With another food contamination outbreak in the headlines – this time E. coli-tainted romaine lettuce traced to an Ohio food company that has sickened at least 19 people- the question of how and when food safety legislation will move forward is more timely than ever. While the House passed its version of The Food Safety Enhancement Act last July, the Senate has been much slower to act. 
Senator Tom Harkin (D-IO), Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, announced his intent to schedule a vote on the measure by Memorial Day. There were even reports a few days ago that the bill might be headed to the Senate floor this week for a vote. However, several proposed amendments to the bill are muddying the waters of bipartisan support. The big issue is around BPA.
An amendment from Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) would ban the use of BPA – bisphenol A, a widely- used chemical found in many hard plastic containers and canned food liners – from nearly all food containers. While public concern around BPA has grown in recent years, awareness about potential risks between plastic food packaging and BPA remains limited. In an editorial in today’s San Francisco Gate, contributor Emily Dwass notes, “Many consumers do not know that BPA leaches from cans into food, especially with acidic content like tomatoes. And although babies may be given a BPA-free bottle, the chemical has been found in cans of liquid infant formula.”
The food industry, which had been supportive of the food safety bill overall, has been vocal in its opposition to the Feinstein amendment. As Jennifer Ward Barber reports in The Atlantic,
“Feinstein’s move raised hackles at food industry groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Grocery Manufacturers Association. Claiming the ban would “undermine the FDA,” the groups issued a letter threatening to withdraw support for the bill if it included Feinstein’s amendment. This new roadblock will undoubtedly impede the bill’s progress to the Senate floor, where it had been expected to end up before the Memorial Day recess.”
While the FDA recently announced its support for “reasonable steps to reduce human exposure to BPA” and is pursuing additional studies on the BPA, the Agency’s official position continues to be that “the benefit of a stable source of good nutrition outweighs the potential risk of BPA exposure.” At the same time, BPA has been designated a “chemical of concern” by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have invested an additional $14 million in stimulus funds on research to gain “better understanding of the potential risks that exposure to bisphenol A poses to public health.”
The outlook on whether or not the BPA amendment will remain in the Senate bill is unclear. Regardless, as the E. coli outbreak this week once again demonstrated, the public health need for passage of the food safety bill is real. As highlighted in my team’s recent report on food policy and sustainability, What’s on America’s Plate, “Over 76 million cases of foodborne illnesses occur every year in the U.S. and result in 300,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths. Experts estimate that foodborne illnesses cost the U.S. $152 billion in health-related expenses annually, without accounting for the costs of pain and suffering.”
And while Congressional leaders looked to resolve challenges with the Senate bill this week, the House continued its focus on food safety with yesterday’s Energy and Commerce Committee hearing on the role and performance of FDA in ensuring food safety. In his opening remarks, House Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Bart Stupak (D-MI) emphasized the urgency on the issue.
“Without legislative action it is not a matter of if but when more lives will be put at risk by another outbreak. We cannot put off action any longer.”
Will Senate Dems hang tough in their commitment to move the bill this month? Stay tuned.
…
Yes! I agree what you say. Here you can always learn the suitable White television stands！…