FDA

Congressional Dems Propose New Food-Safety Super Agency

Consolidating food-safety functions might be smart, but why create a whole new federal agency?

|

swirlingthoughts/Flickr

Congressional Democrats are proposing a new federal agency dedicated exclusively to food safety. The Safe Food Act of 2015, introduced by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (Conn.) and Sen. Richard Durbin (Ill.) Wednesday, would create a new "Food Safety Administration" to set and enforce regulations. DeLauro, Durbin, and friends say creating the new agency would actually save money and cut down on bureaucracy, as there are currently 15 agencies with some role in food-safety rulemaking and enforcement. "The fragmented Federal food safety system and outdated laws preclude an integrated, system-wide approach to preventing foodborne illness," their bill states. 

Fragmented as it may be, however, the vast majority of food safety authority still lies with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), though the Department of Agriculture oversees meat, poultry, and egg safety. I have no love for the FDA, which generally seems more interested in empire-building, extortion, protecting the status quo, and promoting the interests of big pharmaceutical companies and agribusiness than actually helping bring the best, safest drugs, food, and devices to market. But I'm also skeptical that simply transferring authority from the FDA to a new, even more powerful agency would help things out. And I'm equally skeptical that the new agency would really replace all these other oversight bodies, rather than serve as an addition. 

"The stated goals of integrating functions and avoiding duplication of efforts and reducing time sound good," writes Patricia Lee, a senior fellow at Independent Women's Forum. "But what is the likelihood that all of these agencies would cede their authority to this new agency though? And let's not gloss over the fact that they have yet to give us a price tag for creating this new agency." 

Allegedly, the Food Safety Administration would take over all responsibility for "the food safety, labeling, inspection, and enforcement functions that … are performed by other Federal agencies." But elsewhere the bill says the new agency would be charged with "coordination and prioritization of food safety research and education programs with other Federal agencies" as well as coordination "with other agencies and State or local governments in carrying out inspection, enforcement, research, and monitoring." That's a bit confusing.  

The Government Accountability Office has previously reported on the need for better food safety coordination, and some of the fragmentation does seem silly. Rep. DeLauro points out

One agency manages the health of hens, another oversees the feed that they eat, another sets egg quality standards but does not test them for Salmonella. While still in its shell, the egg is the responsibility of the Food and Drug Administration, but once it's processed into an egg product, it becomes the responsibility of Food Safety and Inspection Service.

But couldn't lawmakers consolidate food-safety responsibilities without creating a whole new federal agency?

It seems the Food Safety Administration is something of a white whale for Durbin and DeLauro—they've introduced similar legislation four times, in 1999, 2004, 2005, and 2007. With Republicans now in control, it seems their effort this time may end up like the others. But "if the committees don't take it seriously," Durbin said he'll try to tack it on as an amendment to other legislation.

Advertisement

NEXT: Egyptian poet Fatima Naoot on trial, for post criticizing Islamic mass animal slaughter ritual

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. DeLauro, Durbin, and friends say creating the new agency would actually save money and cut down on bureaucracy

    Why not call it the Department of Foodland Security?

    1. I was thinking the same thing.

    2. Department of
      cOOrdinated
      Food
      Unified
      Safety

      DOOFUS

  2. DeLauro, Durbin, and friends say creating the new agency would actually save money and cut down on bureaucracy, as there are currently 15 agencies with some role in food-safety rulemaking and enforcement.

    If we just centralize power a little more…yeah that should do it.

    1. Not enough TOP MEN. It’s a common problem.

      /statist clown

  3. creating the new agency would actually save money and cut down on bureaucracy

    Bull. Shit.

    1. But couldn’t lawmakers consolidate food-safety responsibilities without creating a whole new federal agency?

      I’m guessing that they’d have to tinker with a lot of existing legislation which authorizes the existing agencies and defines their scope.

      To the extent that it is possible to shrink goverment I would imagine it would be easier to kill off individual offices and programs scattered among multiple agencies, than to tackle a single behemoth department.

    2. If they actually eliminated the old agencies and created one it would make for great TV.

      I for one would be mesmerized by some reality show that followed the useless drones around as they jockeyed for positions and power in the new agency.

      I don’t have any illusions that they would actually eliminate anybody, but the loss of their title and having to share prestige with their peers from other agencies would drive these fuckers batshit.

  4. The fragmented Federal food safety system and outdated laws preclude an integrated, system-wide approach to preventing foodborne illness

    Prediction: “foodborne illness” will eventually include obesity.

    1. Have they considered a Federal Wash Your Hands Agency?

  5. But what is the likelihood that all of these agencies would cede their authority to this new agency though?

    I think they’ll get the idea when their people along w their job titles are xferred to the new agency. Come on, you never heard of a reorganiz’n?

  6. Haven’t you read in these very pages of cases where different agency standards for the same product sometimes conflict and are in any case difficult to meet simultaneously? Like do you put nutrition info on a booze label or not? I could see where consolid’n would ameliorate that.

  7. DeLauro, Durbin, and friends say creating the new agency would actually save money and cut down on bureaucracy, as there are currently 15 agencies with some role in food-safety rulemaking and enforcement.

    Guaranteed that the agencies already handling “food safety” would continue to handle whatever it is they’re currently handling, and this new whatsis would just overlay all of them.

  8. I’m sure the House leadership will extend to this bill all of the deference that it deserves….and give it an appropriate filing in the round can.
    We need to be dis-establishing regulatory agencies (FDA, here’s lookin’ at yah!) not creating more of them.

  9. The solution to the problem of fifteen agencies is a sixteenth agency.

    Only in Washington.

    Then give it Cabinet status. By 2030 we’ll have more Cabinet members than Senators, and they’ll build a new Cabinet Building on the Mall so they don’t have to hire a hall every time they want to meet.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.