My first reaction to this piece of news was anger, which enticed me to go off on a sarcastic rant referencing the benefits of government regulation in the finance and oil industry. But I’ll control myself and try to present accurate information relatively free of my own baggage, so here goes…
Soon our government representatives will begin discussing two food safety bills that, if passed, would greatly increase federal regulation of our domestic food supply. Thanks to the efforts of Pete Kennedy of the Farm-to-Consumer Foundation, these huge incomprehensible bills have been translated into language a lay person might understand. Pete Kennedy is one of the few attorneys in the country working to defend farmers’ rights to produce safe food and our right to buy it. His efforts are invaluable!
If you’re short on time, read the introduction and conclusion (included below) from his article Food Safety: The Worst of Both Bills (HR 2749 & S 510). If you have more time and enjoy reading this kind of thing read the entire 12 page document. Uber-law-geeks can read the actual bills, links below.
When you’re finished, determine where you stand on the issue and then tell your representative. They’ll be talking about this soon and many powerful companies with financial interests will be in their faces for the foreseeable future. Small farmers and consumers are not invited to the table so we need to speak up now and make our expectations known. Go to Open Congress for representative contact information and call or email soon.
In an attempt to see a glass that is half full, I’m trying to take heart in the fact that this type regulation looks good to some because industrial food producers may be starting to worry that local food production and diversity initiatives are gaining ground, threatening their bottom line. That must be good!
Introduction
If S 510 (the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act) passes the Senate, there would be a conference committee between members of the House and Senate to draft a food safety bill that would combine provisions of S 510 and HR 2749 (the Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009) into a final version of the bill. The full House and Senate each would vote on this version of the bill to determine whether the food safety bill becomes law.
S.510 and HR 2749 represent landmark legislation that will significantly increase the federal government's power to regulate intrastate commerce while hurting this country's ability to produce safe food and to become self-sufficient in food production.
Both bills take a one-size-fits-all approach towards food regulation, threatening to leave small farmers and local producers unable to afford the cost of complying with the legislation's requirements. They would also significantly increase the power of the federal government to regulate intrastate commerce and give the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) substantially greater power overall while making the agency less accountable for its actions.
In reality, neither bill would improve food safety; in fact, the new requirements would cause an increase in imported food, a major source of the food safety problems in this country. Either bill would diminish the freedom and liberty Americans currently have to obtain the food of their choice from the source of their choice. What follows is a review of the more damaging provisions of the two bills under the following subheadings:
A. National Agriculture and Food Defense Strategy
B. Authority over Movement of Food
C. Criminal and Civil Penalties
D. HACCP Plans
E. Food Traceability
F. Safety Standards for Produce
Conclusion
S.510 and HR 2749 represent landmark legislation that will significantly increase the federal government's power to regulate intrastate commerce while hurting this country's ability to produce safe food and to become self-sufficient in food production. Both bills contain numerous provisions imposing a one-size-fits-all regulatory scheme that will make it difficult for small farms and local producers to comply with the new laws.
The resources given FDA to carry out the inspection mandate of the bill will not be sufficient for the agency to make all the required inspections. Given the experience in the meat industry, it is likely FDA will gravitate towards regulating those offering the least resistance to the agency's enforcement of the law-small producers. Moreover, the number of inspections required under the bill will lead FDA to hire state officials to carry them out, increasing federal control over state agencies regulating food to a much greater degree than currently exists.
The legislation will disproportionately impact local food producers, the sector of our food system producing the safest most nutritious food, thus benefiting food imports and industrial processors (those sectors of the food system that have been most responsible for the problems with food safety). Passage of the legislation will increase our dependence on imports when the government should be encouraging the buildup of domestic food production capacity, particularly at the local level. Instead, the government will be using our tax dollars to help foreign government improve the safety of their own food systems [S510, section 307]. FDA has indicated that it will be using most of its resources to regulate domestic producers, leaving the regulation of imported food primarily up to private third-party certifiers and foreign governments. Problems with traceability are not solved by throwing domestic food producers into an international database but rather by increasing the market share of local food producers; state and local regulation is more than sufficient to provide accurate traceback of local food.
Rather than employing food defense plans and the Department of Homeland Security to prevent bioterrorism, the country would be better off decentralizing food production and distribution. Fighting bioterrorism has been a lucrative vehicle for industry and academia to obtain government contracts; diversification of the food system would be cheaper and more effective.
Passage of the food safety legislation will reduce judicial restraints on FDA while at the same time giving the agency previously unheard of powers. Does FDA's track record merit the agency more power in regulating our food? FDA has shown that it does not work to protect the health of the American people but rather to protect the profits of the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, promoters of genetically modified foods and concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs)-the antithesis of food safety. What has FDA done to help small farms and local producers? [Click here to read: Food Safety - Can FDA Be Trusted?]
Passage of food safety legislation will make it more difficult in the future to obtain the food of our choice from the source of our choice. Call your Senators and ask them to vote against S 510.
Contact information for your U.S. Senators can be found at http://www.opencongress.org/people/senators
No comments:
Post a Comment