Godlike Productions Banner
12:10 PM
NEW GLP LIVE VOICE & TEXT CHAT




  Monday, November 23, 2009  
  Breaking News     Back
Bill would reduce meat inspections

Chicago Tribune

2007-10-02

Despite E. coli scare, Congress mulls easing law

WASHINGTON - As one of the largest meat recalls in history unfolds, Congress is considering legislation that would reduce required federal inspections for meat that is produced by small companies and then shipped to another state.

Because of a little-noticed legislative change buried deep within the 2007 farm bill approved in July by the House, only state inspections would be required for some meat products.

The measure was planted in the farm bill by Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), according to congressional staffers familiar with the bill. It would be a boon to small meat processing companies whose products must remain in the state of origin because they lack a federal inspection stamp.

Consumer advocates and a federal meat inspectors union oppose the measure, which is now under consideration in the Senate. They say that state inspection standards vary widely and that the federal inspection requirement ensures food safety.

Under current law, the U.S. Department of Agriculture inspects and regulates the interstate sale of beef and poultry. Inspectors are present in many large and medium meat plants. Some states also regulate meat production, but only for products that stay within that state's jurisdiction.

Stan Painter, a USDA inspector and an official with the American Federation of Government Employees union, which represents federal meat inspectors, said that small plants can apply to have a federal inspector present.

"I'm not sure the smaller plants are capable of meeting federal standard," Painter said.

The debate over the state inspections is unfolding during the recall of 21.7 million pounds of hamburger produced by Topps Meat Co. of Elizabeth, N.J., because of E. coli contamination. The Topps frozen hamburger patties were sold in eight states under different labels, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Illinois is not among the states named in the recall.

The recall of 331,582 pounds of Topps meat was announced Sept. 25 after New York state health authorities confirmed the presence of E. coli 0157:H7 in a Topps hamburger.

E. coli is a possibly deadly bacterium that causes bloody diarrhea, stomach cramps and dehydration.

The Topps recall was expanded considerably on Saturday, to 21.7 million pounds of hamburger, after more illnesses were reported. Last Wednesday, USDA inspectors issued a notice of suspension to Topps affecting its ground beef production line because of "inadequate raw ground controls," according to Amanda Eamich, a USDA spokeswoman.

Other large beef recalls include a 2002 action by Con Agra, which recalled 19 million pounds of ground beef because of E. coli, and a 1997 recall of 25 million pounds of beef made by Hudson Foods.

So far this year, the Department of Agriculture has issued recall announcements involving nearly 28 million pounds of ground beef.

In the Topps case, the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service reported, "There are currently 25 illnesses under investigation in Connecticut, Florida, Indiana, Maine, New Jersey, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania."

The Topps case is the latest in a year of increased ground beef recalls, nearly all of them due to E. coli poisoning. Topps does not slaughter its own beef but buys hamburger ingredients from outside suppliers, according to the USDA's Eamich.

Topps is a large-enough meat processor to require the presence of one of the USDA's 6,500 meat inspectors in its plant. But many companies aren't that big. The requirement for a USDA inspection and stamp on meat that will be sold interstate hampers sales for smaller meat processors, according to beef industry advocates.

That restriction is what led Peterson, chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, to introduce a farm bill amendment that would lift the federal inspection requirement, a congressional staffer said.

"He's concerned because in Minnesota they feel their inspections are up to the standards of the federal system," said one agriculture committee staff member.

But some states don't have meat inspection laws; several rely on USDA inspectors for that service.

Under the proposed farm bill change, those states would have to establish their own inspection programs.

Other states, such as Illinois, have their own meat inspection programs. But it would have to apply federal standards if the farm bill proposal passes.

That proposed change in inspection authority has irked the meat inspectors union, whose members work in meat processing plants.

In a letter to Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, the union argues the change "would seriously endanger food safety by weakening the USDA federal meat and poultry inspection program and by increasing reliance on the more lenient, institutionally weaker state inspection programs -- at a time when our nation's food supply is subject to increased risks from both accidental and intentional adulteration."

Harkin, whose committee is considering the farm bill, has signaled displeasure with the proposed inspection change.

In a written response to questions about the change, he said, "It's important to help small and very small plants ship in interstate commerce. However, simply changing the existing law is very complex and will require careful consideration of food safety, additional federal oversight of the state systems and will complicate trade."

  Email Article

  Discuss in the Forum

Back

Click Here To Donate To GLP!



 Valid HTML 4.01 Transitional



Disclaimer:
This website exists for entertainment purposes only. The reader is responsible for discerning the validity, factuality or implications of information posted here, be it fictional or based on real events. Moderators on this forum make every effort to review the material posted on this site however, it is not realistically possible for our small staff to manually review each and every one of the more than 10,000 posts GodlikeProductions gets on a daily basis.

The content of post on this site, including but not limited to links to other web sites, are the expressed opinion of the original poster and are in no way representative of or endorsed by the owners or administration of this website. The posts on this website are the opinion of the specific author and are not statements of advice, opinion, or factual information on behalf of the owner or administration of GodlikeProductions. This site may contain adult content and if you feel you might be offended by such content, you should log off immediately.

Not all posts on this website are intended as truthful or factual assertion by their authors. Some users of this website are participating in internet role playing, with or without the use of an avatar. NO post on this website should be considered factual information on face value alone. Users are encouraged to USE DISCERNMENT and do their own follow up research while reading and posting on this website. Godlikeproductions.com reserves the right to make changes to, corrections and/or remove entirely at any time posts made on this website without notice. In addition, Godlikeproductions.com disclaims any and all liability for damages incurred directly or indirectly as a result of a post on this website.

This site is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. You should not assume that this site is error-free or that it will be suitable for the particular purpose which you have in mind when using it. In no event shall Godlikeproductions.com be liable for any special, incidental, indirect or consequential damages of any kind, or any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, those resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of this site or other documents which are referenced by or linked to this site.

Some events depicted in certain posting and threads on this website may be fictitious and any similarity to any person living or dead is merely coincidental. Some other articles may be based on actual events but which in certain cases incidents, characters and timelines have been changed for dramatic purposes. Certain characters may be composites, or entirely fictitious.

We do not discriminate against the mentally ill!

Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Users may make such material available in an effort to advance awareness and understanding of issues relating to civil rights, economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science & technology, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
For more information please visit:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

Please be aware any communications sent complaining about a post on this website may be posted publicly at the discretion of the administration.

This Disclaimer is subject to change at anytime.

Mail Webmaster with questions or comments about this site.

Privacy Policy - Terms Of Use


Copyright 1999-2009 © GodLikeProductions.com

Page generated in 0.04s (1 queries)