Washington - On February 2, President Clinton is expected to announce an increase of more than $100 million in spending for U.S. food safety programs in the 1999 Federal Budget -- as well as proposals to fund food safety-related activities through "user fees" on the food industry. The added food safety funds would be divided among the U.S. Department of Agriculture (for improved testing of meat and poultry and expanded food safety education programs), the Food and Drug Administration (to expand imported food inspections), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (to enhance efforts to better detect and report foodborne diseases).
Kelly Johnston, Executive Vice President of Government Affairs and Communications for the National Food Processors Association (NFPA), made the following comments on these budget proposals:
"NFPA and the food processing industry have worked closely with government to create a highly effective food safety system, and to see that government's food safety activities are adequately funded. But user fees -- which are, in reality, regressive new regulatory taxes on foods -- aren't the way to go to fund our nation's food safety efforts. Food taxes hurt consumers by raising the cost of producing food, which is passed on to consumers in the form of higher food prices.
"Because there is no clearer example of a fundamental government function that broadly benefits society than that of regulatory activities to help ensure the safety of the food supply, this regulation should be paid for from appropriated funds. Further, such regulatory tax proposals ignore the enormous investment the food industry has already made -- and continue to make every day -- to ensure that America's food supply is the safest in the world.
"No one has a more vested interest in the safety of the food supply than the food industry. NFPA looks forward to examining the particulars of this proposal and how it will be funded, and to working with the Administration and the regulatory agencies on efforts to ensure the continued unsurpassed safety of our food supply. But we will strongly urge Congress to reject any regulatory tax proposals to fund food safety programs -- as they have wisely done in the past."
Johnston noted that NFPA recently wrote to all members of the U.S. Congress, strongly opposing any user fee assumptions in the FY 1999 budget, making the point that "no one should labor under the illusion that regulatory taxes on food companies will somehow improve food safety -- they won't. What is needed instead is a continued effort to focus our nation's food safety resources on the areas where they will be most effective in enhancing the safety of the food supply -- science, research, and education."
NFPA is the voice of the $430 billion food processing industry on scientific and public policy issues involving food safety, nutrition, technical and regulatory matters and consumer affairs. NFPA's three scientific centers, its scientists and professional staff represent food industry interests on government and regulatory affairs and provide research, technical services, education, communications and crisis management support for the association's U.S. and international members, who produce processed and packaged foods, drinks and juices.
For more information on this issue, visit NFPA's Web site at www.nfpa-food.org.
Meat Industry Insights News Service
P.O. Box 553
Northport, NY 11768
Phone: 631-757-4010
Fax: 631-757-4060
E-mail: sflanagan@sprintmail.com
Web Site: http://www.spcnetwork.com/mii