https://patch.com/illinois/glenview/meat-company-opening-production-facility-glenview-pritzker

Cultivated Meat Processing Facility

GLENVIEW, IL — A California-based meat company is investing in Illinois with a plan to open its first commercial-scale cultivated meat production plant here. UPSIDE Foods is investing at least $141 million and create a minimum of 75 new jobs with the creation of the new 187,000-square-foot facility, planned for Glenview.

UPSIDE Foodsis the first cultivated meat company to receive FDA approval. Cultivated meat production eliminates the need to raise and farm animals for food, according to The Good Food Institute.

"Here in Illinois, we are a hub for tech and innovation, thanks to our talented workforce and prime location in the heart of the Midwest," Gov. J.B. Pritzker said Thursday. "This new facility is a significant investment in our communities — creating new good-paying jobs while advancing our ambitious clean energy goals to create a more sustainable future."

The new plant will be located at the Dermody Logistics Campus, the former headquarters of Allstate on Sanders Road, adjacent to Interstate 294.

Dr. Uma Valeti, CEO and founder of UPSIDE Foods, said in a news release the company chose Illinois because of its "notable history of meat production," among other factors. UPSIDE also received one of the first Economic Development for a Growing Economy for Startups tax credits, which provides incentives for start-up companies to invest in Illinois, according to Pritzker's office.

The Glenview facility will open with production of ground cultivated chicken products before expanding to other species. Officials estimate millions of pounds of cultivated meat products will be produced at the new facility, with the potential to expand to over 30 million pounds. They call it " a significant step toward creating a more humane, sustainable, and resilient food system," and added that cultivated meat can help "solve the climate crisis by ensuring animals aren't harmed while using less land, water, and emissions during production."

"I'm excited to bring a new innovative business to Glenview," State Senator Laura Fine (D-Glenview) said. "This company will flourish in our community, as residents prioritize the company's concept of sustainability and a healthy, nutritious lifestyle."

>>19561512

>>19561805 this be comms

https://www.byrdcenter.org/blog/the-power-in-robert-byrds-shirt-pocket

The Power in Robert Byrd’s Shirt Pocket

For Constitution Day I was asked by the editors of the Washington Times to contribute an article on Senator Byrd and the Constitution. This was included along with other articles as a feature on the Washington Times new Pocket Constitution App, which debuted on Sept. 17. It will be available soon at the App Store or it can be downloaded right now from your browser at: constitution.washingtontimes.com for $4.99. Here is my contribution to the new app.

​

The power in Robert Byrd’s shirt pocket

Picture

The late Sen. Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, the longest serving senator in American history, carried a copy of the U. S. Constitution with him in his shirt or coat pocket at all times and often took it out and waved it over his head during his colorful floor speeches in the Senate and when campaigning. When he died in 2010 his Senate colleagues from both sides of the aisle praised him as a staunch defender of the Constitution and a champion of the role of the Senate under the Constitution.

Senator Byrd’s main concern over a long career, during which he served “not under but with” 11 U.S. presidents, was that the powers of Congress were steadily eroding during the 20th century and into the 21st. The presidency had become in the minds of most Americans more powerful than the other two branches of government, even though they are co-equal in the Constitution, each with powers to check the others.

Nothing was more important to Byrd than the power of the purse, which resided with Congress. He despised the line-item veto, which gave presidents the power to strike from appropriations bills specific items that did not meet the president’s approval. In his autobiography Byrd wrote that during Senate debate on the line item veto in 1995 “I pulled out of my shirt pocket my dog-eared copy of the Constitution, noting that the Founding Fathers never would have approved such a proposal. Congress, I said, had been seized by a ‘collective madness.’ A power-hungry president would be able to punish a senator and his constituents, I cautioned.”

​

As part of his three-year struggle against this bill, Sen. Byrd became a master of the history of the Senate of the Roman Republic. He saw strong parallels with the ancient Roman Senate and the U.S. Senate. The Roman Senate was the solid foundation of Rome’s authority but when its powers were eroded over time by giving up authority to the executive, including the power of the purse; it led toward dictatorship and ruin. The Roman Senate declined — and so did the republic of Rome.

Sen. Byrd presented his extensive research on the Roman Senate to his colleagues in the Senate chamber in 14 elaborate and marvelously oratorical history lessons that, while seldom referring to the line-item vote, made a contextual connection with our Constitution and 3,000 years of history. It was a story about the consequences of the abuse of power and the vital importance of the co-equal status of the three branches of the U.S. government. He delivered these addresses without notes, from memory. The addresses were later published as a Senate document and it stands as a fine contribution to history.

Despite Sen. Byrd’s herculean efforts, Congress passed the line-item veto bill in 1996. President Bill Clinton was the first (and only) president to use it in 1997. Byrd’s efforts against it did not stop. He and five other members of Congress filed a federal suit against the Clinton administration (Raines v. Byrd, 1997) on the grounds that the line-item veto was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court threw the case out because the senators and congressman had no standing in the case as they were not personally harmed by the law. But the following year in Clinton v. City of New York, the high court declared the line-item veto to be unconstitutional because it violated the clear language of the Constitution that both houses of Congress must pass an appropriations bill and the president has only two choices, to sign it into law or to veto it. Nothing in the Constitution gave the president the option of tinkering with it after passage by Congress. Byrd raised his pocket version over his head at the press conference held when the Supreme Court made its ruling and shouted “God save this honorable court!”