Would you play ethics limbo with Senator Ruderman?
From Farmers for Choice Hawaii August 14, 2013
We’re not advocating anyone actually play a political limbo dance; but would you if you could? We can’t go very low, so we’d lose. Now how low can he go, apparently pretty low by the looks of it. From a political perspective, I admittedly was not shocked by his testimony but his signature line did cause a tinge of whip-lash. Really why would any Senator submit testimony on behalf of his Company and then use his title. It’s a very questionable choice Sen. Ruderman made here as shown. After reading his testimony it became clear why he may have made this faux pas; his testimony on Hawaii County Bill 79 was weak and certainly not accurate.
The question still remains why is Senator Russell Ruderman submitting personal business testimony and signing it as a Senator? Did the taxpayers pay for your time to draft this testimony as well?
Somehow he finds it perfectly ethical to make it very clear he is a Senator and use his position. Is that taking the low road or the high road of the moral path? It certainly seems it might be an ethics issue. This is what I consider an ethics limbo dance; maybe he feels compelled to dance in order to achieve his personal agenda; however I suggest the truth is a much higher road to take. Is there a conflict in this issue for him as the owner of Island Naturals Food Stores and if he has a personal interest in this issue why is he even testifying, especially with a potential conflict of interest, he is after all a paid Senator in Hawaii.
Is this ethical dance logical in his mind; does he really see this as representing his community fairly; especially since his testimony was full of misinformation, anecdotal jargon and no facts!
Sen. Russell Ruderman’s Testimony Dated 05/14/2013 “Text in bold is my comments not the Senator’s”
Being the only county without widespread GMO test “Test Crops, REALLY Senator don’t your mean seed crops; if we’re really talking widespread crops as you state” our island is in a unique position to protect our agriculture industry and environment from the many dangers of GMo crops. I will only discuss the economic and political impacts of GMO’s at this time. “Maybe because he has no facts in this testimony “
FACT: There is no danger from GMO crops; show us 1 case where an organic farmer lost certification or 1 case of harm to a human or animal has been proven? According to the National Academy of Science who conducted a widespread search for harm to humans in 2004, not one instance of harm to humans was proven out of thousands and that statement stands today.” Source Report Link
For every GMO crop introduced, the value of that entire crop drops “anecdotal since the facts don’t support his theory, which crops are you speaking of? “ Hawaiian papaya, for example, has never recovered to the pricing we enjoyed before the unpredicted and uncontrollable contamination from GMO papaya. “Clearly your confused on the FACTS; show us 1 proven case of contamination from the rainbow papaya? Prove it! The pricing is consistent with market highs and lows especially considering the global marketplace and the imports Hawaii Papaya faces on a daily basis.” Now our Hawaiian papaya crop is on the boycott list for millions of consumers worldwide. Japan took IO years to accept Hawaiian papaya, and still requires labeling. ”The process was started in 1999 and the Japanese ministry had to be handled 1 at a time; there are close to 200 of them. Hawaiian papaya is prized for its superior taste.” In the first year of acceptance of Hawaiian papaya, Japan consumed about 4,000 pounds of GMO papaya “Where he gets this data is unknown since the very first shipment of Rainbow papaya contained 6250 pounds in 5 pound boxes and that was only the first shipment.” and over I million pounds of non-GMO papaya‘ showing that consumer rejection of GMO is still the rule, even expensive marketing campaigns. “Again unknown data since Japan consumes more than $1 million dollars in US imported Papaya annually. Hawaii faces considerable competition on its papaya exports; yet is still considered to be a superior product. The global marketplace regulates the price and Hawaii must compete.”
This bill is well crafted including the exemption for GMO papaya already established here. Papaya farmers deserve our support, but we must protect all other farmers and consumers from the negative effects GMO crops will have on other agriculture crops. “Hawaii County Bill 79 “well crafted” now that is almost funny if not coming from a State Senator; since most people who read the Bill 79 including the County council felt it bizarre, confusing and a train wreck! What negative effects? There has never been 1 organic farmer to lose his certification and there is NO cases of any health risks to humans or animals!”
How well is the Senator dancing the political ethics limbo in your opinion; was this a faux pas or an ethics issue? I have no interest in dancing this ethical, political limbo dance with Senator Ruderman as I find the truth is the best platform no matter what my personal agenda is. I did feel compelled to bring it to the community’s attention, not that it will change his actions or intent but in fairness of transparency there ya go!
---30---