Food safety

Newly empowered conservatives are vowing to stymie Democrats' policy priorities in the lame-duck session. That could have repercussions on a couple of health-related bills, including childhood nutrition and food safety.

The nonprofit Americans for Prosperity is holding a "November Speaks" event on Monday to press lawmakers "not to pass any new legislation from the Left's agenda in the Lame Duck session." Expected speakers at the event include Republican Reps. Mike Pence (Ind.) and Michele Bachmann (Minn.) and congressmen-elect Morgan Griffith (Va.), Frank Guinta (N.H.) and Sean Duffy (Wis.).

Bachmann herself rejoiced on her Web site last week that Democrats' "train of big spending and big government has been stopped in its tracks." Still, she warned, "in the meantime, a dangerous agenda could be presented by the Democrats in the lame duck session of Congress and Americans must keep a vigilant eye."

Americans for Prosperity hasn't specified which bills it opposes, but conservatives in the past have objected to the cost of a childhood nutrition bill that White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said is one of three lame-duck priorities -- along with the new START treaty and the Bush tax cuts -- for President Obama.

The $4.5 billion bill would expand eligibility for school meal programs, establish nutrition standards for all foods sold in schools and provide a 6-cent increase for each school lunch to help cafeterias serve healthier meals.

The Senate passed its version unanimously right before the August recess, and Democrats see the lame-duck session as their last best chance to get it through the House before the new majority takes over in January. The bill got an extra boost last week when a diverse coalition of more than 1,100 groups announced their support and two liberals -- Reps. Jim McGovern (Mass.) and Rosa DeLauro (Conn.) -- got on board despite reservations that the bill is half paid for by ending an expansion of the food stamp program five months early.

For its part, the Senate is expected to take up food safety legislation this coming week. The bill was held up before the elections because Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) objected to passage by unanimous consent.

The House passed its version in July 2009 and a final bill could yet clear Congress this year if there's a speedy conference committee or if the House adopts whatever the Senate ends up passing.

Another priority is preventing a 23 percent cut in Medicare payments to physicians that's scheduled to take effect Dec. 1. Both parties agree the cut needs to be prevented to keep Medicare functioning smoothly but finding pay-fors acceptable to both parties will be tough.

One thing's for sure: Lawmakers can expect to be inundated with calls from physicians next week. The American Medical Association, which wants Congress to pass a bill that will prevent cuts for 13 months at least, wants doctors across the country to call their senators for "White Coat Wednesday" on Nov. 17.

Advocates on behalf of poverty and children's issues are gearing up for a lame-duck session that many see as their last chance to get a childhood nutrition bill passed.

Supporters expect that a Senate-passed bill could pass as a stand-alone or be incorporated into an omnibus package if it doesn't get the votes it needs, but they're split over how to pay for it. Poverty advocates favor the bill, but not if it's paid for by cutting the food-stamp program.

"We cannot trade off one excellent nutrition program for another," said Mariana Chilton of Witnesses to Hunger during a conference call announcing a new report from the Food Research and Action Center.

The report, released Tuesday, found that 17.7 percent of Americans reported having struggled to get food on the table between April and September. That's down from the last quarter of 2009 and much less than what advocates say would have happened in a faltering economy if last year's recovery act hadn't boosted food stamp spending.

The Senate-passed bill would move up the end of that temporary increase by five months, to November 2013, saving $2.2 billion. The $4.5 billion bipartisan proposal would expand eligibility for school meal programs; establish nutrition standards for all foods sold in schools; and provide a 6-cent increase for each school lunch to help cafeterias serve healthier meals.

In August, 106 Democratic House members wrote to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) opposing the food-stamp cuts.

But President Obama last month rekindled hope that a solution is possible, when his spokesman, Robert Gibbs, listed childhood nutrition alongside ratification of the new START Treaty and the Bush tax cuts as being the Democratic priorities for the lame-duck session. Obama has committed to addressing the food-stamp issue after the bill passes, said Margo Wootan, director of nutrition policy at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. And more than 950 public health and other groups have signed on over the past few weeks.

"All in all," she told The Hill, "I am hopeful the child nutrition bill will be passed soon."

The debate coincides with the recent release of two new reports documenting the cost of Americans' lack of interest in fruits and vegetables. The average American consumes only 43 percent of the daily intake of fruit and only 57 percent of vegetables as recommended in federal dietary guidelines, according to the Produce for Better Health Foundation.

Poor nutrition is costing $56 billion a year to treat just three diet-related chronic diseases — coronary heart disease, stroke, and cancer — according to a new report from the foundation. The nonprofit blames the federal government's relegating of fruits and vegetables to a "low funding priority status" for part of the problem.

"The research reinforces the importance of fruits and vegetables to good health. Increased consumption helps reduce the risk of obesity and many diseases, including heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, and some cancers," the group's president and CEO, Elizabeth Pivonka, said in a statement. "Everyone can benefit from eating more fruits and vegetables. That is why the federal government must make fruit and vegetable spending a public health priority."

Concurrently, the group released a "State of the Plate" report examining America's produce consumption. It found that while children have increased their fruit consumption by at least 5 percent since 2004, teenagers and seniors appear to be eating less fruits and vegetables.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) entered the fray over food legislation on Friday with a "fact sheet" blaming Republicans for delaying passage of the bill.

"Republican opposition to tough food safety legislation is just another example of how the GOP’s plan for regulatory rollbacks puts the special interests first and Americans health and safety at risk," the statement reads.

The reality is more complicated.

While 122 Republicans did vote against the bill when it cleared the House in July 2009, so did 20 Democrats. And 54 Republicans voted for the bill, which would give the Food and Drug Administration the power to recall tainted food, quarantine geographical areas and access food producers’ records. 

In the Senate, only one member — Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) — held up the bill after members of the Health Committee reached a compromise this summer. A vote could occur as early as Nov. 17.

An amendment by Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) that would exempt small farmers is now seen as the biggest threat to the bill's passage in the upper chamber. Consumer advocates say the amendment would gut the bill, and have been pressing senators not to vote for it.

The Food and Drug Administration on Friday called on restaurants and food markets to hire food-safety managers to protect the public's health.

The recommendation is based on the findings of a 10-year study of retail establishments' efforts to reduce five key risk factors, released Friday. This comes as the nation is reeling from recent recalls of tainted eggs and peanut butter.

"In looking at the data, it is quite clear that having a certified food protection manager on the job makes a difference," FDA Deputy Commissioner for Foods Michael Taylor said in a statement. "Some states and localities require certified food protection managers already, and many in the retail industry employ them voluntarily as a matter of good practice. We think it should become common practice."

In addition to calling for certified food-protection managers to be common practice, Taylor said the FDA initiative will include:

• Increased efforts to encourage widespread, uniform and complete adoption of the FDA Model Food Code by state, local and tribal regulatory agencies that are responsible for retail food-safety standard setting and inspection. The Food Code recommends standards for management and personnel, food operations and equipment and facilities; and
• Increased efforts for adoption of FDA’s National Retail Food Regulatory Program Standards by state, local and tribal agencies that enforce the Food Code and other measures to create an enhanced local regulatory environment for retail food operations. 

Meanwhile, The Washington Post reported Friday that the voluntary quality-control system of independent inspectors who audit the nation's food producers is rife with conflicts of interest and is largely ineffective.

Even with Congress out of session, heated debate over pending food safety legislation continues.

Consumer advocates with the Make Our Food Safe coalition wrote to senators on Tuesday urging them to reject an amendment carving out small farmers. The advocates say they are "deeply concerned about [the] impact on the safety of the food supply" of the amendment sponsored by Sens. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) and Kay Hagan (D-N.C.).

"The exemptions in the Tester amendment are based only on the sales volume of the grower or processor ($500,000 in annual sales) and its geographic proximity (within 400 miles) to a qualified end-user (which can be a consumer, a grocery store or a restaurant)," the coalition said in a statement. "It does not take into consideration the risk to human health posed by a particular food item. As a result, high-risk foods would be exempt from safety regulations."

The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, which represents small farmers, responded Wednesday with its own statement.

"On the basis of a surprisingly inaccurate analysis of what the Tester-Hagan amendment proposes to do, the organizations behind the letter to Senators reach a conclusion in opposition to the amendment," said Ferd Hoefner, NSAC’s policy director. "Our strong hope is once they look at the actual details of the amendment they will change their position. The sooner they remove this damaging new roadblock to passage of the Food Safety Modernization Act in the short time left in this session of Congress the better."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) filed for cloture on the bill before recess. A vote could happen as early as Nov. 17.

The legislation would give the Food and Drug Administration the power to recall tainted food, quarantine geographical areas and access food producers’ records. It was expected to pass by unanimous consent before recess after Democrats and Republicans on the Health Committee worked out a compromise, but Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) objected.

The House passed its version of food safety legislation in July 2009.

The Food and Drug Administration has allowed an Iowa farm involved in the largest egg recall in the nation's recent history to resume distribution.

Hillandale Farms and Wright County Egg launched voluntary recalls in August because of concerns that their eggs could be tainted with salmonella. No one is believed to have died as a result of the contamination, but hundreds of people have gotten sick.

In a letter to Hillandale Farms plant manager Gary Barness, the FDA writes that "FDA finds your corrective actions to be adequate." The farm will hold off on shipping eggs from four hen houses that tested positive for salmonella until they clear four rounds of egg testing.

About 7.6 million Americans — or 2.6 percent of the country — suffer from food allergies, the National Institute of Health (NIH) reported Monday, noting that age, gender and ethnicity all seem to play a role.

Black male kids are 4.4 times more likely than the general population to have a food allergy, the researchers found, though the factors behind the discrepancy are not yet clear. 

Researchers also reported a link between food allergies and asthma attacks, finding that asthma patients with food allergies were almost seven times more likely to have a severe asthma attack than those without food allergies.

"This study provides further credence that food allergies may be contributing to severe asthma episodes, and suggests that people with a food allergy and asthma should closely monitor both conditions and be aware that they might be related," Andrew Liu, a researcher at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and lead author on the paper, said in a statement. 

Among the findings: 

• Children aged one to five showed the highest food allergy rates (4.2 percent). 

• Adults over the age of 60 had the lowest rates (1.3 percent).  

• Peanut allergies were found in 1.8 percent of kids aged one to five, and in 2.7 percent of kids between six and 19.

Calling the review process flawed, a long list of Democrats from both the House and Senate are calling on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to reject a Massachusetts company's bid to bring a genetically modified salmon to the market. 

The lawmakers say the FDA is evaluating the fish as if it were a new drug, not a new animal.  

"The FDA approval process is inadequate and sets a dangerous precedent: the environmental review is flawed, and the consumer’s right to know is ignored," a group of 20 House Democrats — led by Reps. Dennis Kucinich (Ohio), Peter DeFazio (Ore.) and Mike Thompson (Calif.) — wrote Tuesday to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg. 

"Rather than developing an appropriate evaluation method, the FDA is currently proceeding to approve the [genetically engineered] fish using its process for reviewing a new drug meant for animals."

A similar message is coming from the Senate, where 11 Democrats penned a separate letter to Hamburg Tuesday, arguing that information withheld from the public as proprietary prevents consumers from knowing fully the potential health effects of eating the product.

"Critical information has been kept from the public and consequently, only FDA and [the company] know important details about the approval process," wrote the lawmakers, led by Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska). 

The senators have asked Hamburg to "halt all proceedings" related to the approval process. 

FDA officials met last week to decide whether AquaBounty Technologies’ should be permitted to sell its genetically modified Atlantic salmon, which has been outfitted with a growth hormone gene from a Chinook salmon and an antifreeze gene from an ocean pout. The genes allow the new creation — dubbed the AquAdvantage salmon — to grow about twice as fast as its natural cousin. 

If approved, it would be the first genetically modified animal allowed to be sold as food.  

The agency is also weighing whether to force the company to label its salmon as genetically engineered.

The Democrats endorsing the House letter include Reps. Earl Blumenauer (Ore.), George Miller (Calif.), Sam Farr (Calif.), John Garamendi (Calif.), Raúl Grijalva (Ariz.), Maurice Hinchey (N.Y.), Barbara Lee (Calif.), Betty McCollum (Minn.), Dennis Moore (Kan.), Jim Moran (Va.), Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.), Jackie Speier (Calif.), Peter Welch (Vt.), Lynn Woolsey (Calif.), David Wu (Ore.), Madeleine Bordallo (Guam) and Donna Christensen (V.I.).

Lawmakers signing the upper-chamber letter were Democratic Sens. Patty Murray (Wash.), Bernie Sanders (Vt.), Maria Cantwell (Wash.), Ron Wyden (Ore.), Patrick Leahy (Vt.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Barbara Mikulski (Md.), Jeff Merkley (Ore.), and Jon Tester (Mont.). 

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) also endorsed the letter.  

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) want Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to "clarify" comments he made about their bill.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) again delayed passage of food safety legislation on Wednesday but offered his own, paid-for alternative.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) had asked for unanimous consent on a bipartisan agreement worked out by the Senate HELP Committee, incorporating amendments exempting small farmers and restrictions on the use of the Bisphenol-A chemical in food and beverage containers. Coburn objected but said he'd approve an alternative that appropriates rather than authorizes money for the bill and does not include the Bisphenol-A restrictions, sponsored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)

Reid said he'd think about it.

"Because this is something I had not anticipated," Reid said on the floor, "I will withdraw my [unanimous consent] request and I will renew it at a later time if I can come to something that's more appropriate."

A Senate Democratic staffer said Reid is unlikely to agree since the underlying bill was worked out between the two parties. If the Senate can't pass food safety by unanimous consent, it's unlikely to have time to come to the floor for debate before the mid-term elections.

The legislation would give FDA the power to recall tainted food, quarantine geographical areas and access food producers’ records. The House passed its version of food safety in July 2009.