There is no doubt that food safety is a major concern for both consumers and domestic and foreign producers. The quantity and quality of our nation's food supply has a direct bearing on the health and well being of its citizens. Although the government has a regulatory role in the production, inspection and labeling of food, consumers make their own choices about what to eat. For the most part these choices are based on a belief in the regulatory process and the food industry's desire to produce wholesome products.

However, major events in the past decade have shaken Americans' confidence in the protections and safety of the food supply. The terrorist attack in 2001 revealed how vulnerable the country had become to its enemies in many respects, including food. Also, several major e-coli outbreaks in the food supply chain, and numerous recalls of tainted food, have resulted in calls for stricter controls on food safety.

As I mentioned in my column of July '08, monitoring and controlling the food supply chain is a challenging task for the government. It is a very complex and labor intensive process that is subject to limited resources and personnel. That is not to say that the government has failed to protect us. In fact the government has been overseeing the food supply and protecting the public for more than a century.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) was established in 1862, and began inspecting meat in 1890. It has been involved in plant and animal health, crop production and many other agricultural issues. It is also responsible for monitoring imports. As fruit, vegetable and plant imports arrive, USDA inspectors examine them for disease or pests. The agency is responsible for inspecting domestic and imported meat and poultry products, as well as restricting imports from countries that have outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease and avian flu.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) goes back to 1906 when Congress enacted a new law for food safety. Today the FDA monitors not only food safety but regulates and approves drugs, medical devices, vaccines, cosmetics and many other health related products. Imported foods are subject to examination by FDA inspectors. If the inspectors find food that is adulterated, spoiled, pest infested or falsely labeled, it will be detained and refused admittance into the U.S.

In response to the threat of terrorism after 9/11 the Congress enacted the Bioterrorism Act signed by President Bush in 2002. Its purpose was to better prepare the government to prevent and respond to any bioterrorism incidents and other health emergencies. Title III of the act protects the food supply and agriculture by requiring tougher inspection methods, and registration of all domestic and foreign food facilities. This includes any facility that manufactures, processes, packs, or holds food for human or animal consumption in the U.S. All foreign food shipments must give a prior notice of the importation so that the FDA will have advanced information for inspection. The shipment will not be allowed to enter the U.S. without submission of the prior notice.

From this historical perspective it is evident there have been many regulations enacted for food safety and agriculture. There are also agencies in place to enforce the food safety laws and monitor food importations. However, some in Congress believe that the regulations in place do not go far enough in light of recent tainted food outbreaks. Now a bill pending in the U.S. Senate will put in place a whole new set of laws that propose to reach all the way down to the small farmer hauling vegetables to market in a pickup truck.

The Food Safety Modernization Act would allow the government to increase inspections at what it considers high risk domestic and foreign food facilities. Some of this would require cooperation with foreign governments. There will also be new minimum standards "with respect to growing, harvesting, sorting, packing, and storage operations, minimum standards related to soil amendments, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water."

The act will require food facilities to frequently reregister, subject to review and inspection, in order to continue operation. The goal is to establish a more traceable system of records that will quickly identify everyone who grows, produces, manufactures, processes, packs, transports, holds or sells food.

There has been criticism of the bill for its expansion of government authority over the food industry. Some believe that the laws were designed more for corporate entities, and will hurt small farmers, local suppliers, processors and even roadside vendors. It is also claimed that more regulations on top of those already on the books will drive up food prices.

The National Coffee Association and other agricultural organizations are urging their members to contact Congress to express their concerns about the implications of the bill to small local farms. Oregon Rural Action says that while the bill has good intentions, it "threatens to undermine the best things in U.S. agriculture – small farmers producing for local markets." How the bill will be changed and amended in the future will no doubt be influenced by public response to it.

More information on the bill can be found at www.washingtonwatch.com/bills.