Food police are coming

Pioneer Press

Fort Jones, CA

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

page 1, col 2

pioneerp@sisqtel.net

A bill wending its way through Congress promises - at best -- to create a new, repressive layer of regulation and bureaucracy for small farmers, ranchers, food manufacturers and possibly even home gardeners who sell their produce.

But some say the bill, if passed as written, could - at worst -- put small farmers and ranchers out of business or even behind bars. 

"It's extremely worrisome," said Siskiyou County organic beef producer Craig Chenoweth.

 

"Basically, it's one of those things where the government is just jumping on our fears."

Called the "Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009," the bill submitted to the House in February would create a "Food Safety Administration" within the Department of Health and Human Services tasked with placing what some say are tremendous regulatory burdens any farm, ranch, orchard, vineyard, aquaculture facility or confined animal-feeding operation by dictating all manner of standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, packaging, temperature controls and other items.

Businesses required to have "food safety plans" will have to test, keep samples and maintain records. Even more, the bill would force even small farmers and ranchers to give federal inspectors easement to private land where in the past it wasn't required.

The bill, HR 875, was introduced into the House by Rosa DeLauro, a newly elected Democrat from Connecticut. It calls for the creation of a whole new federal department - complete with new rules and regulations.

But some say DeLauro - whose husband, Stanley B. Greenberg, a political campaign researcher and one of America's most influential lobbyists - is working on behalf of large, corporate agriculture. Agri-giant Monsanto, for example, is one of Greenberg's clients. How much influence big Ag has had on the creation and support for the bill is uncertain.

But every House representative who has so far signed onto the bill is a Democrat - suggesting a strong partisan leaning.

"I believe the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009 would only create additional government bureaucracy that would result in unintended negative consequences for our agricultural producers and processors," said Rep. Wally Herger, a Republican member of the House who represents the North State.

"The legislation places undue regulatory burden and even civil and criminal penalties on a wide spectrum of agricultural producers and processors that includes farms, ranches, and orchards of any size," he said.

That's putting it mildly, said Chenoweth.

"This bill is written by and for big corporate agriculture," he said. "It's another attempt at putting small farmers and ranchers out of business and putting money in the pockets of corporate farming. I don't know if it's as bad as cow farting, but this is Obama-style politics at its best."

"It's a really sad situation that people are looking to have more and more government in their lives," he said.

Instead, Chenoweth said, America's farmers and ranchers need more local control of their operations and less federal interference.

"I'm all for food safety but, look, most of the worst violators are corporate farmers and ranchers," he said. "We need local and regional slaughter facilities, or even mobile facilities. We need to have a local, USDA-approved facility right here. Remember, the idea here is about creating jobs. But when Obama talks about creating jobs, I don't want big government jobs and bureaucracies. Let's put those jobs right here."

Opponents of the bill argue that only massive companies have the ability to meet the proposed regulations and the legal expenses that could be incurred to defend against government actions. They argue the government has near unlimited resources and cite the increased cost of food associated with the cost of compliance. It's not unreasonable to think that many businesses would have to hire staff or outside assistance just to comply with the law, they argue.