It's About Time for Members of Congress to Get Aboard

We need more than 5 Senators to make a difference in funding, but it's a start.

http://www.foodsafet...g/#.VUNy8U0tH3g

Martha

^{Good Luck on getting those worthless scoundrels to agree on anything that would benefit society}

^{Good Luck on getting those worthless scoundrels to agree on anything that would benefit society}

You mean in comparison to worthy scoundrels ?

Here's hoping they get all of their ducks in a row soon. I work closely with CFIA regarding our exports, and they get confused too. We do not have to be certified by the FDA but import under USDA legislation which is very very different. I for one cannot understand why a different kind of food would fall under a different governing body than the next....baffling

You mean in comparison to worthy scoundrels ?

Scoundrels, rascals, and knaves indeed may have value. The enemy of your enemy.... dirty deeds done dirt cheap. 

The irony of FSMA, of course, is that it's reactionary. 

I think the food industry does a pretty damn good job of regulating itself.

As I have mentioned in another thread, It's not conducive to the bottom line to sicken or kill people with the products you produce.

Politicians decided that they had to "do something" to make the food supply safer after several outbreaks of food borne illnesses in the mid to late 2000's. Most of which were in the produce industry. The result was a sweeping set of regulations, which were then allowed to be commented upon (read changed) by the people that would be regulated. This led to ambiguity and confusion, because nobody really knew what they had to do to comply with these new regulations. And we still do not, almost four years after passage of the law. 

Funding the FDA to the tune of half a billion dollars, just for FSMA, over the next five years will not make food safer. Food producers will and have always put food safety programs in place to mitigate risk. 

I have no problem with a governmental agency imposing rules and regulations to ensure the safety of the food supply. I also note that it's not an achievable goal. Unless you go back to a hold and test scenario that HACCP was supposed to obviate.

From what I can find, roughly 3,000 people in the USA die annually because of food borne illnesses. Not to be uncaring here, but in a population of roughly 300 million, that's a pretty small number.

Should the number be zero? Of course. Should it cost millions of taxpayer dollars that don't do ANYTHING to make food safer. not to mention the other millions or billions that industry will spend to comply with FSMA? 

Marshall