BSE Testing

BSE Testing -- (House Of Representatives - March 09, 2004)

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, the most troubling aspect of the first case of mad cow disease is what it revealed about the cattle industry and the United States Department of Agriculture. It revealed that the USDA is not just protecting the food supply, but it is also actively promoting the cattle and meat packing industry. How well are these competing priorities balanced?

Well, the mad cow episode has exposed holes in the food safety chain. It has revealed that the USDA's policy was not one of comprehensive testing, but rather a limited sampling of a few thousand. Of the over 30 million cattle slaughtered last year, only a few thousand of these 30 million were tested for mad cow disease.

Beef, we found out, quickly disappears into the vast distribution network and is mixed with the remains of thousands of other cattle. These consolidated batches of meat are then distributed far and wide, which makes them difficult to recall, almost impossible to trace.

Currently, there is only one laboratory owned by the U.S. Department of Agriculture located in Ames, Iowa, that performs testing on meat to detect mad cow disease. The techniques used in this laboratory require several days to complete. The public is rightly concerned. Maybe the reason we have not discovered mad cow disease until this past December in the United States is because Americans have been eating the evidence.

There are responsible members of the beef industry that want to test their cattle and many consumers who want to buy this tested beef. The tests exist today that can be done quickly, cheaply, easily, and close to home. The cattlemen are willing to pay for it; customers consider tested beef worth the cost. So what is the problem? Well, our

Department of Agriculture and the large beef producers do not want it tested. The $27 billion meat packing industry does not want the possibility that private testing would challenge the Bush administration's position that mad cow disease is not a problem.

An article on the front page of today's Wall Street Journal details many of these responsible cattle producers' frustrations with the current Department of Agriculture policy. It recounted how David Luker, who owns Missouri Valley Natural Beef, wants to pay to test his beef in order to satisfy the demands of his customers. The USDA, however, will not allow it.

The USDA's laboratory refused to test his cattle, insisting that the beef supply is safe, and just take our word for it. When Creekstone Farms Premium Beef said it wanted to build its own laboratory to test for mad cow disease in order to get back into the Japanese market where all cattle are tested, the USDA responded by saying anyone testing without the USDA approval, which they will not give, would face criminal charges. What is wrong with this picture?

President Bush's friend and benefactor, "Kenny Boy" Lay, is walking around free after gross mismanagement of Enron, which devastated workers and cost American investors billions of dollars, yet the Bush administration is now prepared to press criminal charges against people who merely want to test to ensure that the beef they are producing is safe.

There are four testing firms in the United States that make rapid diagnostic kits that can tell in a matter of hours whether a cow is infected. These kits are widely used in both Europe and Japan where testing is pervasive, and as I mentioned in Japan, where it is universal. Yet here, the administration will not allow these tests to be used on American cattle. This is not just an issue about mad cow disease, which is admittedly rare, we think, and we hope will stay that way. It is an issue of consumer choice and consumer protection. This is an issue of treating Americans like grown-ups and supplying them with information they can count on regarding food safety.

If the administration was as concerned with the public interest as it is with special interest, we would have much higher testing standards in place at this point, and we would not be stopping responsible members of the industry from giving what many consumers want.

Mr. Speaker, food safety is a key ingredient for a livable community where our families are safe, healthy, and economically secure. I hope the public will be heard on this important issue as this year progresses.

END