[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 1 (Tuesday, January 20, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S54-S56]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Akaka):
S. 2007. A bill to provide better protection against bovine
spongiform encephalopathy and other prion diseases; to the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation that
would strengthen consumer confidence in the safety of our nation's beef
supply while expanding our understanding of the many prion diseases
that affect both humans and animals. This bill, known as the BSE and
Other Prion Disease Prevention and Public Health Protection Act
codifies some of USDA's recent steps, requires more aggressive testing
of older cattle and expands surveillance for Chronic Wasting Disease
(CWD) in deer and elk and Creutzfedt-Jacob disease (CJD) in people.
Our country has been blessed with the safest and most abundant food
supply in the world, but we can do better. The events surrounding the
diagnosis of the first Mad Cow case in Washington State demonstrate
that improvements are possible. Had the provisions of my bill been in
place in early December, the animal would never have been allowed to
enter both the human food supply and the consumer product system and
contaminate 2.8 million pounds of products.
Currently, only 20,000 out of 35 million cattle presented for
processing are tested for BSE. How many cattle in America have BSE? We
are hopeful that there was only this one isolated case but the truth is
that we don't know because we test so few animals. Answering that
question today is similar to trying to estimate the prevalence of HIV
infection in people by only testing individuals who have symptoms of
AIDS. At the current level of testing, we have no real estimate of the
true prevalence rate of BSE in our country.
A similar situation exists with respect to CWD, in deer and elk, or
CJD in humans. The bill that I am introducing provides for more testing
of all ruminants intended for human consumption as well as expanded
surveillance for the human prion diseases.
Better surveillance: The bill requires the use of rapid BSE tests for
all cattle and bison over 30 months of age and for all sheep, goats,
deer and elk over 12 months of age. Rapid tests can provide results the
same day that they are taken instead of the current five to seven days.
Although most sampling and testing for BSE will occur through USDA
inspectors at slaughterhouses, the bill also provides for on-farm
sampling of non-ambulatory animals. In addition, all ruminants of any
age exhibiting neurological symptoms would be tested.
All tested animals would be held until the results of the test are
known rather than being released into the food supply and consumer
product system, as was the case in Washington. An expensive and time-
consuming recall of products would be avoided.
The bill also requires the development of a mandatory ruminant
identification program to allow for trace back of diseased animals to
their farm of origin within 48 hrs after diagnosis. This is significant
not only for BSE but for other reportable illnesses such as
brucellosis, tuberculosis and foot and mouth disease.
There are also provisions that require expanded coordination of
testing for CWD in farm-raised and wild deer and elk. To support
expanded ruminant testing for prion diseases, the bill calls for the
expansion of the national animal health laboratory network to include
state and university veterinary diagnostic laboratories.
Similarly, the bill expands the sampling of suspected cases of human
CJD through the National Prion Disease Pathology Research Center at
Case Western Reserve University.
Targeting Risk Materials: The bill updates and expands the definition
of BSE specified risk materials and bans the use of such materials from
cattle over 30 months of age for any use.
Importation of ruminant-based products: The bill expands the list of
ruminant derived products that must be labeled for contents and country
of origin and bans imported products containing ruminant-derived
materials from countries identified as at-risk for BSE transmission.
[[Page S55]]
Feed Ban: The bill closes loopholes in the USDA rules on recycling
pet food and poultry litter back into ruminant feed. The legislation
requires FDA to develop a database for handlers of livestock, renderers
and feed mills and feed blenders.
We currently have only a limited understanding of prions and the
diseases that they cause. To understand how these significant and
challenging misfolded bits of protein can affect us, we need better
data. We need data on which to base sound policy for our public health,
for our animal health and for the safety of our food supply.
While we are accumulating that data, we need to take every reasonable
step to ensure that we do not introduce infective material through
importation or through feeding our ruminant animals contaminated feed.
An expanded testing program will demonstrate to our trading partners
that they have nothing to fear in buying our meat products.
I urge my colleagues to join me in this effort to strengthen consumer
confidence in the safety of our food supply. The BSE and Other Prion
Disease Prevention and Public Health Protection Act can provide the
public with the confidence that our beef and venison is safe to eat and
can assure our trading partners that we are aggressively addressing BSE
surveillance in the United States.
______
By Mr. SPECTER:
S. 2008. A bill to amend the Animal Health Protection Act to direct
the Secretary of Agriculture to establish an electronic nationwide
livestock identification system, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I am now introducing legislation
identified as the National Farm Animal Identification Records Act on
behalf of Senator Leahy and myself.
Less than a month ago, on December 25, a case of mad cow disease was
diagnosed in a single nonambulatory dairy cow that was slaughtered in
Washington State. This cow belonged to a herd of some 82 dairy cows
which were cleared for clearance in the United States in 2002. This
case of mad cow disease has caused quite an alarm, with enormous impact
on the industry for providing meats in the United States. It has caused
a lot of concern throughout the country.
This legislation is directed to having an identification system, an
electronic nationwide livestock identification system which will enable
the Federal Government, the Department of Agriculture, to identify
animals. There is a chip in the animal's ear and it will be possible to
identify the animals and where they came from so that in the event
there is any diagnosis of mad cow disease, there will be a way to deal
with it and to prevent its spread and provide public confidence that
the meat is not infected with mad cow disease.
This disease has had a very major impact on the livestock industry,
touching Pennsylvania, my State, as well as many other States in the
country. This is a salutary, preventive legislation.
I ask unanimous consent a full copy of the text be printed in the
Congressional Record following my statement.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
S. 2008
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``National Farm Animal
Identification and Records Act''.
SEC. 2. NATIONWIDE LIVESTOCK IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM; REVIEW OF
USDA RESPONSES TO OUTBREAKS OF DISEASE IN
LIVESTOCK.
Section 10411 of the Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C.
8310) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(f) Nationwide Livestock Identification System.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall establish
an electronic nationwide livestock identification system for
the identification of individual animals to enhance the speed
and accuracy of the response of the Department of Agriculture
to outbreaks of disease in livestock.
``(2) Capabilities.--The livestock identification system
shall be capable of tracing, within 48 hours, an individual
animal from birth to slaughter.
``(3) Participation by states.--The States shall provide
information for inclusion in, and shall have access to, the
livestock identification system.
``(4) Use of existing technology.--The Secretary may use
technology developed by private entities before the date of
enactment of this subsection to operate the livestock
identification system.
``(5) Financial assistance.--The Secretary may provide
financial assistance to producers to assist the producers in
complying with the livestock identification system.
``(6) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection for fiscal
year 2004 $50,000,000, of which $25,000,000 shall be
available to carry out paragraph (5).
``(g) Review of Responses to Outbreaks of Disease.--The
Secretary may appoint an international panel of scientific
experts to provide an objective review of a response by the
Department of Agriculture to an outbreak of disease in
livestock and identify areas for improvements in such
responses.''.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the National Farm
Animal Identification and Records Act or the FAIR Act, with my friend
and colleague Senator Specter. This legislation would establish a
uniform national electronic animal identification program to trace
animals from birth to slaughter, within 48 hours, in order to combat
animal disease outbreaks.
As the recent discovery of a cow infected with bovine spongiform
encephalopathy, BSE, or mad cow disease, in Washington State
demonstrated, a verifiable nationwide animal identification system is
urgently needed to enhance the speed and accuracy of USDA's response to
disease outbreaks. Unfortunately to date only, 23 of the 81 cows that
came from Canada with the infected mad cow have been able to be located
because of inadequate records. The National Farm Animal Identification
and Records Act FAIR Act would require the Department of Agriculture to
establish a national animal identification program for individual
animals that could trace an animal's history within 48 hours.
As a senior member of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry
Committee, I have long advocated for the establishment of a national
animal identification system. For the last 5 years I have worked with
the Holstein Association in Brattleboro, Vermont to begin the process
of creating a national animal identification program. The Holstein
Association's pilot program, a precursor to this national animal
identification program legislation, electronically identifies
individual animals and tracks their movements from birth to slaughter
within 48 hours. To date Holstein's pilot program has close to a
million bovines enrolled from over 7000 farms in 42 States and has
proven its electronic animal tracking capabilities.
The Holstein project demonstrates electronically tracing individual
animals immediately is achievable. The technology and expertise
developed by the Holstein Association is a prime example of how the
Department could immediately begin tracking individual newborn animals
electronically with a system similar to National FAIR. The Holstein
Association could be an important partner with USDA in reducing the
impact of future animal diseases.
I would also like to applaud Secretary Veneman's announcement last
month of additional mad cow safeguards, including moving toward a
national animal identification system. I believe this was a positive
step toward protecting American farmers and consumers. Unfortunately
USDA's current plans do not call for individual animal identification
to be completed until mid 2006. The FAIR Act would require the
Department to begin implementation of a national system within months
of passage. In addition, it is clear USDA will need additional
resources to carry out a national animal identification program, thus
our legislation will provide additional funding for USDA to begin this
work immediately. Furthermore to ensure producers are not hurt by the
potential costs of a national system, our bill will provide financial
assistance for producers to carry out a national identification system.
It is time for the United States to take serious steps to combat
animal diseases, like BSE, that have broad public health implications
for our Nation. A national animal identification program is long
overdue. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.
______
By Mr. SMITH:
[[Page S56]]
S. 2009. A bill to amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to
require the Secretary of the Interior to give greater weight to
scientific or commercial data that is empirical or has been field-
tested or peer-reviewed, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Environment and Public Works.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, today as my first legislative action of the
new session, I am introducing important legislation that would require
a higher standard for the science used in administering the Endangered
Species Act. The Sound Science for Endangered Species Act Planning Act
of 2004 would require independent scientific peer review of certain
actions taken by the regulatory agencies under the Endangered Species
Act. In addition, it would require the Secretary of the Interior and
the Secretary of Commerce to give greater weight to scientific or
commercial data that is empirical or has been field-tested or peer-
reviewed.
In recent years, we in the northwest have experienced a number of
situations in which Federal agency scientists either demanded actions
not supported by scientific data, or actually fabricated the data
itself. In December 2001, it was revealed that Federal employees had
submitted hairs from a captive Canada lynx as though they had been
recovered during field surveys in several national forests to determine
the range and habitat of this threatened species.
It was also revealed in an Oregon newspaper that a Forest Service
biologist criticized his own agency for shoddy work. This employee
called into question much of the information collected over 18 years on
one national forest, claiming that determinations for projects were
based on sketchy information that was not accomplished according to
protocol, or not collected at all. Rather than denying these charges,
the Forest Service acknowledged that they had some validity, and
launched an investigation.
The most egregious example of decisions not based on scientific
evidence, however, occurred in the Klamath Basin in 2001. As many of
you may recall, I have come to the floor of the Senate on many
occasions over the last several years to plead the case of the farmers
and ranchers in the Klamath Basin. In 2001, field-level biologists with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries
Service developed two separate biological opinions on the operation of
the Klamath Project, as it related to suckers and coho salmon,
respectively.
Taken together, these two biological opinions sought to both raise
the lake of level of Upper Klamath Lake and increase flows in the
Klamath River, at the time the basin was experiencing a severe drought.
On April 6, 2001, the Bureau of Reclamation announced that the agency
would deliver no water to most of the agricultural lands that had
received irrigation water from the Federal project for almost 100
years.
I cannot begin to describe the human toll that these biological
opinions exacted on the farmers and ranchers in the Klamath Basin.
Those who still have their farms lost most of their farm income that
year. Many depleted their life savings just to hold onto their land.
Ranchers were forced to sell off livestock herds that year. Stable farm
worker communities were decimated as families moved to find work.
The real tragedy is that none of this had to occur. Late last year,
scientists with the National Research Council found that the two key
decisions regarding the operation of the Klamath Project that deprived
farmers of their water lacked ``substantial scientific support.''
This situation should never be repeated. Decisions of this magnitude
under the Endangered Species Act must be peer reviewed, and some
standard for the science used in these decisions must be established.
I was in Klamath Falls the day after the decision was made to cut off
water to the farmers. I will never forget the anguish on the faces of
the people I met with that day. Many were World War II veterans who
received homesteads in this Basin after the war or their children, none
of whom could believe that this action was being taken by a government
``of the people, for the people, and by the people.''
Our constituents deserve better from their Government. They will get
it if this bill is enacted. There is an identical bill in the House
that has bipartisan support, and 63 cosponsors. I urge my colleagues to
join me in cosponsoring this reasonable bill to help restore sound
science to agency decisionmaking.
____________________