[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 16]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 23737]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



  INTRODUCTION OF THE SEAFOOD SAFETY AND MERCURY SCREENING ACT OF 2000

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR.

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, October 19, 2000

  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, earlier this year the Mercury Policy 
Project and the California Communities Against Toxics found the Food 
and Drug Administration was not testing enough seafood for toxic 
mercury. Their findings were published in a report that was also 
cosponsored by the Sierra Club and Clean Water Action. In addition to 
contending the FDA's recommended level for methyl mercury exposure was 
inadequate, the report noted that the FDA does not check any domestic 
tuna, shark or swordfish for toxic mercury even though they tend to 
have the highest levels of the toxin.
  The lack of a system to screen seafood for mercury is a serious gap 
in the nation's food safety system. Individuals who consume too much 
mercury can suffer serious health problems. That is why today I am 
introducing the Seafood Safety and Mercury Screening Act of 2000. This 
legislation will require the FDA to develop a system for testing 
seafood for methyl mercury. It will also require the FDA to develop a 
statutory threshold level for methyl mercury content in seafood and 
consider the findings of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), which 
published a report on mercury exposure in July, when developing that 
threshold. The NAS report found that the Environmental Protection 
Agency's recommended level for methyl mercury exposure, which is 
stronger than the FDA's, is the more appropriate standard.
  We know that if people ingest too much mercury they will get sick and 
we know exactly where to look for it. Domestic tuna, shark, and 
swordfish have very high levels of toxic mercury. If we have the means 
to detect this poison and know exactly where it comes from, common 
sense suggests that we take the time to look for it and take the 
necessary steps to inform the public. Typically we do not know about 
the source of an outbreak of food poisoning until the FDA or other 
government agencies works backwards to find its origin after people 
have already gotten sick. When it comes to mercury, we have the 
opportunity to be proactive and prevent illness instead of being 
reactive after its too late.
  The establishment of a strong, enforceable standard that prohibits 
seafood that contains mercury above the recommended level from reaching 
the consumer will stop episodes of food poisoning before they have a 
chance to occur. Another important component of protecting the public 
from the contaminated seafood is by providing citizens with the 
information they need to make informed decisions about what they are 
eating. To that end, the Seafood Safety and Mercury Screening Act of 
2000 will also establish a nation wide education program to educate 
consumers about the dangers of mercury contamination, with a particular 
emphasis on protecting the most vulnerable populations, pregnant women 
and children.
  I urge all of my colleagues to join me in the effort to strengthen 
our nation's food safety system by lending their full support to the 
Seafood Safety and Mercury Screening Act of 2000.

                          ____________________