As always, Edwards begins his policy proposal with an overview of the problem:
In recent weeks, a series of tainted products from China have exposed gaps in America's food safety protections. Today, John Edwards outlined his plan to make food safer by taking on the big food companies and food importers on behalf of American consumers and producers. First he would finally implement country-of-origin labeling so families can learn the source of their food and have the option of choosing domestically-raised and grown food. He would also strengthen the Food and Drug Administration's oversight over the safety of American and imported food.
Now, it was bad enough that many Americans lost pets to this tainted food supply, but human beings have also been exposed to tainted food from third-world countries. All so big food companies and importers can sweeten their bottom line. I don't think any company should be allowed to profit off endangering the American consumer. John Edwards agrees. After all, what kind of America do we have when we cannot even trust the food we eat!!??
Edwards then goes into these problems in detail:
Neglect of Food Safety: Breakdowns in food safety cause 76 million illnesses, 325,000 hospitalizations, and 5,000 deaths each year in the U.S. The General Accountability Office recently added our nation's food safety system to its list of "high-risk" operations. [CDC, 2007; GAO, 2007]
Now, these numbers are staggering. 76 million illnesses? 5,000 deaths? All for profit. The thought of that makes me sicker than tainted food!!!!
It only gets worse. Equally as shocking and disturbing:
Growing Reliance on Food Imports: Americans eat about 260 pounds of imported foods a year, on average, and the Food and Drug Administration inspects only 0.7 percent of imported food products. Following reports of tainted pet food, contaminated livestock feed and seafood, China recently admitted that 180 food processing facilities had been caught putting industrial additives into a range of food products. An investigation found 23,000 food-safety infractions. Unfortunately, the recent wave of tainted products from China is only the latest in a series of import-related crises over the last decade. Hundreds or more people became sick from Guatemalan raspberries in 1996, Mexican strawberries in 1997, Mexican cantaloupes in 2000, and Mexican green onions in 2003. [AP, 4/16/07; NY Times, 4/30/07; WSJ, 6/30/07; CSPI, 2007]
Again, it is tragic that Americans must risk their, and their pets lives so things can be done on the cheap. Why in the world would we import foods from China, Guatemala, and Mexico if we can't even insure their safety? It is simply a disgrace!! Unfortunately it gets even more disgraceful than that:
Agribusinesses Blocking Country-of-Origin Labels and Other Food Safety Steps: Five years ago, Congress passed a law giving consumers the right to know where their meat, produce and nuts came from. However, implementation of the law has been repeatedly delayed by special interests. The USDA is now preparing to allow chickens raised, slaughtered, and cooked in China to be sold here without labels showing their origin. [Center for Food Safety, 2007; Boston Globe, 5/9/07]
This should enrage all American consumers. Although it is a legal right that the American consumer should know where their food has come from, since Washington is in bed with special interests Americans lose a right provided them by law. Now, the USDA is going to sneak Chinese grown chickens on unwitting American? I personally do not want to eat one morsel of food grown or produced in China right now. Thanks so much Sen. Edwards, for bringing this issue to the fore-front!!
Now we get to the good part. All of this so far is very disturbing, and really makes me ashamed of my government. That has been nothing new lately. That is where I think the Edwards campaign stands out, not only does he make fancy speeches to show disgust and critisize, but he offers real solutions to these problems with specific proposals and being honest with the American people about just exactly what he would do to address the real concerns that confront everyday Americans. I would say the safety of our food eclipses just about anything. To me, this issue and the issue of Iraq are paramount in this election. If we can't even trust the food we eat, what makes us a super-power?
Edwards pulls no punches in this first paragraph, and it is refreshing that someone is taking a strong, moral stance on this issue:
Providing Consumers with Country-of-Origin Information: Despite increasing concern about the safety of imports from countries like China and interesting buying local produce, implementation of country-of-origin labels has been twice blocked by large meat packers, agribusiness lobbyists and retailers like Wal-Mart. Consumers are not required to be told where these categories of food come from. As president, Edwards will end the delays and start enforcing mandatory country-of- origin labeling, giving Americans the information they need to choose the best food for their families. This will also help domestic farmers and ranchers by giving consumers the option of choosing safe, American-raised meat, and it will motivate foreign producers to make safety a priority and move our food supply system toward fuller accountability for the safety of what we eat. [USDA, 2007; The Hill, 4/7/05; National Family Farm Coalition, 2007]
Democrats everywhere must demand to know what our candidates think about this issue. If they will not take the stand that John Edwards is taking against the Agri-business lobby and corporations like Wal-Mart, then they do not deserve a single Democratic vote. Having a President who enforces these laws is not only the right of the American consumer it is the moral thing to do. I have the right to know where my food comes from. The last part of this paragraph just makes sense. Edwards is committed to reviving rural America, which includes our farmers and ranchers, and personally, I would always buy American grown food if I just knew which was grown here and which wasn't. I would even pay a higher price to support American industry, and eat food I felt was safe. Edwards should be commended for taking a strong stance for Americans no matter who you support.
This next paragraph is a really good idea too:
Integrating Food Safety Rules and Enforcement: Fifteen different agencies are charged with regulating some part of our food supply, enforcing 35 different laws. Different agencies regulate meat lasagna and vegetable lasagna. An open-faced ham-and-cheese sandwich is inspected by the USDA while a closed-face ham-and-cheese sandwich is inspected by the FDA. The USDA and FDA inspect imported food at 18 U.S. ports, sometimes in separate facilities and generally without sharing assets. President Bush's solution—a "czar" with the bureaucratic rank of assistant commissioner—is not nearly enough. Edwards will strengthen the FDA and rebuild our food inspection system within the beefed-up agency, giving one regulatory body clear responsibility for ensuring the security and safety of the food we eat. [National Academy of Sciences, 1998; GAO, 2007; CSPI, 2007; Government Executive, 6/19/07]
I believe that government does have a role to play in people's lives. That being said, we should strive to make our government as effecient and effective as possible. This is just another statement I believe that shows John Edwards just gets it. He would run a streamlined government which gets the most out of every taxpayer dollar. This is an excellent idea that would not only save money, but it would increase the effectiveness of the effort to insure Americans eat safe food. People can say what they want about money, polls, and haircuts, but this is the mark of an effective leader. One we desperately need in the White House.
This next one is simply a no-brainer. It is a shame a major candidate for President had to include it in a policy proposal. I think that shows the disdain our elected leaders have for us that he does:
Getting Unsafe Food off the Shelves: Unlike the Consumer Products Safety Commission, neither the USDA nor the FDA has the power to order mandatory recalls of the food products they inspect. The agencies are not even equipped to monitor how well companies carry out voluntary recalls. Edwards will establish the power to order mandatory recalls and provide the resources to make sure they are quickly carried out. [GAO, 2007]
This again shows Edwards qualifications for leadership. We here all this talk about keeping us safe, but what about our food? If we get sick and die from eating, or lose our pets by feeding them, how in the hell are we safe? We are running up on a trillion dollars blown away literally in Iraq, but not one red cent to keep unsafe food off our shelves? How are we safe if al-Queda can just taint our food supply? Again, we need to know exactly where these candidates stand on these issues!!
Again, this next paragraph shows leadership and a true concern for the safety of the American consumer:
Increasing Inspections of Imports: Less than 1 percent of imported food is inspected, down from 8 percent in 1992. Eighty percent of imported food automatically bypasses inspection. Following the recent wave of tainted imports, big corporations are scaling up their inspections of Chinese products, but American families have no choice to rely on an under-resourced and neglected government agency. Edwards will provide the resources for the FDA to do its job. [NY Times, 5/16/07; NY Times, 7/1/07; GAO, 1998]
Again, this is disturbing information. What is wrong with our government when the rich and corporations get huge tax breaks, but we cannot trust the food we eat. Why in the name of all that is holy if we are going to neglect a government agency is it the one that ensures the safety of our food!!!?? I'm sure George W. Bush knows exactly where his food comes from, and so do the talking heads in Washington. It is good to know Edwards thinks the American consumer has that right too!!
This next paragraph shows the mark of a true leader also:
Requiring Safety Systems Abroad: The U.S. cannot put inspectors in all of the 130 countries that sell us food, but we can insist that these nations take their responsibilities seriously. Edwards will require countries exporting food to the U.S. to have safety systems certified by the FDA as equivalent to our own. This level of protection is now given only to meat, poultry and egg products. This added protection will supplement, not replace, inspections by U.S. officials at ports of entry. [CSM, 5/807; GAO, 2004]
We need a President who cares more about the safety of the American people than allowing corporations to exploit the third world. Edwards is serious about doing this. Certain standards should have to be met for us to import food from any country. This is just common sense. It is good to see that Edwards gets it yet again.
To finish up, Edwards sums up how this coincides with his Rural Recovery Act to help our nation's family farmers:
Building on Edwards' Agenda for Family Farmers: Today's announcement builds on earlier efforts to create fairness for family farmers and help them create a healthy, abundant and safe food supply:
Strictly enforcing laws against anticompetitive mergers and unfair pricing.
Passing a national ban on packer ownership to stop the spread of large corporate hog interests.
Passing a national moratorium on the construction and expansion of hog farm lagoons.
Limiting farm subsidies to $250,000 per person and closing loopholes in payment limits.
Expanding conservation programs that help farmers preserve the land.
http://www.johnedwards.com/...
Most of these things are just common sense that don't get to be done because of the corporate control of the White House and our Congress. John Edwards believes the American people should have someone in the White House who cares about the interests of the American people over big Agri-business and Wal-Mart.
As I said above, although it is not getting as much air-time, I believe this issue to be at least close in importance to Iraq. I think we need to know what every candidate running thinks about this issue, and more importantly what they will do about it. Any candidate that cannot support the common-sense proposals put forth by John Edwards simply does not deserve our support.
Once again, John Edwards has taken the lead on an issue of dire importance to every American with more than speeches and promises. I hope Democrats everywhere will join me in electing a true leader who wants to have a more efficient, effective government that fights for the interests of everyday Americans over those of big Corporations. John Edwards is the leader to take America into the new century with common sense!!
Even more distasteful to the young, as it has been to moralists for thousands of years, is the ethic that judges all things by their profit. Robert Kennedy- To Seek a Newer World
Comments are closed on this story.