• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

USDA Hiding Info.....Why?

Mike

Well-known member
USDA Won't Disclose
Who Sold Recalled Beef
Lawmakers Are Told
Rule Bars Release;
Revision Is in Works
By JANE ZHANG
March 7, 2008; Page A8

WASHINGTON -- Agriculture Department officials, under fire on Capitol Hill over the largest meat recall in U.S. history, told legislators that they can't disclose a list of 10,000 establishments -- from food distributors and processors to grocery stores and restaurants -- that sold the recalled meat.

But a rule change, in the works for the past two years, would allow the disclosure if it hadn't been held up by bureaucratic delays.

Richard Raymond, the department's undersecretary for food safety, told the House Appropriation's agriculture panel that he has pushed for the rule change, but it has yet to be sent to the White House Office of Management and Budget for approval. The USDA and the budget office, however, have been discussing the rule informally.

That answer didn't satisfy some lawmakers. Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D., N.Y.) said the names of the companies are not proprietary, and he requested that the USDA provide information by the middle of next week.

"This is a very, very critically important issue," he said. "If we have stores that are selling bad products, we should know about it."

Mr. Hinchey pursued the matter at a separate hearing with OMB Director Jim Nussle, who promised to look into the rule change, the congressman's spokesman said.

USDA officials have been grilled at a series of congressional hearings in the last few weeks after the recall of 143 million pounds of beef, dating back two years, by Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Co. The Chino, Calif., company, the second-biggest beef supplier last year to the national school-lunch program, has been shut down indefinitely.

Agriculture officials said the recall wasn't triggered by food contamination but because of the way the company handled cows that had passed a preslaughter inspection yet then became unable to stand. Undercover video by the Humane Society of the United States showed workers forcing so-called downer cows to stand up using forklifts and electrical-shock devices, and dragging at least one cow to the area where cattle were killed.

Most of the meat has been consumed, but the USDA's Dr. Raymond said some may have been made into canned food and might be on grocery-store shelves. The government has ordered the recalled meat to be destroyed and buried in landfills. But The Wall Street Journal has reported that a few companies are holding off destroying the meat with the hope it could be donated or put back in stores.

Questioned by subcommittee Chairwoman Rosa Delauro about holding on to the meat, Dr. Raymond said that was "wishful thinking, because regulators say you need to destroy the products." Alfred V. Almanza, administrator of the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service, said, "it's a prohibiting activity" that could lead to criminal prosecution.

USDA officials have said it is "extremely unlikely" that the recalled meat poses a risk to human health. No illnesses have been reported from the recalled meat.

But downer cows are more likely to carry mad-cow disease, which causes a rare, but fatal, brain disorder in humans. The government generally prohibits such animals from entering the food supply, but some are permitted to be slaughtered if they clear further inspection by a USDA veterinarian.

Under the USDA's estimate, if the Hallmark/Westland plant had allowed every downer cow to be slaughtered, the risk of human exposure to mad-cow disease would be increased by 0.13%, Dr. Raymond told the lawmakers.

Write to Jane Zhang at [email protected]
___________________________________________________

The USDA Losing Credibility Day By Day................
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Bill to require seafood origin labeling introduced in Senate

Fri, Mar 7, 2008

By ANNA FERGUSON

The Brunswick News

When ordering seafood, many of Russell Hohnerlein's customers have the same question: Where did it come from?

Hohnerlein, manager of The 4th of May at 444 Ocean Blvd, St. Simons Island, never has to check a daily serve list to answer.

"All our seafood is local. Always," he said.

Should Sen. Ronnie Chance, R- Fayette, have his way, Hohnerlein won't have to field this question much longer. The answer will be visible to the eye – right there on the menu.


Mike Oriams, left, of City Market on Gloucester Street in Brunswick, sells the biggest flounder in the house to Ann Friedrich of St. Simons Island, right, while Frank Owens looks on. (Michael Hall/The Brunswick News)


Senate Bill 533, introduced by Chance Wednesday, would require restaurant menus to carry a label on all seafood items identifying the country of origin.
The bill is co-sponsored by five other Republicans in the Senate, including Sen. Jeff Chapman, R-Brunswick. He is no stranger to the seafood industry. His district includes Georgia's southern coastline, which encompasses a large part of the state's commercial fishing fleet.

"This is just good government," Chapman said, adding that he is confident the bill will make its way into a law. "It benefits and protects the consumer as well as area fishermen. There really is no down side here."
Under Food and Drug Administration regulations, country-of-origin labeling requirements are already required on some seafood, including what's sold at the grocery store and other food outlets. The regulation is beneficial to business, said Frank Owens, manager at City Market at 1508 Gloucester St. in Brunswick.

"A lot of people ask me where my fish is from and I have no problem telling them it's all local and from the states," Owens said. "I think it does make a difference and is important knowing where your food is from."

Ann Friedrich of St. Simons is one such customer. A regular at City Market, she opts to buy her fish there because it is a regional variety.

"I drove over from the island because I know where this fish is coming from," she said. "At the grocery store, it's from Thailand and China. Who knows what all is in that."

Labeling seafood items on menus is already mandated in Arkansas, and similar bills are moving forward in Mississippi and Alabama, said Jeff McCord, a representative with the Catfish Institute.

In recent years, the vast majority of seafood served in America has hailed from farms in Asia. Such imports have lowered the price of seafood, said McCord.

"The price of labor is a lot cheaper in Asia, and the health standards are much lower," he said. "In many cases, fish are, essentially, raised in cesspools."

He said only about 1 percent of food imported in the U.S. is inspected.

Chance's bill would not stop the purchase of seafood from outside the country. It is a mere effort to create a heightened awareness of consumer health issues and encourage the serving of locally-farmed foods, said Eddie Gordon, executive director of the Wild American Shrimp Association.

"It's a win-win situation," Gordon said. "It doesn't keep imported seafood from being sold here, but it does give consumers the tools they need to make their own informed decisions."

Gordon, whose organization supports the promotional campaign that encourages consumers to ask for and to eat seafood caught in local waters, has felt a positive push among consumers recently for more locally grown and farmed foods, including seafood. This bill is reflective of that effort and would hopefully bring the seafood industry up to speed regarding consumer needs, he said.

The price difference between eating locally raised and caught seafood and imported varieties is not drastic and wallets would not be greatly effected should the bill pass, both Gordon and McCord agree.

For shrimp, the price difference between local and imported shrimp is practically nonexistent, Gordon said.

For catfish, the difference usually rings up as about a dollar more per pound for local varieties, McCord said.

Since most restaurants already know the origin of the seafood they serve, adding labels to the menu would not be a difficult task. If anything, Gordon said, it would be an advantage.

"Eating local has become a big movement nationwide," he said. "More and more people are becoming savvy about knowing where their food is from. This requirement could only help restaurants," Gordon said.

In Arkansas, where the requirement has already been enacted, that has proven to be the case, McCord said.

"It's really become a selling point," he said.

At Dressner's Village Cafe, 223 Mallory St., St. Simons Island, the main seafood dish on the menu – grouper – is not farmed locally but instead comes through vendors.

Should the bill pass, Dressner's manager Bob Lowry said he would comply with the new regulations but is unsure how the measure might affect business.

"Our grouper is never local," he said. "But if we are required to list where it's from, then that's what we'll do."
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Mike said:
USDA Won't Disclose
Who Sold Recalled Beef
Lawmakers Are Told
Rule Bars Release;
Revision Is in Works
By JANE ZHANG
March 7, 2008; Page A8

WASHINGTON -- Agriculture Department officials, under fire on Capitol Hill over the largest meat recall in U.S. history, told legislators that they can't disclose a list of 10,000 establishments -- from food distributors and processors to grocery stores and restaurants -- that sold the recalled meat.

But a rule change, in the works for the past two years, would allow the disclosure if it hadn't been held up by bureaucratic delays.

Richard Raymond, the department's undersecretary for food safety, told the House Appropriation's agriculture panel that he has pushed for the rule change, but it has yet to be sent to the White House Office of Management and Budget for approval. The USDA and the budget office, however, have been discussing the rule informally.

That answer didn't satisfy some lawmakers. Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D., N.Y.) said the names of the companies are not proprietary, and he requested that the USDA provide information by the middle of next week.

"This is a very, very critically important issue," he said. "If we have stores that are selling bad products, we should know about it."

Mr. Hinchey pursued the matter at a separate hearing with OMB Director Jim Nussle, who promised to look into the rule change, the congressman's spokesman said.

USDA officials have been grilled at a series of congressional hearings in the last few weeks after the recall of 143 million pounds of beef, dating back two years, by Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Co. The Chino, Calif., company, the second-biggest beef supplier last year to the national school-lunch program, has been shut down indefinitely.

Agriculture officials said the recall wasn't triggered by food contamination but because of the way the company handled cows that had passed a preslaughter inspection yet then became unable to stand. Undercover video by the Humane Society of the United States showed workers forcing so-called downer cows to stand up using forklifts and electrical-shock devices, and dragging at least one cow to the area where cattle were killed.

Most of the meat has been consumed, but the USDA's Dr. Raymond said some may have been made into canned food and might be on grocery-store shelves. The government has ordered the recalled meat to be destroyed and buried in landfills. But The Wall Street Journal has reported that a few companies are holding off destroying the meat with the hope it could be donated or put back in stores.

Questioned by subcommittee Chairwoman Rosa Delauro about holding on to the meat, Dr. Raymond said that was "wishful thinking, because regulators say you need to destroy the products." Alfred V. Almanza, administrator of the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service, said, "it's a prohibiting activity" that could lead to criminal prosecution.

USDA officials have said it is "extremely unlikely" that the recalled meat poses a risk to human health. No illnesses have been reported from the recalled meat.

But downer cows are more likely to carry mad-cow disease, which causes a rare, but fatal, brain disorder in humans. The government generally prohibits such animals from entering the food supply, but some are permitted to be slaughtered if they clear further inspection by a USDA veterinarian.

Under the USDA's estimate, if the Hallmark/Westland plant had allowed every downer cow to be slaughtered, the risk of human exposure to mad-cow disease would be increased by 0.13%, Dr. Raymond told the lawmakers.

Write to Jane Zhang at [email protected]
___________________________________________________

The USDA Losing Credibility Day By Day................

Kind of a smoking gun on who the USDA is carrying water for, I would say.
 

PORKER

Well-known member
That answer didn't satisfy some lawmakers. Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D., N.Y.) said the names of the companies are not proprietary, and he requested that the USDA provide information by the middle of next week.
 
Top