The meat industry has a beef with food safety legislation that is making its way through the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
The Subcommittee on Health is expected to mark up a food safety bill as early as Wednesday, and the committees Democratic and Republican staffs were meeting into the evening Friday to try to iron out some of the measures sticking points. But meat industry groups say they will have a difficult time swallowing the bill in its current form.
Right now, this is a bill we just dont support, said Colin Woodall, executive director of legislative affairs for the National Cattlemens Beef Association. We are very much in support of food safety, but this bill would have a lot of unintended consequences and would add more costly regulations and wont actually translate into safer food.
Woodall said meat producers are also concerned about the precedent this bill could set in giving the Food and Drug Administration regulatory authority over the industry, which is currently watched over by the Department of Agriculture. The cattlemens group also takes issue with mandatory recalls and says voluntary recalls work better. The industry worries that the bill would require government inspectors on farms, Woodall said.
There is no need to have FDA inspectors come on farms or cattle operations, Woodall said. There are too many other processes and steps between the time it leaves the farm and gets to the consumer, including the way the consumer handles the product when they get it home. It would give a false sense of security to the consumer.
Dave Warner, a spokesman for the National Pork Producers Council, said his group has a number of concerns about the legislation, with on-farm inspections being among the top. FDA doesnt not have the personnel, and it doesnt have the expertise, he said.
But consumer groups are by and large on board with the direction of the food safety discussion draft backed by six committee Democrats, including Chairman Henry Waxman (Calif.), former Chairman John Dingell (Mich.) and Subcommittee on Health Chairman Frank Pallone (N.J.).
We do have some amendments that we would like to have made to it, said Carol Tucker Foreman of the Consumer Federation of America. We feel like were very much in agreement with the committee and committee staff. We have a very united coalition that includes all of the consumer organizations. We like this bill.
Tucker Foreman said the consumer advocates would like to strengthen some of the bills language as it relates to performance standards that companies would have to meet. But, she said, this bill is built on telling companies, its your responsibility to produce safe food, and requires FDA to set standards.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association takes issue with the provision in the bill that sets up industry-paid fees to help cover the expenses of a stepped-up food safety system.
Were concerned that industry funding inspections would create a conflict of interest. We think that any industry investments need to improve, not erode, consumer confidence, said Scott Faber, a top lobbyist with the GMA. Consumers expect that inspectors know that they are working for the taxpayers, and not for industry, when they are inside a food manufacturing plant.
Terri Henderson, 6, center, whose mother is El Salvador, attends a rally with members of Congress at Union Station's Columbus Circle to announce the Restore Opportunity, Strengthen, and Improve the Economy (ROSIE) Act on July 29, 2014. The legislation provides incentives for government contractors to pay a living wage and other benefits that would help low-income workers.