Washington - Irritated consumer food groups call it a dinosaur. Incensed industry lobbyists say it's a zombie that won't die.
One of the few issues that unite all sides in food safety debates is President Clinton's annual proposal for U.S. slaughter plants to pay user fees for federal inspectors to check raw meat and poultry.
Since 1992, Clinton has annually asked Congress to levy the fee to help pay for the Food Safety and Inspection Service operated by the U.S. Agriculture Department. And every year lawmakers have resoundingly rejected it.
In releasing its budget plan this week, the White House said it expected Congress to approve meat inspection user fees that would generate $504 million in fiscal 2000. Without the fee, lawmakers will have to find money elsewhere to fund most of the FSIS's total budget of $653 million.
The FSIS employs inspectors at meat and poultry plants around the nation to make sure processors reject diseased animals, safely handle raw meat and follow other rules.
“This is like a zombie that refuses to die,” said one food industry analyst. “It has zero chance of being adopted by Congress because this is a public health function the government should pay for.”
The Grocery Manufacturers Association likened the user fees to stubborn weeds that sprout up in the back yard. “Every year, you think you destroy them but then they pop up again the following year,” said a spokesman for the group.
Consumer groups agree.
“In the past, this was part of the administration's deficit reduction efforts but this year there is no more deficit,” said Caroline Smith De Waal, a food safety expert with the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “This idea is a dinosaur.”
Other consumer activists contend that a user fee contradicts the Clinton Administration's overall efforts to improve food safety with strong federal government involvement.
The Republican-controlled House Appropriations committee also takes a dim view of meat inspection user fees.
“Everybody knows it's a budget gimmick. It's dead on arrival,” said one committee aide. “But it makes full funding of FSIS much more difficult for us because the USDA doesn't have much discretionary money to work with.”
The food safety money is a tiny, but high profile, portion of USDA's overall budget of $63 billion. Last year, food safety budgets at FSIS and the Food and Drug Administration won extra funds only after a lengthy congressional fight.
Administration officials defended the proposed user fees for meat inspections.
“We assess fees on a lot of things in the government -- the securities industry, some of the FAA's operations -- so I don't think this is an absolutely cut and dried issue,” Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman told reporters.
“I think you can make a good intellectual case why the fees ought to be paid but whether Congress ultimately approves it or not is problematic,” he added. “I accept that.”
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
Return to Home Page