wildflower
04-07-2009, 04:44 PM
Northeast Organic Farmers Association take on current Food Safety issues
NOFA Food Safety Policy Report
3/31/09
Steve Gilman
NOFA Policy Coordinator
The cherry blossoms aren't the only thing a' popping in
Washington, D.C. this Spring. NOFA has been a part of a number of
delegations visiting members of Congress to represent the organic
small farm point of view on various issues, including major
activity on food safety. The legislative emphasis is due to acute
public concern over the latest contaminated food recall - where
transgressions by a single small-scale food processor (handling
less than 1% of US peanuts) caused nearly 4,000 products to be
recalled, $1.5 billion in losses, as well as 700 illnesses and
nine deaths.
Plainly the convoluted and grossly deregulated processor
oversight system is badly broken and needs fixing. The
industrialized food structure of centralized production and
nationwide distribution has created huge risks that were not even
imagined when much of the current legislation was written back in
1906. The legislative thrust seems to be shifting away from
consolidating all food oversight agencies into one entity and
there is now a concerted effort to fix FDA, to make it more
effective and transparent as well as giving it recall authority,
something now solely in the hands of the food processors.
Traceability - tracking backward to the source of contamination
and forward to processors, distributors and sales outlets - is
also a major issue before Congress.
In the face of a food safety overhaul however, small scale and
organic farmers are rightfully concerned that government
regulation will come down heavily on small producers - or in the
zeal to finally clean things up, the baby will get thrown out
with the bathwater. Meanwhile, even though the hysterical
reactions to the rampant misinformation that has been circulating
through the Internet has been debunked - we all stand to lose
credibility because of it. There is no Monsanto connection to
H.R. 875, for example, and Rep. Rosa DeLauro has clarified that
gardeners and Direct marketers - to Farmers Markets, CSAs,
roadside stands, local restaurants, etc - are completely exempt
under her bill. It's time to take a deep breath and look at our
situation with a clear eye.
As is usual with a first step in the legislative process, only a
small piece of DeLauro's Bill concerning processors (Sections
204, Performance Standards for Contaminants in Food, giving
recall powers and 205, Inspection of food Establishments, NOT
farms) is moving forward.
It is important to realize that in the legislative process
introduced bills and resolutions first go to committees that
deliberate, investigate, and revise them before they go to
general debate. And the majority of bills and resolutions never
make it out of committee. With all the internet hoopla over HR
875 -- other, much worse, legislation is being overlooked:
-- S425, Sen. Sherrod Brown, which focuses on traceability
(including livestock identification);
-- HR 759, Rep. John Dingell, FDA Globalization Act of 2009,
which thoroughly updates (and expands) FDA's authority on a wide
range of food and drug issues, and mandates electronic trace-back
systems;
-- HR 814, Rep. Diana DeGette, TRACE Act, which would require
systems to trace all foods at all stages, including livestock,
meat, poultry, eggs and egg products;
These bills all fall under the jurisdiction of the
Energy and Commerce Committee, chaired by Henry Waxman, not the
usual agriculture committees our farming groups have clout with.
And importantly, there's an acceleration in the timetable --
Waxman's Committee has just prioritized food safety legislation
over both health and climate change which were formally at the
top of the list -- and they are expected to mark up a bill soon
after Memorial Day. SO, we've got to keep our powder dry, move
way beyond H.R. 875 and concentrate on the bigger picture.
To be sure, it's important for us to conscientiously let Congress
know where we stand and what we're doing about food safety. The
bottom line is that food safety is everybody's business and
producing healthy, uncontaminated food is a major responsibility
for all growers. But it's not lost on legislators that the
inherent risks of direct sales to consumers at farmers markets,
CSAs and roadside stands are vastly different than industrial-
scale contamination - as happened when produce from a single
field in California poisoned people in 44 states during the 2006
E coli spinach outbreak, for example.
The message we're sending to Congress includes the following:
-- Face to face direct market sales such as Farmers Markets, CSAs
and farm stands are already well-regulated under state and local
jurisdiction and require no additional federal oversight.
-- Appropriate on-farm risk management and tracking precepts
should not be a one-size-fits-all remedy. For small scale farms
effective food safety parameters must be flexible, risk-
appropriate, scaleable (with an understanding of small business
resource limitations) science-based and educationally-centered.
The solutions need to be solutions - not ideas that drive
farmers, fishermen, and local food processors out of business.
-- Food safety risks are greater and are greatly exacerbated in
the large scale food processing sector which includes food
wholesalers, handlers, distributors and retailers as well as
foreign food importers - along with the industrialized farms that
supply them. There are distinct risk and safety issues in this
sector and they should be dealt with separately, with concerted
oversight.
-- For farmers in the populous Northeast states, especially,
interstate commerce is not an appropriate regulatory designation
as numerous local farming operations routinely conduct business
across state lines.
-- It is a reversal of Congressional intent and taxpayer funding
to rip out long term beneficial and scientifically-validated
conservation and farmscaping practices in the name of food safety
such as is happening in CA under the super metrics of the Leafy
greens Marketing Agreement. (see "Food Safety Hits the Fan" at
<NOFA Interstate Council: Home (https://www.nofa.org) <http: www.nofa.org=""></http:> (https://www.nofa.org/)<http: www.nofa.org=""></http:> (https://www.nofa.org/) >
-- There must be an expanded definition of food safety that goes
beyond narrow microbial contamination issues to include the
overall health impacts of pesticides and GMOs, environmental
contamination from synthetic inputs, the energy basis of
petrochemicals, effects on climate change as well as food
security and sustainability issues.
NOFA Food Safety Policy Report
3/31/09
Steve Gilman
NOFA Policy Coordinator
The cherry blossoms aren't the only thing a' popping in
Washington, D.C. this Spring. NOFA has been a part of a number of
delegations visiting members of Congress to represent the organic
small farm point of view on various issues, including major
activity on food safety. The legislative emphasis is due to acute
public concern over the latest contaminated food recall - where
transgressions by a single small-scale food processor (handling
less than 1% of US peanuts) caused nearly 4,000 products to be
recalled, $1.5 billion in losses, as well as 700 illnesses and
nine deaths.
Plainly the convoluted and grossly deregulated processor
oversight system is badly broken and needs fixing. The
industrialized food structure of centralized production and
nationwide distribution has created huge risks that were not even
imagined when much of the current legislation was written back in
1906. The legislative thrust seems to be shifting away from
consolidating all food oversight agencies into one entity and
there is now a concerted effort to fix FDA, to make it more
effective and transparent as well as giving it recall authority,
something now solely in the hands of the food processors.
Traceability - tracking backward to the source of contamination
and forward to processors, distributors and sales outlets - is
also a major issue before Congress.
In the face of a food safety overhaul however, small scale and
organic farmers are rightfully concerned that government
regulation will come down heavily on small producers - or in the
zeal to finally clean things up, the baby will get thrown out
with the bathwater. Meanwhile, even though the hysterical
reactions to the rampant misinformation that has been circulating
through the Internet has been debunked - we all stand to lose
credibility because of it. There is no Monsanto connection to
H.R. 875, for example, and Rep. Rosa DeLauro has clarified that
gardeners and Direct marketers - to Farmers Markets, CSAs,
roadside stands, local restaurants, etc - are completely exempt
under her bill. It's time to take a deep breath and look at our
situation with a clear eye.
As is usual with a first step in the legislative process, only a
small piece of DeLauro's Bill concerning processors (Sections
204, Performance Standards for Contaminants in Food, giving
recall powers and 205, Inspection of food Establishments, NOT
farms) is moving forward.
It is important to realize that in the legislative process
introduced bills and resolutions first go to committees that
deliberate, investigate, and revise them before they go to
general debate. And the majority of bills and resolutions never
make it out of committee. With all the internet hoopla over HR
875 -- other, much worse, legislation is being overlooked:
-- S425, Sen. Sherrod Brown, which focuses on traceability
(including livestock identification);
-- HR 759, Rep. John Dingell, FDA Globalization Act of 2009,
which thoroughly updates (and expands) FDA's authority on a wide
range of food and drug issues, and mandates electronic trace-back
systems;
-- HR 814, Rep. Diana DeGette, TRACE Act, which would require
systems to trace all foods at all stages, including livestock,
meat, poultry, eggs and egg products;
These bills all fall under the jurisdiction of the
Energy and Commerce Committee, chaired by Henry Waxman, not the
usual agriculture committees our farming groups have clout with.
And importantly, there's an acceleration in the timetable --
Waxman's Committee has just prioritized food safety legislation
over both health and climate change which were formally at the
top of the list -- and they are expected to mark up a bill soon
after Memorial Day. SO, we've got to keep our powder dry, move
way beyond H.R. 875 and concentrate on the bigger picture.
To be sure, it's important for us to conscientiously let Congress
know where we stand and what we're doing about food safety. The
bottom line is that food safety is everybody's business and
producing healthy, uncontaminated food is a major responsibility
for all growers. But it's not lost on legislators that the
inherent risks of direct sales to consumers at farmers markets,
CSAs and roadside stands are vastly different than industrial-
scale contamination - as happened when produce from a single
field in California poisoned people in 44 states during the 2006
E coli spinach outbreak, for example.
The message we're sending to Congress includes the following:
-- Face to face direct market sales such as Farmers Markets, CSAs
and farm stands are already well-regulated under state and local
jurisdiction and require no additional federal oversight.
-- Appropriate on-farm risk management and tracking precepts
should not be a one-size-fits-all remedy. For small scale farms
effective food safety parameters must be flexible, risk-
appropriate, scaleable (with an understanding of small business
resource limitations) science-based and educationally-centered.
The solutions need to be solutions - not ideas that drive
farmers, fishermen, and local food processors out of business.
-- Food safety risks are greater and are greatly exacerbated in
the large scale food processing sector which includes food
wholesalers, handlers, distributors and retailers as well as
foreign food importers - along with the industrialized farms that
supply them. There are distinct risk and safety issues in this
sector and they should be dealt with separately, with concerted
oversight.
-- For farmers in the populous Northeast states, especially,
interstate commerce is not an appropriate regulatory designation
as numerous local farming operations routinely conduct business
across state lines.
-- It is a reversal of Congressional intent and taxpayer funding
to rip out long term beneficial and scientifically-validated
conservation and farmscaping practices in the name of food safety
such as is happening in CA under the super metrics of the Leafy
greens Marketing Agreement. (see "Food Safety Hits the Fan" at
<NOFA Interstate Council: Home (https://www.nofa.org) <http: www.nofa.org=""></http:> (https://www.nofa.org/)<http: www.nofa.org=""></http:> (https://www.nofa.org/) >
-- There must be an expanded definition of food safety that goes
beyond narrow microbial contamination issues to include the
overall health impacts of pesticides and GMOs, environmental
contamination from synthetic inputs, the energy basis of
petrochemicals, effects on climate change as well as food
security and sustainability issues.