Politics

Small farmer advocacy groups disagree over fallout of Food Safety Modernization Act

Photo of Matthew Boyle
Matthew Boyle
Investigative Reporter

Small farmer advocacy groups disagree over what the Food Safety Modernization Act (SB 510), a measure that  would substantially increase the power and reach of the Food and Drug Administration, will mean for small farmers if passed by the Senate Tuesday.

SB 510 would allow the FDA to mandate that a company recall a food product it suspects is infected, which is something the agency hasn’t had the ability to do in the past. The bill also expands the FDA’s inspection powers, and would force food producers to comply with several new bureaucratic requirements, including opening their production facilities to more FDA inspections officers and following new in-depth inspection procedures.

On Monday night, senators voted to 69-26 in favor of a move for cloture on the bill, a way to circumvent the filibuster. The vote came on the heals the passage of the Tester-Hagan amendment, which provides exemptions and special provisions for farms that make less than $500,000 annually, meaning that such farms wouldn’t have to follow the same in-depth inspection requirements factory farms would. The amendment was proposed by Democratic Montana Sen. Jon Tester and Democratic North Carolina Sen. Kay Hagan in response to several small farm lobbying groups that argued the original bill would unintentionally hit small farmers, family farmers and local farmers hard with “one-size-fits-all” regulations.

National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition policy director Ferd Hoefner told The Daily Caller that the Tester-Hagan amendment was key to his organization finally supporting the bill. NSAC is now in favor of SB 510, after having wavered on it for a long time. He said the Tester-Hagan amendment adds extra protections for small farms and for direct-to-consumer farmers, like those who farm for local farmers’ markets.

“They have a choice: they can either comply with state regulation or an FDA regulation that’s appropriate to their scale,” Hoefner said in a phone interview. “That will be new and different for most of them.”

In terms of giving the FDA recall mandate authority, something that has infuriated Oklahoma Republican Sen. Tom Coburn, Hoefner told TheDC he expects the FDA to only use recall power in emergencies.

“The government could mandate a recall [under the proposed bill],” Hoefner said. “Whether they would actually use that in its entirety remains to be seen. I think they would continue to do the same thing and ask for a voluntary recall as a first approach.”

Pete Kennedy, the president of the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund, another small farm advocacy group, is opposed to the bill in its entirety, even with the Tester-Hagan amendment attached.

“The Tester-Hagan amendment is an improvement on the bill, but I think it’s still fundamentally flawed,” Kennedy told TheDC. “I think over time the powers given by the bill could possibly whittle away at the protection provided by Tester-Hagan, they’ll have broad power, and unfortunately under their existing power, what we see right now they seem to have three particular targets, which are raw milk, raw cheese, and supplements.”

  • Pingback: Food Safety Bill is Necessary, But What About the Bureaucracy? « Business

  • Tess_Comments

    The FDA does not need more power. The FDA needs more oversight of itself.

  • Pingback: USMJParty Of Kentucky » 11/30/2010 SB510 Passes in Senate

  • OldMexican

    “The vote came on the heals the passage of the Tester-Hagan amendment, which provides exemptions and special provisions for farms that make less than $500,000 annually, meaning that such farms wouldn’t have to follow the same in-depth inspection requirements factory farms would.”

    Let me translate this for you – the Bill creates a HUGE barrier of entry against smaller farms that can potentially compete against the huge Agri-business corporations that can perfectly afford all this new regulatory nightmare. Except for those that only get to make half a mil per year, which leaves PEANUTS when you factor in costs.

    Monsanto happens to be for this bill, big time; no wonder, as it would place any upstarts and smaller competitors in their proper place, that is, below the $1/2mil line IF they don’t want to comply with the New Rulez.

    And who said regulations are not good for business…

    • Supernatural Witness

      500,000 sound like a lot until you start producing products. 500,000 is a very small operation.

  • Pingback: Food safety bill: goodbye, artisanal cheese?

  • Pingback: Food Safety Bill is Necessary, But What About the Bureaucracy? | Business Pundit

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Small farmer advocacy groups disagree over fallout of Food Safety Modernization Act | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment -- Topsy.com

  • emem

    So instead of fining the gigantice food conglomerates like Con Agr, Monsanto, etc. for failing to properly police their supply chains, the dems are going to grow the FDA who already has plenty of power to ensure a safe food supply?

    Something’s really fishy here? Food prices have risen so much in the last 2 years and this will add to the cost.

    I have to wonder who are the major shareholders of the big food cos? Time to go to the edgar system of the SEC and pull reports. Who benefited from political donations.

    • Supernatural Witness

      They all received bribes in the 10s to 100s of thousands of dollars. I had a list of all the bribes, but I cant find it this morning. The GOP must be held to account: any Senator or Rep who votes to expand gov should be primaried. Nevertheless we must vote for the R in the general election.

    • joshcomm

      Try George Soros………….just follow the money trail and see who all will benefit from Monsatos power reign with this payoff to the FDA/Monsato. If you really want to look into this……….see how many former Monsato employees are now employed by the FDA and in what position they are.