vitamins and other “enrichments” to our milk, bread, cereal, margarine, etc.?
Democrats are pure evil. If given total power America will starve. Obama was heading us that direction. We cannot let it happen again.
2020 will be a watershed election.
It looks like we all get a little something different from this. I see her as a typical DC crony who assists farmwrs in getting taxpayer dollars, instead of earning their paycheck.
I seee her as a typical dem. Why else would she work in DC.. for farmers? Not too many farms by the Potomac.
I think the “Green” agenda is by it’s own title a fraud, because it is not about a green world at all. I
t’s about a political agenda that has confiscated the word “Green” for what they understand the sheeple think that word implies, regardless of any of the affects of any policies of the “Green New Deal”. As usual with Marxists and Progressives, it’s a con job.
“..and with greater resistance to droughts, floods, insects and climate change...”
Climate change? I’m seeing red!!
Democrat pols are only good for a couple of things. I can’t say what that is on an open forum but they do have something to do with swinging or pigs food.
the US Senate has already been forced to hold cloture votes – ending drawn-out debates – on 128 Trump nominees! In glaring contrast, the Senate had a grand total of only 24 such cloture votes for all six previous presidents combined: Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush II and Obama
She's "African American", that's why. And, oh yeah, "Trump is a racist."
We need to take a page from JFK.
When Kennedy came into the presidency, we had the Bureau of the Budget — and it was largely staffed by Republicans. JFK didn’t like that, so he sent a bill over to abolish the Bureau of the /budget and replace it with the Office of Management and Budget, which he then staffed up with Democrat bureaucrats.
This may be an agency we should repeal and replace.
Which means they're more self-sufficient and not dependent on "progressive" politicians and their bureaucratic minions. And that is absolutely NOT acceptable.
Somebody once described the environmentalist wackos as watermelons — green on the outside, but red on the inside.
You and the author (among others) harbor either a bias or genetic mutation - ironically - which enhances ignorance. In your comment on GM, you ignore the chemical aspect altogether. I read that as either supportive or acquiescence.
GM in the sense of critique is lambasted for increasing use of chemicals on crops which are modified to tolerate them. I and others have little problem with GM which utilizes plant defenses found in nature or breeding of crops and animals for characteristics. It’s all about the chemicals and the author is clear on his bias.
You are parroting a narrative well-used by monsanto/pro-chemical sycophants. Oversimplifying the debate to simply “to GM or not GM” is a very liberal thing to do and many do it very well. If you harbor a bias which cannot tell the difference, then perhaps you need a timeout to evaluate your formerly-defective ways, “exDem”, and how they affect your thought process.
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.