[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 2676-2677]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   AGRICULTURE SECURITY: PROTECTING AMERICA'S FOOD FROM FARM TO FORK

  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to call attention to the 
urgent need to prepare America against an attack on our agriculture. 
The Nation's agriculture industry is crucial to our prosperity. Yet it 
does not receive the protection it needs. Our food supply system is 
vulnerable to accidental or intentional contamination that would damage 
our economy, and, most importantly, could cost lives.
  There is no need to question whether animal-borne diseases can 
actually threaten the United States. Look to last December's mad cow 
disease outbreak: only one cow was found to be infected, and yet the 
U.S. beef industry was thrown into a tailspin from which it still has 
not recovered. As a result: American cattle prices fell by 20 percent; 
some predict beef exports will fall by 90 percent from 2003 to 2004; 
and more than 40 foreign countries have instituted bans on American 
beef, most of which will not be lifted in the near future. This fallout 
resulted from the infection of only two cows.
  In the beginning of February, a version of the avian influenza, a 
disease sweeping through Southeast Asian poultry that has killed at 
least 22 people to date, was discovered on two Delaware chicken farms. 
It also surfaced in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and a far more 
contagious strain was later reported in Texas. While the two strains 
found in these States carry no know risk to humans, this discovery 
illustrates how easily an animal-borne disease can break out in the 
United States. Only four farms and one live chicken market have tested 
positive for the disease. Yet this discovery resulted in the slaughter 
of over 92,000 chickens in the U.S. to date and a ban on American 
poultry exports in a number of Asian countries and the European Union.
  We should learn two things from these recent outbreaks: No. 1, the 
cost to the agriculture community for even a small outbreak is high, 
and, No. 2, we must be prepared for the unexpected.
  While the emergence of mad cow and the avian flu in American 
agriculture has been detrimental, it has not come close to causing the 
amount of damage a larger outbreak could create.
  Imagine if either of these diseases spread across the Nation instead 
of being contained to just a few farms.
  Or worse, imagine if the strain of the avian flu that is currently 
claiming human lives in Asia was found in the United States.
  In these scenarios, the outbreak would have been far more difficult 
to contain and much more costly to our Nation.
  A 1994 Department of Agriculture study said that if a foreign animal 
disease became entrenched in the United States, it would cost the 
agriculture industry at least $5.4 billion. A 2002 report by the 
National Defense University predicted that this figure would be three 
to fives times greater today. On a smaller scale, an outbreak that only 
penetrated 10 farms could have as much as a $2 billion economic impact.
  Earlier this month, the President released Homeland Security 
Presidential Directive 9, HSPD-9, aimed at addressing many of these 
concerns. HSPD-9 is a great first step. It signals the administration 
is aware of the vulnerability in our agriculture sector and considers 
this to be a homeland security priority.
  Under HSPD-9, the President directed the Department of Homeland 
Security to ensure the execution of a number of much needed security 
measures, including the following: Develop surveillance and monitoring 
systems for animal and plant disease and the food supply that provide 
early detection of poisonous agents; develop nationwide laboratory 
networks for food, veterinary, and plant health that ensures 
communication and coordination between related facilities; and develop 
a National Veterinary Stockpile that contains enough vaccine and 
antiviral products to respond to the most damaging animal diseases.
  But the President's initiative does not go far enough because it 
fails to address a number of serious shortcomings with the current 
governmental response to agriculture security, such as: Lack of 
communication between Federal agencies; insufficient coordination with, 
and funding for, State and local officials; inadequate international 
collaboration; and the impeding nature of some State and local laws to 
effective response plans.
  To address these many concerns, I introduced two bills, S. 427, the 
Agriculture Security Assistance Act, and S. 430, the Agriculture 
Security Preparedness Act, to increase the coordination in confronting 
the threat to America's agriculture industry and provide the needed 
resources. My legislation provides for more targeted State and local 
funding and a better-coordinated Federal system.
  The Agriculture Security Assistance Act would assist States and 
communities in responding to threats to the agriculture industry by 
authorizing funds for: Animal health professionals to participate in 
community emergency planning activities to assist farmers in 
strengthening their defenses

[[Page 2677]]

against a terrorist threat; a biosecurity grant program for farmers and 
ranchers to provide needed funding to better secure their properties; 
and the use of sophisticated remote sensing and computer modeling 
approaches to agricultural diseases.
  The Agriculture Security Preparedness Act would enable better 
interagency coordination within the Federal Government by: Establishing 
senior level liaisons in the Departments of Homeland Security, DHS, and 
Health and Human Services to coordinate with the Department of 
Agriculture, USDA, and all other relevant agencies on agricultural 
disease emergency management and response; requiring DHS and USDA to 
work with the Department of Transportation to address the risks 
associated with transporting animals, plants, and people between and 
around farms; requiring the Attorney General to conduct a review of 
relevant Federal, State, and local laws to determine if they facilitate 
or impede agricultural security; and directing the State Department to 
enter into mutual assistance agreements with foreign governments to 
facilitate the share of resources and knowledge of foreign animal 
diseases.
  Over 30 Federal agencies have jurisdiction over some part of the 
response process in the event of a breach of agricultural security. In 
a report on the United State's preparedness for responding to animal-
borne diseases issued in August 2003, Trust for America's Health, a 
nonprofit, nonpartisan organization founded to raise the profile of 
public health issues, stated that, ``The U.S. is left with a myriad of 
bureaucratic jurisdictions that respond to various aspects of the 
diseases, with little coordination and no clear plan for communicating 
with the public about the health threats posed by animal-borne 
diseases.'' Protecting America's agriculture and its citizens requires 
Federal agencies to know who is responsible for what portion of the 
prevention and response to an attack on our agriculture.
  State and local officials, and the communities they serve, are the 
front lines of defense for American agriculture. Without adequate 
resources, both in terms of funding and advice, these defenses will 
fail. While the presidential directive mandates the creation of a 
coordinated response plan that would include Federal, State, and local 
partners, it falls short of supplying the State and local officials 
with the necessary funding and guidance to better protect their 
jurisdiction. Surprisingly, the administration proposes huge cuts in 
fiscal year 2005 to homeland security grants for the States.
  We have witnessed the impact a small, unintentional outbreak of mad 
cow disease had on our country. We cannot wait for a far more damaging 
and widespread attack on our agriculture system. While I commend the 
President's initiative in this area, further action is needed. I urge 
my colleagues to support this overdue legislation to protect America's 
breadbasket.

                          ____________________