[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 131 (Monday, September 19, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 19, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                     PATHOGEN REDUCTION ACT OF 1994

                                 ______


                        HON. CHARLES W. STENHOLM

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                       Monday, September 19, 1994

  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the 
administration's Pathogen Reduction Act of 1994, as one element of our 
ongoing effort to improve our ability to detect and control 
microbiological contaminants in the Nation's meat and poultry supplies.
  In 1993, the U.S. Department of Agriculture pledged to Congress and 
the American people that it would redouble its efforts to modernize the 
system for inspecting meat and poultry products. There was, and 
continues to be, virtually universal agreement that we must have a 
program in place that is public health-oriented, based on risk, and 
built on sound science.
  The reduction of pathogens, before they reach the consumer's table, 
was targeted as the focus of reform, to be achieved in two stages: 
Improvements in the existing programs as soon as possible, to be 
followed later by a complete overhaul of the system in order to better 
serve consumers and producers over the longer term. Even though there 
is much they can already do under the existing statutes. Department 
officials last year told us that they would be asking for additional 
legislative authority to fully realize their short-term objectives 
toward pathogen reduction.
  Although I have been discouraged since then by the delay in receiving 
a legislative proposal and by the seemingly slow pace and direction of 
change in general within USDA, I am encouraged at the renewed 
determination on the part of this administration to begin taking the 
steps necessary to rebuild public confidence in the safety of the meat 
and poultry supply and to restore the credibility of USDA's Food Safety 
and Inspection Service as a protector of public health.
  I am introducing this legislation, not because I necessarily support 
its content, but because I view it as the first step toward serious 
congressional consideration of needed changes in the inspection 
programs. The substance of the bill, as with any legislation, will be 
debated and ultimately modified as it moves through the legislative 
process. I want to emphasize that this bill is only the first part of 
what will be a series of efforts to improve our inspection system. For 
example, I strongly believe in the need to involve the National Academy 
of Science to facilitate the development of a longer-term legislative 
and regulatory framework for improving the inspection program. This 
effort, which would bring to the table all stakeholders to reach a 
consensus on a program that could effectively serve consumers and 
producers well into the next century, is the thrust of legislation, 
H.R. 4562, I introduced on June 9 and Senator Heflin introduced into 
the Senate on August 25. I view the NAS legislation as an important 
complement to the administration bill being introduced today, and 
intend to give both bills equal and expeditious consideration.
  As I have noted in the past, today's agriculture community is 
extremely sensitive to environmental and consumer concerns about the 
food they produce. Farmers and ranchers know they will be successful 
only to the extent that the consumer is satisfied that their food is 
safe, wholesome, and reasonably priced. Anyone who doubts the 
industry's commitment to safe food should examine the recent report we 
commissioned from the General Accounting Office. In it, the GAO 
documented that major meat and poultry packers and processors 
themselves are already far ahead of USDA in monitoring for, and 
correcting, pathogen problems before products leave plants.
  That is why I am confident that the meat and poultry industry, along 
with consumers, the inspector's union, public health professionals, 
scientists, and all other affected parties can work constructively with 
Congress in moving this process forward.

                          ____________________