estebanana -> RE: Feds Won't Target Unwitting Owners of Illegal Wood (Sep. 25 2011 1:44:32)
|
from this guys blog, ( his writing style is grandiose, but his conclusions are intersting): http://www.nashvillescene.com/pitw/archives/2011/09/12/schooling-ron-ramsey-or-blame-marsha-blackburn-for-the-raid-on-gibson "Nearly a century later, in 2008, the protections under Lacey's act were expanded to include plants imported from foreign countries, and used U.S. law as a buttress to the forestry codes of other nations. Even Rep. Marsha Blackburn, who recently flaunted Juszkiewicz like a flag pin on her lapel, voted to override Bush's veto of the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008, aka the 2008 U.S. Farm Bill, which includes an amendment expanding the powers of federal government to enforce the Lacey Act — the very thing that made the Gibson raid possible." Obama took office on Jan. 20th 2009. The Lacey Act was last amended during Bush's final term on Dec. 15th 2008. From the USDA website: "The Lacey Act combats trafficking in “illegal” wildlife, fish, and plants. The 2008 Farm Bill (the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008), effective May 22, 2008, amended the Lacey Act by expanding its protection to a broader range of plants and plant products. The Lacey Act now, among other things, makes it unlawful, beginning December 15, 2008, to import certain plants and plant products without an import declaration. This page will serve as a clearinghouse for all information related to the implementation of the Lacey Act declaration requirement and will be updated promptly as new information becomes available." The revisions to Lacey Act were conceived of and completed during the Bush administration. Republicans were not crying foul then because the Lacey Act by way of limiting and culling illegal wood imports, in turn enhanced the potential for profits of domestic wood suppliers by creating greater demand of non imported products. The difficulty in fairly enforcing the Lacey Act is in determining where the limits of retroactive accountability and quantity of goods is concerned. Those issues are not partisan issues and those are the parts of the interpretation of the law which concern the small craftsman/artisan instrument makers, the instrument collector and musicians. Those problems have not been resolved yet with any degree of certainly or assurance that we should become complacent.
|
|
|
|