[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 12 (Thursday, January 27, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S339-S340]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Franken, Mr. Kohl,
Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr. Durbin):
S. 216. A bill to increase criminal penalties for certain knowing and
intentional violations relating to food that is misbranded or
adulterated; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
=========================== NOTE ===========================
On page S339, January 27, 2011, in the middle column, under the
heading STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS, the
following appears: By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Mr.
FRANKEN, Mr. KOHL, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, and Mr. DURBIN): S. 216. A bill
to increase criminal penalties for certain knowing and
international violations relating to food that is misbranded or
adulterated; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
The online Record has been corrected to read: By Mr. LEAHY (for
himself, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Mr. FRANKEN, Mr. KOHL, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, and
Mr. DURBIN): S. 216. A bill to increase criminal penalties for
certain knowing and intentional violations relating to food that
is misbranded or adulterated; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
========================= END NOTE =========================
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today, I am pleased to introduce
legislation to hold criminals who poison our food supply accountable
for their crimes. This is an issue that received considerable attention
last year, and I was pleased that the Congress finally passed
comprehensive food safety reforms. But our work is not done. The Food
Safety Accountability Act increases the sentences that prosecutors can
seek for people who violate our food safety laws in those cases where
there is conscious or reckless disregard of a risk of death or serious
bodily injury. The legislation I propose will allow law enforcement to
seek sentences of up to 10 years in jail for those who contaminate our
food supply with the intent to mislead or defraud consumers, and
endanger Americans.
Last year, I introduced similar legislation which received unanimous
support from the Senate Judiciary Committee. I hope the Judiciary
Committee, and the full Senate, will give it the same consideration
this year. I'd like to thank Senator Klobuchar and Senator Franken for
their ongoing support of the bill. Senator Sessions, Senator Hatch,
Senator Coburn, and Senator Grassley had concerns about its breadth,
and we were able to work together to address these concerns in the
legislation I introduce today.
Just last summer, a salmonella outbreak caused hundreds of people to
fall ill and triggered a national egg recall. The company responsible
for the eggs at the root of this summer's salmonella crisis had a long
history of environmental, immigration, labor, and food safety
violations. It is clear that fines are not enough to protect the public
and effectively deter this unacceptable conduct. We need to make sure
that those who intentionally poison the food supply will go to jail.
The Food Safety Accountability Act will help to do that in the most
egregious cases.
Current statutes do not provide sufficient criminal sanctions for
those who violate our food safety laws with the intent to mislead or
defraud. Doing so is already illegal, but it is merely a misdemeanor
right now, and the Sentencing Commission has found that it generally
does not result in jail time. The fines and recalls that usually result
from criminal violations under current law fall short in protecting the
public from harmful products. Too often, those who are willing to
endanger our children in pursuit of profits view such fines or recalls
as merely the cost of doing business.
In the last Congress, a mother from Vermont, Gabrielle Meunier,
testified before the Senate Agriculture Committee about her seven-year-
old son, Christopher, who became severely ill and was hospitalized for
six days after he developed salmonella poisoning from peanut crackers.
Thankfully, Christopher recovered, but Mrs. Meunier's story highlighted
improvements that are needed in our food safety system. No parent
should have to go through what she experienced. The American people
should be confident that the food they buy for their families is safe.
After hearing Mrs. Meunier's account, I called on the Department of
Justice to conduct a criminal investigation into the outbreak of
salmonella that made Christopher and many others so sick. These
products were linked to the deaths of nine people and have sickened
more than 600 others. It appears that the company responsible knew that
their peanut products had tested positive for deadly salmonella, but
rather than immediately disposing of the products, the company sought
ways to sell them anyway. The evidence suggests that the public was
misled, and that the company put profit above the public's safety. The
Food Safety Accountability Act increases the chances that those who
disregard the safety of Americans and commit food safety crimes will
face jail time, rather than merely a slap on the wrist, for their
criminal conduct.
On behalf of the hundreds of individuals sickened by recent
salmonella outbreaks, I hope Senators of both parties will act swiftly
to pass this bill. We have come a long way, but must continue to be
diligent to ensure that our food safety system is strong. The Justice
Department must be given the tools it needs to investigate and
prosecute crime involving food safety, and we must work together, from
farm to
[[Page S340]]
fork, to improve the safety of food in this country.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 216
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 ``Food Safety Accountability
Act of 2011''.
SEC. 2. CRIMINAL PENALTIES.
(a) In General.--Chapter 47 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 1041. Misbranded and adulterated food
``(a) Definition.--In this section, the term `food' has the
meaning given that term in section 201 of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321).
``(b) Offense.--Any person who violates subsection (a),
(b), (c), or (k) of section 301 of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 331) with respect to any food--
``(1) knowingly and intentionally to defraud or mislead;
and
``(2) with conscious or reckless disregard of a risk of
death or serious bodily injury,
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than
10 years, or both.''.
(b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of
sections for chapter 47 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``1041. Misbranded and adulterated food.''.
______
By Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. Merkley):
S. 220. A bill to provide for the reforestation of forest landscapes,
protection of old growth forests, and management of national forests in
the eastside forests of the State of Oregon; to the Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce critical forest
legislation for my home State of Oregon.
This is legislation that I introduced in the last Congress.
Unfortunately, despite making significant progress and gaining the
support of the administration, my legislation did not get passed before
Congress adjourned. But the need remains as great as ever and it
remains one of the top priorities for my State. So today, early in this
new Congress, I am reintroducing the bill and sending the message that
this urgent priority needs to get done.
I am pleased that my colleague from Oregon, Senator Merkley, has
joined me today in introducing this bill. Like me, he recognizes the
severe needs in our forests and in the forest dependent communities.
For too many decades, Oregon has been at war with itself over the
fate of its forests. Nowhere has the negative impact of this battle
been greater than in Oregon's eastside forests.
Over-logging and disastrous fire suppression policies of the past
gave way over time to excessive litigation and gridlock.
That excessive litigation and gridlock has resulted in millions of
acres of Oregon's Federal forest landscape containing choked,
overstocked stands that are at great risk of uncharacteristic
catastrophic fires, insect infestations and disease.
Controversial logging that holds the industry and the environment
hostage to competing ideologies serves no one's interest. The focus
should be on areas that everyone agrees desperately need management: to
thin and restore our forests and watersheds, and to reduce hazardous
fuels putting our forests at risk.
That is why I introduced legislation in the last Congress to begin to
tackle the challenges facing Oregon's Eastside forests.
Leaders on both sides of these difficult issues came together with me
after intense negotiations to bring peace, jobs, and a healthier
tomorrow to the 8.3 million acres on the 6 Federal forests in eastern
and central Oregon.
Those leaders realized that each side had armed itself politically
enough to survive, but not enough to succeed.
With each passing month and each attempted timber sale and threatened
lawsuit, our inability to take action, our inability to address the
needs of Oregon's declining forests means that they are growing more at
risk of preventable fire and disease.
Leaders on both sides of this issue realized that unless something
fundamental changes, Oregon's Federal forest landscape, with millions
of acres of choked, at-risk forest in desperate need of management,
millions of acres of old growth, species habitat, and watersheds face
an uncertain future.
Timber executives came together with leaders of the Oregon
environmental community to take shared responsibility for saving our
endangered forests, following months of intense negotiations to reach
an agreement on legislation.
Since my bill was introduced in the last Congress, there have been
continuing discussions and negotiations as my stakeholders and I have
worked with the Administration and the Energy and Natural Resources
Committee to get the bill ready for passage in the Senate. Today's bill
reflects some of those changes, but it preserves the core elements of
the agreement that I crafted with the stakeholders to this agreement--a
push to increase the timber produced from our national forests,
landscape scale restoration efforts and protections for watersheds and
old growth.
Today in eastern Oregon we are down to only a small handful of
surviving mills. Without far greater certainty of supply and an
immediate increase in merchantable timber, more mills will close.
If that happens, our Eastside forests will pay the price.
Without mills to process saw logs and other merchantable material
from forest restoration projects, there will be no restoration of our
Eastside forests.
Fortunately leaders on both sides of this issue recognize that and
that is why they set aside their differences to forge an agreement.
Job One must be saving the remaining infrastructure of forestry--
Oregon's mills and its timber workers--in central and eastern Oregon
while preserving our old growth and watersheds.
My stakeholders and I worked very hard on the agreement and to
advance this legislation. As I predicted, we have already seen our
share of challenges. But I have great faith that we will stand firm to
see this legislation implemented.
I am not going to let Congressional gridlock stop the historic
progress that has been made on forestry issues in Oregon. This issue is
simply too important.
I also want to point out that none of our efforts will succeed unless
Oregon Federal forests are also adequately funded to properly manage
and restore these valuable Federal assets.
Together, as a team, we will fight for the funding to put our people
back to work and restore the health of our forests.
I want to thank my stakeholders for their support and tireless work
in crafting this agreement and ultimately in working with me through
the legislative process.
I am proud to introduce this legislation today, and I am going to
keep working with all the folks in my State who are willing to talk in
good faith about restoring our eastside forests.
____________________