Why I'm opposed to S.510: Food Safety Modernization Bill

I had a lot of questions thrown at me in response to yesterday's post, in which I highlighted my objections to the 'big ag' sponsored FDA Food Safety Modernization Act - which sadly passed the senate vote today.

Some asked why I'd object to a bill that demanded more accountability from food producers, and promised to reduce the risk of food poisoning outbreaks. Here are my reasons:

• It won't work. The bill doesn't really change current food safety standards that much - it merely forces small production facilities - like individual farms, or Mom & Pop producers who make stuff in their basement - to adopt the same federal standards as immense production giants. Given that 99% of all food poisoning outbreaks are caused by said production giants, it's not really making anybody safer - just making small-scale production of food accountable for big ag's mistakes.
• It'll put small producers out of business. Rare breeds farms and small producers will now have to follow the safety standards of gigantic agricultural producers. The problem is, those giants can soak up those costs with impunity, while adding hundreds of hours worth of bureaucracy and compliance to small producers will put them out of business. Given that small producers aren't the ones causing the food outbreak problems, I don't see why they have to suffer the consequences.
• It'll make food more expensive. The bill gives the Food and Drug Administration leeway to hire hundreds of new inspectors and invest in massive expansion projects. The food industry will levy that cost - and pass it directly onto you and I - the consumer. Given that food production in America is cost-prohibitive as it is, it'll price anything aside from factory-farming out of existence.
• It will destroy choice and innovation. One of the most significant aspects of the bill is the power it gives the FDA to regulate what is and isn't acceptable to grow. So that's a big 'yes' to genetically modified crops, but a 'no' to entirely natural, organic substances like Red Rice Yeast and Stevia. As the FDA has proven time and time again, they're more than willing to abuse their power if pharmaceutical industry lobbyists demand it - banning natural supplements that offer a healthier, cheaper alternative to patented pharmaceutical products.

I'm not a tea party supporter, or a militant libertarian - but I do support independence and freedom of choice. This bill is an affront to those ideals, because it encourages the corporate conglomeration of America's food production and ultimately denies us all the freedom to decide what and how we feed ourselves and our families.

“If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.”

Thomas Jefferson

Is the Government controlling what we eat?

For years, a hoax email has been doing the rounds - warning of a new bill being passed in Congress that would "criminalize growing your own food" and "outlaw organic farming." You can read it here.

Armed with that knowledge, I'd assumed news of Senate Bill S.510 - or the "FDA Food Safety Modernization Act" was a similar hoax. Sadly, I was mistaken.

This law, which was recently passed by both houses on Capital Hill, was introduced to help maintain the safety of food produced in the United States - something very much in the public's attention after a couple of major health scares regarding eggs and spinach.

The bill basically hands all domestic food production into the hands of the Food and Drug Administration. It will call upon all food producers - from national giants to the smallest farms and orchards - to register with the federal government and abide by certain regulations and restrictions.

The bill brings in stringent new paperwork requirements, and draconian fees for violation. It also arms the FDA with thousands of new officials and officers to perform inspections and ensure compliance.

Which, on the surface of it, sounds like a good thing. More frequent inspections will mean fewer violations. Better paperwork tracking will make it easier to track contamination to the source. Tougher fees will make it much less attractive to dodge filling in the correct paperwork.

But the problem with the bill is that it's a complete farce.

All these expensive regulations and measures are being brought in to reduce the risk of food contamination, but none of them affect food grown outside of the United States.

That's ironic, given that the recent e.coli outbreaks in spinach and tomatoes that made the headlines were tracked down to Mexican production facilities, while the poisoned pet food scandal that broke a few years ago involved food imported from China.

Secondly, the cost of all these new enforcements are going to be passed along to American consumers, making domestic food more expensive (a concession even supporters of the bill admit.)

Foreign food won't be hit by this increase in costs, making it even less cost-effective to grow food at home and even more attractive to outsource jobs and production to Mexico, Canada and further abroad.

Thirdly, it treats small food producers largely the same as big ones. A Mom & Pop outfit making organic fruit jam will be forced to comply with the same expensive regulations as a national factory-farming giant, churning out millions of dessicated chickens per year.

The reason the bill's supported by so many corporate lobbyists is because it essentially guarantees putting hundreds of small production facilities out of business. It's all done in the name of 'food safety', too - which is ironic because every major food scare in recent history has been tracked down to a large food production facility - never a small local or organic one

And finally - and perhaps most alarmingly - the bill puts authority for what is and isn't 'acceptable' to produce in America in the hands of the FDA (one of the most corrupt organizations on Earth.)

If the FDA decide an organic grain variety is unacceptable, for example, they can outlaw it. If they don't like a particular species of crop, it can be banned. Given that the FDA is largely sponsored by corporate lobbyists for immense multi-national corporations, how long will it be before we see innovations that threaten their supremacy 'banned' in the interests of 'food safety'?

(Think I'm exaggerating? Read about how the FDA banned Red Yeast, because this natural supplement reduced cholesterol more safely, effectively and - worst of all - cheaply than the expensive Statins the pharmaceutical giants had spent millions patenting.)

S. 510 threatens to wipe out farms and farmers across the United States - basically relegating what we can and can't eat into the hands of a few, select multinational corporations. It's one of the most transparently corrupt and utterly ineffectual bills I've seen in recent times - and one that promises to have a devastating effect on the life and livelihood of millions of Americans.

The sad fact is? Barring dotting the i's and crossing the t's, all it's waiting for is Barack Obama's signature before it actually becomes law.

Head? Meet Brick Wall...

Right now, world leaders are meeting at a United Nations conference in Rome to discuss the crisis of exploding food prices. And they all annoy the hell out of me.

For a start, you've got the Oxfam groupies dressed up as corn-on-the-cob, protesting outside of the conference at the effect biofuel creation has on food prices.

Then you have Robert Mugabe and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad strolling around enjoying the Italian scenery.

Then there's ex-Nazi Pope Benedict XVI, ranting; "hunger and malnutrition are unacceptable in a world which has the resources and know-how to put an end to these tragedies."

The whole thing stinks of hypocrisy.

For a start, Oxfam have spent years attacking the oil industry and the effect it has on poor and developing countries. Now they've neatly sidelined their complaints to concentrate on an alternative they themselves were pushing a few years ago - bio fuels.

Mugabe and Ahmadinejad are the leading cause of starvation in their own countries, rigging elections and pouring people into the meat-grinder of petty imperialism. The European Union officially has a ban on Mugabe entering their territory and the United States refuses to meet Ahmadinejad face to face. Yet while the civilised world turns their nose up at discussing real and important issues with them, they're more than willing to invite them to a conference about feeding the poor - a discussion neither dictator is likely to make any significant contribution to.

Then there's that idiot Pope - he's the one who really gets my goat. Here he is, ranting that the world "has the resources and know-how to put an end to these tragedies" while just a few months ago, he was telling the people of Africa that using condoms was a sin against the church. AIDS is another tragedy that the world has the resources and know-how to put an end to - but the Pope's only interested in advocating his own agenda, not doing anything helpful.

Even the good old Americans are looking like arses at this event - suggesting dropping subsidies and trade barriers to stimulate trade and production, while still having whopping great tariffs on imported corn and sugar and recently passing huge subsidies that are making farmers rich while the rest of America sinks into a recession.

This entire conference is a gigantic waste of time and money. It's puffery - as simple as that. A lot of self important politicians preening and squawking like peacocks, while simultaneously failing to do anything remotely positive about the problem they've identified.

Well, I suppose that's not entirely true. World hunger has abated slightly since they started this farce. I've certainly lost my appetite.