11.30.2010
The Senate passed a sweeping food safety bill on Tuesday that would give more power to the Food and Drug Administration, more than a year after the House of Representatives passed a similar measure.
The legislation is designed to bolster the safety of the nation’s food supply and passed 73 to 25. The measure passed with both Democrat and Republican support, particularly in the wake of several national outbreaks of food poisoning that involved eggs, peanuts and spinach.
The House approved a stricter version of the bill and House leaders have indicated that they would accept the Senate version of the bill. Proponents hope to have the legislation signed into law by the end of the lame-duck session.
The overhaul drew opposition from some tea party activists, who see it as government overreach. The bill also revealed a dividing line between burgeoning local-food movements and major agriculture businesses. Small farmers remain concerned about the cost of new federal regulation and were opposed to the bill, arguing that since most cases of national food-borne illness are caused by large companies, small producers should not be subjected to the same standards.
Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT), a farmer, included an amendment before Thanksgiving that exempts small farmers and those who sell directly to consumers. This Tester amendment outraged many large agriculture groups, arguing that no one should be exempt from producing safe food.
The Food Safety Overhaul places a greater responsibility on manufacturers and farmers in preventing contamination, which is a departure from the current regulation that relies on government inspectors to catch contamination after the fact.
Standards are also set for imported food in the new legislation, requiring importers to verify that products grown and processed overseas meet safety regulations. Public health experts say that this is desperately needed, claiming that the FDA has only been inspecting about 1 percent of imported food products.
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), a well-recognized critic of the legislation has claimed the bill is unnecessary. He has objected to the cost, estimating that it will total about $1.4 billion over four years. The Congressional Budget Office has stated that it will have a negligible impact on the federal deficit.
The legislation is designed to bolster the safety of the nation’s food supply and passed 73 to 25. The measure passed with both Democrat and Republican support, particularly in the wake of several national outbreaks of food poisoning that involved eggs, peanuts and spinach.
The House approved a stricter version of the bill and House leaders have indicated that they would accept the Senate version of the bill. Proponents hope to have the legislation signed into law by the end of the lame-duck session.
The overhaul drew opposition from some tea party activists, who see it as government overreach. The bill also revealed a dividing line between burgeoning local-food movements and major agriculture businesses. Small farmers remain concerned about the cost of new federal regulation and were opposed to the bill, arguing that since most cases of national food-borne illness are caused by large companies, small producers should not be subjected to the same standards.
Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT), a farmer, included an amendment before Thanksgiving that exempts small farmers and those who sell directly to consumers. This Tester amendment outraged many large agriculture groups, arguing that no one should be exempt from producing safe food.
The Food Safety Overhaul places a greater responsibility on manufacturers and farmers in preventing contamination, which is a departure from the current regulation that relies on government inspectors to catch contamination after the fact.
Standards are also set for imported food in the new legislation, requiring importers to verify that products grown and processed overseas meet safety regulations. Public health experts say that this is desperately needed, claiming that the FDA has only been inspecting about 1 percent of imported food products.
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), a well-recognized critic of the legislation has claimed the bill is unnecessary. He has objected to the cost, estimating that it will total about $1.4 billion over four years. The Congressional Budget Office has stated that it will have a negligible impact on the federal deficit.
No comments:
Post a Comment