Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Economy, Taxes | Tags: National Food Supply, Power Grab, Regularatory Control
Power grab. More regulatory control over the nation’s food supply in all its complexity. New and sweeping powers to wreak havoc on small farmers. Dangerously broad, one-size-fits-all regulation that includes no checks and balances.
The U.S. Senate passed Tuesday what is called a food-safety modernization bill, S-510, which grants the Food and Drug Administration extensive new powers to recall tainted foods, increase inspections, demand accountability from food companies and oversee farming transportation and storage. The new powers would overlap the jurisdictions of the Dept. of Agriculture and other agencies that oversee food safety.
In 2006, there were 51.2 cases of confirmed food-induced bacterial contamination per 100,000 people. By 2009 the rate had fallen to 34.8 cases per 100,000 people — 1/3 fewer. It is worth pointing out that food producers care very deeply about keeping their food free of contamination, for a case that makes people sick can destroy their business. The bill imposes hundreds of millions of dollars of expenses on the private sector, taxpayers would have to shell out an additional $1.4 billion from 2011-2015 to pay for the FDA to do all this new regulation.
The Food and Drug Administration regulates about 25¢ out of every dollar spent in the economy. Unsurprisingly, it does nothing well. Small farms and local and organic food outfits don’t have the profit margins to comply with the new burdens imposed by all this bureaucratic nonsense. The House version applied even to farmers markets and roadside stands. Big Agribusiness has leveraged government to shackle their smaller competitors.
Democrats will look at this bill and see their goals of a safer food supply. Republicans will see the results — a bloated department forcing many small companies out of business, lots more regulation that may not do anything to improve food safety, overlapping jurisdictions with other government agencies, and no cost-benefit. But lots more discretionary control and more unnecessary enforcement.
