Food Safety "Modernization" Act

[Jen]

I could call this the Food Safety "Nationalization" Act, but you'd probably stop reading.

Obama apparently thinks our food isn't safe enough after the salmonella-in-peanut butter debacle and the salmonella-in-spinach debacle in recent years. He's worried that his daughter, who eats PBJ four times a week, is going to get sick off the peanut butter.

Does he want to reform the FDA? Why do that when he can form a new organization to regulate our food?

This is the bill on Open Congress: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h875/text

Maybe this poorly-written legislation is in its infancy, but right now, the bill could make it very difficult for small farms, farmers markets and organic famers to comply with the regulations that would be placed upon them. Not to mention, this simply seems like overregulation to me. Why create a new FDA when we already have one?

Once again, is Obama stupid and in love with overregulation or is this the first step toward a nationalized food industry, complete with food rationing and perhaps even the outlaw of organic farming or home gardening?

[Kirtan]

is increased food safety really that bad in modern america where more and more 'good' christians dont believe in vaccinations?

[Jen]

The answer to that question depends on who's controlling the food "safety."

Is this really being done because the food industry is unsafe, or is it being done to create a crisis that will allow Obama to nationalize all of part of the food industry for his own purposes?

And, far as I know, there isn't a vaccination against food poisoning or salmonella. If there is, let me know so I can go get my jab.

[Kirtan]

sounds more like the republican call to worry about everything and anything while obama is in charge. same standards are held from when bush and clinton were in charge. when obama gets in charge everyone goes insane from his deeper looks at standards.

[Jen]

This isn't a deeper look at existing standards. This is the creation of a new organization.

I feel like Obama is creating a lot of new organizations at the expense of the taxpayer that simply aren't necessary. I don't feel he's justified the creation of these organizations and worry about their purposes.

[Kirtan]

obama is doing the necessary task of creating many. many groups that work and therefore contribute tax that bolsters the economy. it combats the recession.

cant put money into the recession when fewer people are working for the govt.

[Jen]

So you're saying he's creating makework administrative jobs for out-of-work white collar workers and there's no ulterior motive behind it.

I'd feel better about it if he'd come right out and say he was simply doing that--putting people to work typing up medical data or designing posters in English, Spanish and Hmong about the dangers of taking a crap in the middle of the Spinach field--just so they could get working again and not because he's looking to nationalize their respective industries.

[Kirtan]

Hmong are a people, not a language.

and jesus christ, not even american socialists are claiming obama as one of them. he is not a socialist, his policies arent socialist.

unless you consider o'reily and coulter as the wordsmiths of truth

[Jen]

1. Hmong is also a language. I looked it up.

2. So-called "National Socialists" claim him as their own. And National Socialism is governed by the American Socialist Party, or at least it was last time I checked.

3. I haven't watched/read/heard Ann Coulter or Bill O'Reilly for years. I'm too poor to pay $50 a month for New Zealand's poor excuse for satellite televison.

[Kirtan]

so whats wrong with hmong?

[Jen]

I wasn't saying there was anything wrong with any of the languages. I mentioned the salmonella-infected spinach, some of which came from my home state, Wisconsin. My working theory on this contamination is that a lot of the migrant workers don't understand that they need to use the toilet and end up using it on or near the crops, whose roots then absorb it and make people sick. Hence the spinach remaining contaminated after washing.

Designing posters to raise awareness would be a good thing. Either that or investigating whether the workers are given sufficient toilet breaks.

[jimmy]

Jen, Obama isn't creating a new FDA because expanding government bureaucracy tickles him in a special place. He's doing it because the current FDA severely neglects the "Food" part of its name, and puts almost all their effort into drug regulation. So, his intention is to split the agencies--the current FDA will deal only with drugs, and the new organization is to solely handle the food side of things.

As far as whether this will affect farmers or whatever, tough shit. Food should have the highest of standards. Food producers will either adapt to new regulations or get out of business. That's just how it works.

[Jen]

The U.S. already has extremely high food safety standards. I think we're doing pretty well.

And it's funny that Obama never actually says what he means, he needs you and his other supporters to explain what he really meant to say after the fact.

Of course farmers who can't meet reasonable federal standards should be shut down. But what if the government raises the expectations so high that small farms or farmer's markets can't possibly qualify? Further, what if nobody can qualify? Will farms become government-owned? What I'm hearing people say is that these standards are too high and force farmers to take responsibility for things they cannot control.

[jimmy]

The U.S. already has extremely high food safety standards. I think we're doing pretty well.

Yeah... except for these rashes of people dying from tainted peanut butter.

Things like that just plain should not happen.

And it's funny that Obama never actually says what he means, he needs you and his other supporters to explain what he really meant to say after the fact.

He's a busy man. Unlike Bush, who rarely explained anything and also didn't provide any kind of documentation for what he was doing, Obama gives a broad overview and provides all the information about what he's up to. What do you want, for him to spoon feed every policy to you? Be a responsible citizen and investigate it yourself. It's not like I spend hours a day looking into this stuff. Cursory browsing of news articles a bit of public radio go a long way toward explaining things--because Obama has introduced a lot of transparency in his administration. Why should he tell you everything directly when he's put it out there for all to see?

Of course farmers who can't meet reasonable federal standards should be shut down. But what if the government raises the expectations so high that small farms or farmer's markets can't possibly qualify? Further, what if nobody can qualify? Will farms become government-owned? What I'm hearing people say is that these standards are too high and force farmers to take responsibility for things they cannot control.

Wow, a business not wanting to be regulated. I've never seen that before.

They will say anything to avoid more regulation. If they self-regulated well enough that people didn't die from bad peanut butter, spinach, or what have you, none of this would be necessary. It's one thing when one or two people die from an isolated patch of contaminated food. It's another matter entirely when a rash of food poisoning and accompanying fatalities occurs all over the country because one company didn't play by the rules.

One bad apple spoils the bunch, as they say.

[Jen]

I don't like food poisoning, either, but I've always read that the U.S.'s rate is significantly lower than the rest of the world's.

I think it's nice that Obama puts his legislation on the internet for us to pick apart. Perhaps I haven't been clear enough about that. The added transparency is a good thing. Doesn't work when there's a 1,000+ page bill, except to make us brutally aware that the people voting on it didn't have time to read it, either. But with little bills like this one, it's a good thing.

I read the bill. I think some of it is extreme and will put smaller farms and farmers markets out of business. And I think if businesses feel they cannot comply, the law could be used to make a case for nationalizing farms. I didn't see anything in the bill where it was explained why the FDA is inadequate or that the FDA will be divided.

[jimmy]

The FDA is inadequate because they don't pay enough attention to the food side of things. Seriously. It was a known problem during the Bush years. They simply didn't regulate food very well. They weren't funded well enough to do so.

Bush fucked up the government quite a bit, privatized a lot of things. It's going to take some time to sort out and get the agencies to do what they should be doing again.

[Jen]

If privatizing fucked something up, Obama will have to prove it to have my support. What I'm not in support of is bigger government and increased nationalization of things, particularly essential services like food and medical care.

[JC]

Perhaps the FDA regulations are fine, just seems people are getting lazy as the years go by? Perhaps they need a wake-up call, let them know how important the rules are to follow as far as what they are regulating.

[Jen]

What Julius said. I'm unconvinced that we need more rules, much less another organization. We have the best food safety standards in the world, they just need to be enforced. And if someone at the FDA did miss the peanut butter contamination, that person should lose his or her job.

[jimmy]

If privatizing fucked something up, Obama will have to prove it to have my support. What I'm not in support of is bigger government and increased nationalization of things, particularly essential services like food and medical care.

You are not going to enjoy the next four to eight years.

What Julius said. I'm unconvinced that we need more rules, much less another organization. We have the best food safety standards in the world, they just need to be enforced. And if someone at the FDA did miss the peanut butter contamination, that person should lose his or her job.

The FDA has not had the manpower to enforce its rules, either. That is another part of why the agency is being split.

[Jen]

I'm still hoping he'll get impeached, quit, or it will come out that he's actually a Kenyan national. His Presidency is like my worst nightmare in terms of what could happen to my country and it hurts me deeply that it happened just before I was planning to move back.

If the FDA needs improvement, it should be improved. I'm not convinced it needs improvement to the extent of splitting it and feel like Obama is creating crises in order to fulfill his own agenda.

[jimmy]

I'm still hoping he'll get impeached, quit, or it will come out that he's actually a Kenyan national. His Presidency is like my worst nightmare in terms of what could happen to my country and it hurts me deeply that it happened just before I was planning to move back.

Well, now you know how half the country felt for the past 8 years. :rolleyes:

If the FDA needs improvement, it should be improved. I'm not convinced it needs improvement to the extent of splitting it and feel like Obama is creating crises in order to fulfill his own agenda.

So, where was your bitching when Bush created the Department of Homeland Security and folded FEMA into it?

[Jen]

I criticized a lot of things Bush did. I also felt some of them were justified given the situation. I don't remember the particular event you're talking about, but folding one thing into another sounds like smaller government, rather than bigger.

[jimmy]

No, actually, he folded FEMA--one of the largest agencies in the government--into DHS, a new, massive bureaucracy. He ruined FEMA's effectiveness, too, which is part of why the Katrina aftermath went the way it did.

[Jen]

Ok.

I do remember the FEMA thing scaring me. It was likely poorly done and he should have been called on it. Perhaps we've called him on it by putting the Republicans out of office and letting the socialists take over.

I don't think Bush or FEMA can take the whole blame for Katrina, though. I do wish New Orleans had run the evacuation buses through the streets as was their plan, but I wonder if people STILL would have stayed in New Orleans. If a person doesn't want to leave their home, what should happen? Should they be forced?

And those who remained voluntarily, yes, they should have been rescued faster but I think there has to be a degree of understanding among people that if they chose to stay after a mandatory evacuation, they've created a very dangerous situation for themselves.

[Brad]

Put black people in hole.

Add Water.