On May 28, 2009, at 6:31 AM, <senator@feinstein.senate.gov> <senator@feinstein.senate.gov> wrote:

Dear Mr. Saunders:

Thank you for writing to express your views on the “Global Food Security Act of 2009” (S. 384). I appreciate hearing from you on this legislation and welcome the opportunity to respond.

Like you, I believe that Congress must maintain its commitment to a robust foreign aid package designed to help develop and maintain effective food security programs worldwide. Please know that I understand and have noted your concerns about the development of genetically modified food as a means to provide for global food security.

As you may know, on March 31, 2009 the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations favorably reported S. 384 to the full Senate for consideration. Be assured that I have noted your views on how best to further global food security, and will keep your views in mind should the Senate have the opportunity to debate this bill.

Again, thank you for writing. I hope that you will continue to write on matters of importance to you. Should you have any further comments or questions, please feel free to contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841. Best regards.

Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

Further information about my position on issues of concern to California and the Nation are available at my websitehttp://feinstein.senate.gov/public/. You can also receive electronic e-mail updates by subscribing to my e-mail list at http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ENewsletterSignup.Signup.

Dear Senator,

Thanks for your reply.
As for your statement which I am perceiving as a “hinting” without verbally committing to the position of being in SUPPORT of Genetically Modifying Organisms in dangerous and wreckless ways before feeding them to ourselves despite scientific evidence and a great deal of it that suggests that it is endangering to human health and safety to do so? As a public leader it seems that you hold a tenuous position of balance between individual human rights concerns and corporate interests, and possibly without enough time to fully research the information required to make a fully responsible decision about the issue, you have my empathy on that if it is the case. It is on this issue that I urge you to draw the line on the side of human rights concerns, many of your constituency have researched enough to know that GMOs for food is a dangerous proposition, and only valuable to those who would seek to harm human life, justifying the act with statistics, and junk-science. When this comes up on the floor for debate, what will your position be on the issue of GMO’s? You reply that you have noted mine, and neglected to inform me of your position. Am I mistaken in my assumption that you and I have differing views on this issue?

As always, I appreciate you and your efforts,

Stephen Saunders